Why do so many betas harbor gauzy delusions about female sexual nature? Why are monogamously inclined traditionalists, manginas and white knighters so quick to sanctify women and paint their misbehavior in rose-colored hues while simultaneously offering unconditional support and shitlapping amen choruses for women when they accuse men of committing a litany of hackneyed misdeeds?
Iím here to provide what I believe is the most parsimonious answer to this riddle:
Beta males are rarely in a position to witness the worst of women.
This is so true. A beautiful girlfriend from hell did much to rewrite my software for evaluating women. Getting propositioned by young married women and other experiences with women have made additional contributions to my much altered view. If I could only tell my adolescent self what I had to learn the hard way...
I am struck by how many myths about human nature survive and how many different people see it in their interest to promote assorted myths. Take marriage for example. Some married people encourage other people to get married basically in order to validate their own choice. Some do not want to admit to themselves how dissatisfied they are with their mate and their lot in life. They'd rather see everyone stuck in the same boat because they want more company for their misery.
You are better off knowing the truth. The more accurate your model of humans becomes the more possible it becomes to make sense of the world. One needs to be a genius to rationalize huge falsehoods with the world as you experience it so that you can make good decisions for yourself and yet still maintain the falsehoods. A correct model of the world lowers your cognitive load substantially. The behavior of others becomes much less surprising. Misunderstandings happen less often. Dealing with others at work and in your personal life becomes easier the more you understand the implications of everything from differences in cognitive ability to the differences in mating strategies of men and women (e.g. why women want the confirmation of other women for their choices whereas men make up their minds about love interests on their own).
Movies, TV shows, and most of what passes for mainstream media discussions of human nature make you you less able to understand the world. You've got seek out the best heterodox writers if you want to understand human nature.
In the comments of a post in which Razib presented an interesting typology of terrorists from the standpoint of their sanity and rationality a commenter named Sean who says he spent a few years in Iraq doing intelligence work comments on the inner dynamics of polygamous marriages as he learned about them in Iraq. These do not sound like peaceful households.
Incidentally, Iíve spoken with well over 100 men who are married to more than one woman, and children of those family arrangements. Being the person I am, I never failed to ask ďwhatís it like?Ē
I found that in about half the households, the wives manipulate the husband in a constant battle for supremacy over each other, while in the other half the wives conspire against the husband in a battle to dominate him together. Or the situation fluctuates between those two extremes. (In principle, thereís a strict hierarchy of wives but in practice, people are people.)
I only heard a positive review of polygamy from two men, one of whom was wealthy, so he could keep his wives in different houses, and one of whom was a dwarf with a major Napoleon Complex. Make of that what you will.
I expect eventually polygamists will use sexual selection to make more female babies. I also expect they will select for genes that make their wives have personalities that are more at peace in polygamous marriages. Genetic engineering will be used eventually to make females who will become unjealous and uncompetitive wives.
Will genetic engineering also be employed to make cousin marriage more sustainable? Imagine, for example, removing all the harmful genetic recessives so that cousins making babies make healthier babies. One could imagine cousins making lots of daughters so that they can trade those daughters for lots of daughters of their cousins to give their sons more wives.
Check out this slide show of women connected to Italian prime minister Silvio Berlusconi. A few of the slides stand out: "Silvio Berlusconi has shortlisted his dental hygienist to contest crucial elections next month." Nicole Minetti is hot! If she gets elected then Italy's politics will have considerably more appeal than American politics. Can you imagine American feminists letting a woman that sexy get elected to anything? Berlusconi might make Graziana Capone into a candidate. I see Silvio's promoting attractive women into politics as a necessary counter to the feminists who resent attractive women and want to keep the attractive women down. His success stories are inspiring. He lifted up "Francesca Pascale, 25, a former TV showgirl" and helped her become a regional councillor in Naples. Berlusconi fights the good fight against those who are jealous of beauty.
Faced with the threat of prosecution in Milan for having sex with prostitutes and 17 year old girls Berlusconi is unapologetic and says he makes women feel special. Of that I have no doubt.
"Every woman that has had the opportunity to know me knows my regard for them: I have always behaved with the greatest attention and respect towards them," the billionaire businessmen said. "I have always made it so that every woman feels, how should I say, special."
Hundreds of thousands of (mostly less attractive) women protested on the streets about Berlusconi's behavior. Unfortunately, he has few overt allies in the battle to help beauties.