Men commit something like 80% of all violent crime, and in general are far more aggressive than women
Does this mean that in the evolutionary context, female humans sexually selected for more aggressive males? (because being partnered to them increased their survival?)
 Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
 Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
>Men commit something like 80% of all violent crime
Women regularly assault police officers without getting arrested for it, women are a protected class, thats why the arrest statistics show a discrepancy
Wouldn't it just indicate that many people were likely the product of rape?
Women are 100x more agressive than men we just don't punish them because they're weaker than us
what is "rape"? How can your biological imperative be to make a baby and then you feel violated when somebody attempts you?
Rape isn't part of evolutionary theory, it's a bullshit meme. Part of the violence that women employ.
>what is "rape"? How can your biological imperative be to make a baby and then you feel violated when somebody attempts you?
A man can impregnate dozens of women at any given time; a woman can only get pregnant from one man. Therefore, while reproduction for a man can be a numbers game, a woman has to be more selective. Hence the shit test known as rape allegation: a woman will claim she is being raped and she will oppose as much resistance as she can. In this way only the strongest men will be able to successfully impregnate the woman. The weak beta males will be filtered, because they will be scared of the consequences of being accused of rape. The fearless Chads will successfully impregnate the woman, and Polish-tier abortion laws will make sure that the offspring of the Chads will safely be delivered and improve the stock of society.
have sex, incel
ah yes, sons of single mothers will surely improve society
autism
take your meds
This is totally backwards, chads ont rape, only ugly low value males have the motivation to rape, which is why women are so wary of them. You see this with orangutang males with no flaps. as well
This.
Women are attracted to the Chad men.
Ugly men only have two choices to reproduce, get status or rape.
If they can get status in spite of being ugly, that means they must have exceptionally good but otherwise "hidden" genes. (I.e. smart)
Either way they can help provide for the offspring.
Women don't care about their children, women love murdering babies more than anything else.
This is probably the right answer tbh, smart fricker.
fails biology.
Look up lions gorillas etc for examples of societies like that.
Tons of differences with humans, humanity needs huge societies to work together, if women only choose agression we would still live like monkeys in the trees.
>humanity needs huge societies to work together
Sentinel island is pretty comfy they don't even have medical fascism
>Sentinel island
Yeah, monkeys in the trees, like he said.
I would rather be a monkey than a technocrat slave goyim
Maybe the problem isn't male aggression, but female cowardice?
>large dogs maul more people than small dogs despite being generally less aggressive than small dogs.
smart man
According to Betina Arnt, Women commit 40% of all domestic abuse
The same woman that illegally claimed a profession that she wasn't a part of and defended a pedophile that raped a student repeatedly over the period of 6 months, and then bragged about it? You really want to quote her statistics?
Yes, the data they were based on was legitimate.
Then say according to whoever the reputable source was, not some over the dam postwall roastie that's nothing but a glorified sex therapist.
How does this impact on the nature of female violence?
The validity of the statistics claimed when wanting to find out more.
Wait did you literally just google her name and read the abc news piece about her?
imagine screeching
>men are violent criminals
out of one side of your mouth while demanding the right to murder babies out of the other side
Women engage in physical violence when in conflict with someone weaker than them, such as a child. They're also becoming increasingly physically violent with men, despite the women being physically weaker, because they know most men understand they can't retaliate without the legal system punishing them.
Where women really outperform men is in psychological violence, where they're not only allowed, but encouraged by society to be in constant attack mode on others.
>open thread
>search for 6.5/50
>don't see it
>close thread
This thread is full of pozzed femigays
6.5/50 isn't accurate because females do commit violent crimes. 3/30 is more accurate for what's happening in the US. Your mileage may vary in the rest of the world.
1% does 41% of suicides
>Men commit something like 80% of all violent crime,
Proof?
See
>https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4062022/
>in 2011 the CDC reported results from the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS), one of the most comprehensive surveys of sexual victimization conducted in the United States to date. The survey found that men and women had a similar prevalence of nonconsensual sex in the previous 12 months (1.270 million women and 1.267 million men).5 This remarkable finding challenges stereotypical assumptions about the gender of victims of sexual violence. However unintentionally, the CDC’s publications and the media coverage that followed instead highlighted female sexual victimization, reinforcing public perceptions that sexual victimization is primarily a women’s issue.
>"Rape,” the category of nonconsensual sex that disproportionately affects women, is given its own table, whereas “made to penetrate,” the category that disproportionately affects men, is treated as a subcategory, placed under and tabulated as “other sexual violence” alongside lesser-harm categories, such as “noncontact unwanted sexual experiences,” which are experiences involving no touching.
It's worth noting the astonishingly high violence rates in lesbians couples. Put in a situation where the other person is of similar strength, women quickly become far more violent than they are when in a relationship with a male that is stronger than them. It may be that women being "less violent" isn't due to their behavioral nature but rather because they have less opportunity to be violent against those of similar or lesser strength.
