9 0

How are we to evolve as human beings if we keep thinking and acting like less evolved animals? Females no longer need the support and protection of males so perhaps the human race would evolve more rapidly if said women would choose to mate with philanthropic philosopher types instead of aggressive high testosterone types.

msimpson9agn 5 Apr 23

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account


Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.


Humans have evolved past requiring aggressive high-testosterone types to provide basic needs, which is why we have the philanthropic philosopher types to choose from now. I can't see, if societies regressed to primal forms, philanthropic philosopher types being bred out since human brains have evolved past merely understanding our basic needs. Therefore, I expect both types might be attractive and both types might lead together. Add women in the mix as either aggressive high-testosterone (and estrogen-fueled) or philanthropic philosopher types, and perhaps we may rebuild a better, more egalitarian society. See Maslow's hierarchy of needs:


If society as we know it disappeared tomorrow, asteroid, war, or run away virus, all that you said won't mean shit. It can happen and probably will, it will be back to the basics. Those testosterone driven males will rule. I don't believe some of our wiring will ever change.

@Sticks48 Yes, I agree that basic wiring according to Maslow's hierarchy of needs, will ever change.


I don't think we will get the chance to evolve too much. I think if we did we would just be huge brains with computer life support.


Evolution is a long slow process, its worked out great for the human race so far, we just need to fine tune the worlds economies so everyone is treatly fairly.

gater Level 7 Apr 23, 2018

Don't see it happening. The media, advertising and social media promote the hunky ones even more now.


No, no, no. philosopher types are uninteresting in bed. just take Socrates, for example- sexually boring. and who said women no longer need a man's protection?


Don't blame women for hyper-masculine cultures, and don't assume that most women prefer aggressive males.

"In another study, participants who read dating ads in which people described themselves as altruistic (“I volunteer at the food bank&rdquo😉 were rated as more attractive short-term dates and long-term partners than those who didn’t mention such qualities. Other studies have similarly shown that women prefer men who are sensitive, confident and easy-going, and that very few (if any) women want to date a man who is aggressive or demanding. The picture that emerges is clear: when women rate hypothetical partners, they clearly prefer “nice” men.
The problem with the nice-guys-finish-last stereotype, aside from going against the grain of years of scientific evidence, is that it may compromise the possibility of forming meaningful relationships. Perpetuating this myth not only creates unhelpful expectations about how we should behave, but trying to live up to the myth can sometimes damage relationships.

In the end, the idea that women want to date bad boys really just reinforces the misogynist’s idea of deceitful women and earnest “nice” men baffled by their lack of dating success. It allows some men to blame and hate women as a means of deflecting attention away from their own shortcomings. So, if you’re looking to science for some advice, it’s simple: be nice."



I think if we become more civilized as a species it will come from education not breeding. Morality, ethics are taught.


That's a whole lot of women being painted with the same brush !

@evergreen It's a broad brush!

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:64745
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.