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:
[psychologytoday.com]

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.

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.

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?

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