I've seen it mentioned anecdotally but what is the evidence for it?
This isn't some hidden knowledge dude. It's so well known it even has its own Wikipedia article.
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_violence_in_lesbian_relationships
>wikipedia
suspect but I'll accept it given that they've probably tried to sanitise this sort of stuff as much as possible.
>lesbian battering
I can make so many jokes about this
I have not asked this question before, I think you have me confused with someone else. I was looking for a reference before I repeated it myself.
You again? Each time this subject comes up, you pop up like a bot and try to sea lion the thread. Why are you so scared of this fact?
In 'evolutionary context' women never select for anything at all , ever. especially not in primal cavemen societies.
the strongest chimp or a group of them in alliance take whatever they want and keep it if they can , in this context this is 'natural selection'
the woman can either put up with this and surrender or rebel directly and be put down or rebel indirectly by killing her invaders offspring and probably still be put down.
these 2 options are the sum of 'sexual selection'.
sexual selection is just a delayed byproduct of natural selection which means whichever behavior pattern lead to successful reproduction via nature aka violent behavior will be imprinted onto the descendants as desired traits aka women being attracted to violence as a byproduct of only being descendant of women who put up with it.
in simple terms primal women didnt select for violance but were taken via violance via natural selection and modern women being descendants of that natural selection will still sexually select for it due to millions of years of evolutionary imprint and the absence of natural selection to correct for different conditions or criteria of selection.
Groups like these would be (and always have been) easily dominated by a more egalitarian society with e.g. monogamy.
literally me on the left
No, it's more likely that men fought over access to women and women naturally sided with the victor. They do that now, in abstracted kinds of ways. Which is why women care less about how a man looks, as long as he's capable.
females beating the shit out of other women and their children were pretty normal.
Physical aggression is actually the WEAKEST aggression ever, most of time it actually PREVENTS things into escalating into way worse problems in long run, people rarely even actually hit someone or even if they do the damage is minimal and heals quickly, it's a shortcut to prevent degenerate behavior or situation escalating into way worse place where nothing will help at that point.
This modern agenda of masculinity, aggresive speaking, is completely against what we've done for thousands of years that made us survive.
We're living in world where this is bad but somehow canceling people jobs over political opinions is fine,
or jailing people for "misgendering" someone based on their looks, "RACISM" is considered like worst "social crime" ever while it's just survival group gene kicking in.
There is healthy aggression aswell as degenerate aggression, frick this emotionalics world
i think women are not much different in anger and wanting to be violent. it just so happens that most women cant win a fight, so they do things differently
Males fight each others over the right to frick females in nearly all mammalian species.
We humans are nothing special in that matter.
If emotional violence was recognized as a crime then 99% of all crimes would be committed by females, and most cases of "domestic abuse" by men against women would be recognized as self defense.
#JusticeForAmberHeard
yes, have you tried ask women if they prefer taller men
There isn't sexual selection for "Aggressiveness" Specifically, because both genders are actually equally Aggressive according ot research. It's just that Females manifest their aggressiveness in non-physical manners, such as social sabotage, propaganda etc.(such as "Oh he raped me" or "he has a small dick") in order to ruin someone's life in revenge., whereas men manifest their aggressiveness physically and usually end up engaging in fights for revenge.
Now as for being good at the fights, meaning being physically strong, there is definitely sexual selection for that. Women would choose a strong man over a weak man any day of the weak. Humans are sexually dimorphic for a reason.
>females aren't aggressive
Virgin detected
sorry to disappoint you, but no
using that as an insult speaks volumes about yourself though
haha keep fighting the good fight lil' phoneposter buddy, you do you
Maybe men commit most of violent crimes because they can. If a woman tried to get directly involved with certain types of violent crimes, she'd be very likely to get beaten up and caught.
There is also opportunity cost. Why would she get involved directly when she can use her pussy to get a man to do the violence for her?
We also can't discard that some do get violent, but they don't get arrested (and thus don't make it to the stats). It could be because it doesn't get reported or isn't taken seriously by the police and justice system.
I don't know how it's in the US. But in Brazil there is a domestic violence law that explicitly discriminates against men, and I've seen judges saying out loud that women do get special treatment (and are even proud that this is the case).
They probably selected more for protective instincts (not letting wild animals or other people harm her or her children, protecting territories, defending resources etc.) which is displayed in the world as aggression because men have a lot things they want to protect such as their social positions and dominance, "mating grounds" (think bar fights) etc. This is a more normal, non-pathological kind of aggression.
People who are prone to pathological aggression like anger-issues, sociopathy/psychopathy etc. likely continued on their genes by using their type of aggression to overcome non-protective and weak protective males to secure a female. Thanks to those buttholes, we now have a bunch of crazies running around - male and female.