Women are better hunter, science suggests

[Alexop]

How can these studies be taken seriously by the science community?

https://www.iflscience.com/women-may-be-better-hunters-than-men-latest-research-argues-71719?fbclid=IwdGRjcAVDwIpjbGNrBUPAZ2V4dG4DYWVtAjExAHBkb2YFc3J0YwZhcHBfaWQMMzUwNjg1NTMxNzI4AAEejzx-QWBPu-rHAOLh9gF7Nd_lLminTbgNE3AKpcxyw0a4fnnLQ8KIPOwr4n4_aem_JsU8rcpx2Fp_xWn2xfOXtA

If this can pass as science then science is just religion plus some fluke luck discovery by throwing shit at the wall and see what sticks.

Better suitable to run the animals down to exhaustion? Woke dude, men can run marathons (42 km) faster than women. And I can imagine how excited women were to run 20 km after animals with a child in their belly or right before they gave birth. They usually had lots of pregnancies during their lifetime. Generally 4-9 births with 3-4 years in between. Try physically compete with men who are physically stronger and give no births at all.

Edited 4 hours ago by Alexop

[aurum]

Green uses science to support its worldview and subsequent political agenda.

Nothing new about that.

[Leo Gura]

As soon as you see a PhD in colonialism, run. That's wokeness infecting science.

Woke science slop 

Political agenda corrupts science. Any agenda other than truth is corrupting.

Edited 3 hours ago by Leo Gura

[AION]

Men are not only physically stronger. Even with mind games like chess and such it is no match. Hunting is mostly a mind game.

Edited 3 hours ago by AION

[Leo Gura]

Women are evolved to be good mothers, not good providers.

[Ulax]

I like that term: Woke slop.

[Ulax]

32 minutes ago, AION said:

Men are not only physically stronger. Even with mind games like chess and such it is no match. Hunting is mostly a mind game.

Also, there is much less sexual incentive for women to develop competence

[Alexop]

39 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Women are evolved to be good mothers, not good providers.

Yes, think about teleporting a such woke dude back in time 50.000 years ago. The tribes will laugh at his nonsense until they faint. 😅😅

Not just woke dudes! Even libertarians or other weirdos who do not understand our roots and implicitly our biological base. These artificial environments we live in today made space for us to make shit up.

Edited 3 hours ago by Alexop

[Natasha Tori Maru]

My tits provide. I evolved to lactate.

[AION]

15 minutes ago, Ulax said:

Also, there is much less sexual incentive for women to develop competence

Women are better at communcation jobs and I don't even think they have a biological edge, they just enjoy that more than other things that makes them better at that kind of job. But for zero sum jobs like being a hunter, chess player, fighter, or soldier things are different.

Edited 3 hours ago by AION

[Alexop]

Now of course the opposite discourse can  be abused. 

"Ah look at these woke fools. Women should stay at home like in the 50s."

No, women can work, and they work great. But we have to take into account what we evolved for. Teach people about our biology and masculinity and femininity so they make sure they choose the right path for themselves.

Otherwise you'll meet more and more confused children. Girls who force themselves to be like men and immature feminized soyboys castrated by a sick society 

Edited 2 hours ago by Alexop

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, Alexop said:

Yes, think about teleporting a such woke dude back in time 50.000 years ago. The tribes will laugh at his nonsense until they faint.

I saw a YT video some years back where whites went to a remote African tribe and explained feminism to them, and the tribal men were laughing like the whites were insane.

But that sword cuts both ways.

Edited 2 hours ago by Leo Gura

[Schizophonia]

Someone once told me that the reason men are taller and stronger, at least in their upper bodies, than women is that back in the Paleolithic era there was basically a conspiracy to deprive women of food lol.

Strangely enough every single tribe took part in this conspiracy, as did other primates and most mammals in general.

The greatest conspiracy of all time.

Edited 1 hour ago by Schizophonia

[something_else]

I agree with the overall sentiment of the criticism here, but I am inclined to play devils advocate a bit, for fun.

One thing worth remembering is that a lot of our understanding of prehistoric human behaviour is reconstructed from fairly limited evidence. Evolutionary explanations can become plausible-sounding stories that reflect our more modern cultural assumptions. The underlying point this person is trying to make is "we don't actually know as much about how early humans acted as we all like to think we do" bundled in a controversial enough wrapper that it will garner attention.

There almost certainly were women who hunted back then. The most successful way to hunt as a pre-historic human was probably endurance and throwing spears, which women aren't inherently disadvantaged at. We assume men developed strength for hunting and providing, but it's also possible men developed extra strength for intra-species competition like fighting other men, and war. 

Small Stage Purple tribes would likely have a lot of variance between them because there isn't a massive underlying social structure spanning empires that you would get from something like Stage Blue civilisations. Some tribes may have distributed hunting between men and women, some may have restricted women from hunting, some may even have been matriarchal. The truth is we don't actually have that much evidence either way, because it's all pre-historic. By the time we have access to historical record we're already hitting Stage Blue where the variance starts to coalesce into modern social hierarchies and distribution of labour.

[Jannes]

There are videos on youtube of a dude living with a huting tribe in africa for a while. When they were hunting baboons, the women were part of the hunt as well. 

[Alexop]

34 minutes ago, Schizophonia said:

Someone once told me that the reason men are taller and stronger, at least in their upper bodies, than women is that back in the Paleolithic era there was basically a conspiracy to deprive women of food lol.

Lmao. I am ashamed to call myself leftist. I will say "leftist but not exactly what you think".

[Leo Gura]

18 minutes ago, Jannes said:

There are videos on youtube of a dude living with a huting tribe in africa for a while. When they were hunting baboons, the women were part of the hunt as well. 

That does not contradict the main point.

Can a woman hunt a baboon if required? Sure. But that is not her strength.

How many women do you see hunting on Instagram? I have not seen one. Women are not even interested in hunting.

Edited 1 hour ago by Leo Gura

[Bjorn K Holmstrom]

My brother's wife is a hunter.

[TheBeautyOfGod]

Exceptions prove the rule

[Alexop]

@something_else you just need some common sense to realize that women did not evolve to have hunting and defence/attack as their main thing. You just need to know if tribes fought with each other for resources (which we know), how many children did women have (lots), how strong their bodies are compared to men (weaker). 

You don't send women to risk their lives to hunt dangerous animals or defend the tribe. A woman was veeery precious. A man can impregnate 100 women maybe in one year. A woman can bear max 2-3 babies at once. And bearing the baby, lactation, mens periods made her body even more vulnerable.

Edited 48 minutes ago by Alexop