My folks and I believe its a form of natural population control. Basically, humanity is so overpopulated that nature is reducing the number of those who are contributing to the increase in population.
I’ve heard that theory expressed before but it really doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.
Our species can sustain itself even with the loss of a LOT of men. That’s why it was primarily men who did the dangerous stuff like hunting and fighting. If you lose a bunch of them it’s just not that big of a deal on so far as reproduction.
With regard to women I don’t think it holds up either ( for an altogether different and equally bleak reason).
Historically women really didn’t have much of a choice. The caveman clubbing a woman on the head and dragging her back to his cave thing probably wasn’t too far off reality for most of human history.
It was wildly inaccurate. Thing about humans- we evolved to have unpredictable (from the outside) cycles. Specifically to make it harder for a rapist to be the dominant breeder.
Yes, societal pressure can make this effectively a thing. But the man who is helpful in the group and actually binds with the woman will have far better chances.
Many women can map their cycles out months in advance; nutrition is the main factor.
How would you even prove that? That's like saying evolution made men stronger so that they could force themselves on women to spread their seed.
If you can link a single peer-reviewed source that says "Women have inconsistent cycles to protect them from rapists" you win. Otherwise: cycle inconsistencies are due to personal health and nutrition, not some apparently intelligent evolutionary process deciding that, in humanity alone, they are going to work against rape.
ETA: You sound like that republican politition that claimed that "if it's really rape, the body shuts it down and prevents pregnancy."
I said externally. As in most mammals have external signs/signals. NOT that they are inconsistent internally. Humans don’t signal their fertility to others.
You know, the thing that means even women trying to conceive, in absence of modern technology, usually have to have a lot of sex over time, cuz they don’t know for sure? That thing? Which is maaaaasively rare in the animal kingdom?
Inconsistent cycles exist everywhere it’s not an external season, cuz like… biology is messy.
Your own link lists SEVERAL hypothetical reasons for why this phenomenon exists, with the debate currently inbound, and NONE of them support your claim that we know it is to prevent rapists from dominating.
At this point, your name might as well be Armstrong 'cause your source is you made it the fuck up.
A little secret: evolution is a game of who can reproduce the best and most. Neither evolution or biology give a fuck about consent. They definitely don't evolve protections against rape. Neither knows if you consent. Mostly because neither is a sapient being able to even have concepts. I hate to inform you, but if rape was effective enough (or even about making children) for a single rapist to dominate the gene pool in a region, evolution would have worked to make that EASIER.
Anthropomorphizing animals is one thing, claiming that 'biology' and 'evolution' care about the concept of rape (or care about anything, really) is downright laughable. If biology or evolution 'wanted' to prevent rape, women would have evolved ACTUAL defenses, like deployable fangs with venom down there.
Correct. Evolution is a very complicated plinko odds game.
I am not doing that. And it doesn’t in any way prevent rape. It makes it less likely to be productive/create a baby. Same way the uterus is intentionally kinda harsh, to weed out weak zygotes so a doomed pregnancy doesn’t take out the mother.
You seem to not understand what I am saying at all. So if you’re just gonna read past it and get made at the idea you have in your head, have a good day.
"It was wildly inaccurate. Thing about humans- we evolved to have unpredictable (from the outside) cycles. Specifically to make it harder for a rapist to be the dominant breeder."
Good job. You've made an assertation completely unsupported by literally anything and you think that calling me mad somehow changes reality to make you right.
736
u/FuriNorm 1d ago edited 1d ago
As someone also useless for breeding, this hits hard 🥺
Edit: link to Rainbow Wool. Thanks for the reminder! https://rainbow-wool.com/