.png)
"Nope. A woman’s « job » evolutionarily speaking is not to get married and have kids. Her "role" is to have kids, but only with men with matable traits. Traits that are positive that get passed onto the next generation in order to respect the ecosystem.
Not all males deserve to reproduce. So if 90% of males are destructive,hateful, and incompetent, it is of natures law to wipe their bloodlines the fu&k out."
_______________________________________________
Explanation: nature is a self regulating system, but also ruthless when it comes to selecting the individuals who will be picked based on how much nature/the planet benefits from them.
It is simple: animal/plants individuals with good traits contribute positively to the perpetuation and growth of the ecosystem. Animal/plants individuals with bad traits are a threat to nature and therefore deserve to be destroyed.
Before the patriarchy, women exerted their rightful privilege to only mate with men with traits that women instictively know that they contribute positively to the planet.
In the Patriarchy, the roles were reversed, and 1000s of years later, the humanity is currently witnessing a frightening overload of mediocre unmatable scrotes , who were the result of 100000s of generations of scrotes ancestors who artificially had access to women's bodies (be in via r$pe,coersion,indocreination....)
The planet is getting ruined year after year and the ecosystem is reaching a point of no return because undeserving cell bags feel entitled to reproduce just for existing.
Which is why women have the right AND privilege to be ruthlessly selective just as much as mother nature.
Our reproductive period is restricted from puberty until menopause, and it is ,from evolutionary perspective, a very good reason:
--The planet is not meant to be populated by 8 billion humans.--
The strength in humanity doesn't come from quantity but from quality.
well all humans lose reproductive efficiency at a certain age but the problem is men seem to think at 30 we shrivel up and turn to dust, (some are even now saying it's 25) and its simply not the truth. Women have been bombarded with the “fact” that our fertility “falls off a cliff” at 30-35, when this statistic is based partly on a study of French peasant women living 300 years ago, which has been largely debunked. And while yes over 40 has its risks, age isn't the only factor at play. I do not know a single woman who has not internalised the whole "your fertility is gone at 30 and your life is over" shit. just so much disinformation. Women have also been blamed for all of the worlds infertility problems when half of all infertility problems, the male partner is a contributing factor. This means that male infertility can be a significant cause, or at least a part of the reason, when a couple is struggling to conceive but sure lets just always blame the woman. And declining sperm quality as men age has also been implicated in a number of developmental problems but its women who have been blamed for all of that too. like mens shitty sperm literally causes preeclampsi. I'm glad more women are waking up to not having kids with these losers, but there are still a lot of women (especially the pick me's) passing these losers genes on.
HUMANS lose reproductive efficiency after a certain age. Keep in mind that our physical ages and our chronological ages differ based upon our genetics and also how well we care for our bodies though. But really this comes down to men trying to tie our "value" to the age of our wombs...and if they want to drive down that road they must acknowledge that it has TWO lanes. Also, if your Mom had to tie a steak around your neck to get the dogs to play with you...I don't feel bad that you don't get to pass on your unmotivated uggo genes.
I hate even using the word "value" with these sentiments. Women lose the ability to produce as they age, just like men do.
"Value" makes it seem like we must lose overall value as we age. We don't. I don't even like those two words being so close together. I think we mentally conflate the two by proxy when it's worded like that.
I also don't even know if it has so much to do with their ability to be productive to the planet. I think it is more for survival.
Good genes, better chance of survival, better chance of the bloodline continuing on. The more of a decent, handy dude he is, the better your chance of survival as he won't get you killed from lack of skills or dying of starvation in a shack. Men still need skills although it looks a bit different today than it did in centuries past.
The biological truth and need for survival still runs deep. A dumb, useless, ugly dude means your life is wrecked and you have less of a chance of staying alive, reproducing comfortably, living stress free, and being well-fed.
So....no ugly, useless, mean, stress inducing scrotes allowed. These princess boys need to get some skills and take some vitamins. Pick up some carpentry. Go for a jog.
Whether we lose value or not, men still try to put their dicks in us, no matter how old we are, so I don't think anyone actually cares. Not like the kinda guys who say that would be an active parent, anyway. Nor do I think they have women throwing themselves at them, so anything they spout is just white noise. They're talking to air.
Yeah and your meat cap is showing as you reach 25.. your testosterone is dropping after 35, including your bones will get weaker… its why men seek a nurse with a purse because deep down they know men age worse than women.,
As sera 7 said, if a woman sells her eggs she has 30k, a man needs to sell his sperm 7 times to pay a phone bill.
FACTS! Women don’t loose value. Lmao. If we’re basing are value as human beings off of having children. Most men would fail. They’re too short, ugly and broke to reproduce anyways. It’s why we as a society project this notion on women not men, because men would realise quickly they don’t have the option to “spread their seed” because they aren’t worthy enough with their subpar genetics. Women regardless of age - can get sex, attention and physical affection from Men. Men are not hard to come by at any age - men are NOT valuable for women to base their entire identity around what they think. They can stay mad !
Women do lose reproductive value as they age, as do men. But good thing I am not interested in spending my life with a man who only sees me for my reproductive value.
men’s menopause is their receding hairline, erectile dsyfunction, reducing sperm count that they project onto women, as ‘biological clocks’. Yes we aren’t meant to reproduce after a time, but neither are men, with their unattractive receding hairlines, ED and low sperm virility.
Unlike men though, women are desired at all ages, but not these sleazy scroates.