Monogamy May Be Even More Difficult For Women Than it Is For Men

[Greoric]

An introvert that does no introspection, is kind of a contradiction. The term was invented to describe people who partake in introspection, self-reflection.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraversion_and_introversion#Introversion

If you define the terms differently, that is fine. In commonly used language, introversion has basically come to mean being on the "autist spectrum" and having no social skills. But if we are talking about the original meanings of the terms, having been created as concepts to describe how people of different personality types choose to receive and process information, and how they prefer to spend most of their mental (and physical) energy, then what I said holds true.

The terms "introvert" and "extravert" were never meant to be used as definitives. A generally more introverted person is by no means incapable of picking up social signals (unless they are mentally impaired), nor is a generally more extraverted person completely incapable of self-reflection (unless they are a total narcissist/psychopath). Both sides can and will manifest in a person, but one side is usually dominant, thus the categorizing of people into extraverts or introverts.

It's safe to say that an "introverted" person would be less impacted by surrounding culture, as their observations would be more likely to have been formed independently, through introspection, rather than collectively, by picking up social signals.

This thread is fucking packed with great posts.

 

[TheGreatA]

I legit LOLed at the first comment.

If I can jump in here with an alternative description of that continuum, it seems to be less of a descriptor on how you are in public as much as how much work it feels like for people to be in public. The best way, I've read that makes the most sense for introversion and extroversion, is whether being in social situations is draining or not. If someone is "recharged" by being by themselves or with a few people very close to them then they could be described as introverts. That's as compared to people that feel "recharged" when they're among people constantly. The counter intuitive part is that you could have an introvert that especially talkative in social situations, but its just not very sustainable because they feel like they're giving out their energy. (I'm actually one of those people and scored pretty highly on the introversion scale on a Meyers Briggs personality test).

In short it seems like introversion and extroversion has more to do with your state of preference in social setting as opposed to a degree of social awkwardness.

The problem appears to be that the context has changed when it comes to applying those two terms.

To most people nowadays, an extravert means a socially successful person, while an introvert means a socially unsuccessful person.

That is quite far from the truth in many cases, even if generally this may seem to be the case. An extraverted person can be socially unappealing and not possess any social skills. In fact, I would imagine that many of the so-called "incel" types represent precisely this type of a person. Someone who enjoys and yearns for social situations, but is incapable of partaking in them, therefore becoming repressed and frustrated.

The introvert can handle social situations fine, he or she will just feel drained by them in the long term, and require space for self-reflection, to put things in order, to remain in control of his or her own faculties. Contrary to the extravert, they will not feel as frustrated by a lack of social situations in their life, but might actually feel relieved by it.

The more introverted a person is, the more capable they are of living their life as an island, without needing social approval.

 

[MikeMcMann]

An introvert that does no introspection, is kind of a contradiction. The term was invented to describe people who partake in introspection, self-reflection.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraversion_and_introversion#Introversion

If you define the terms differently, that is fine. In commonly used language, introversion has basically come to mean being on the "autist spectrum" and having no social skills. But if we are talking about the original meanings of the terms, having been created as concepts to describe how people of different personality types choose to receive and process information, and how they prefer to spend most of their mental (and physical) energy, then what I said holds true.

The terms "introvert" and "extravert" were never meant to be used as definitives. A generally more introverted person is by no means incapable of picking up social signals (unless they are mentally impaired), nor is a generally more extraverted person completely incapable of self-reflection (unless they are a total narcissist/psychopath). Both sides can and will manifest in a person, but one side is usually dominant, thus the categorizing of people into extraverts or introverts.

It's safe to say that an "introverted" person would be less impacted by surrounding culture, as their observations would be more likely to have been formed independently, through introspection, rather than collectively, by picking up social signals.

I legit LOLed at the first comment.

If I can jump in here with an alternative description of that continuum, it seems to be less of a descriptor on how you are in public as much as how much work it feels like for people to be in public. The best way, I've read that makes the most sense for introversion and extroversion, is whether being in social situations is draining or not. If someone is "recharged" by being by themselves or with a few people very close to them then they could be described as introverts. That's as compared to people that feel "recharged" when they're among people constantly. The counter intuitive part is that you could have an introvert that especially talkative in social situations, but its just not very sustainable because they feel like they're giving out their energy. (I'm actually one of those people and scored pretty highly on the introversion scale on a Meyers Briggs personality test).

In short it seems like introversion and extroversion has more to do with your state of preference in social setting as opposed to a degree of social awkwardness.

I will take a little something from both your posts as I was conflating 'shy' probably more with Introvert than I should.

That said I think there is certainly room for my view that it is also viewed with regards to how one comports themself in social or public settings.

introvert
An introvert generally prefers solitary activities to interacting with large groups of people. If you would rather work through your feelings in your diary than have a conversation, then you are an introvert.

What Is an Introvert? Definition & Guide to Introversion
Introvert Definition:
The definition of an introvert is someone who prefers calm, minimally stimulating environments. Introverts tend to feel drained after socializing and regain their energy by spending time alone.

 

[MikeMcMann]

The problem appears to be that the context has changed when it comes to applying those two terms.

To most people nowadays, an extravert means a socially successful person, while an introvert means a socially unsuccessful person.

That is quite far from the truth in many cases, even if generally this may seem to be the case. An extraverted person can be socially unappealing and not possess any social skills. In fact, I would imagine that many of the so-called "incel" types represent precisely this type of a person. Someone who enjoys and yearns for social situations, but is incapable of partaking in them, therefore becoming repressed and frustrated.

The introvert can handle social situations fine, he or she will just feel drained by them in the long term, and require space for self-reflection, to put things in order, to remain in control of his or her own faculties. Contrary to the extravert, they will not feel as frustrated by a lack of social situations in their life, but might actually feel relieved by it.

The more introverted a person is, the more capable they are of living their life as an island, without needing social approval.

I am not so sure about that. MOst of the most annoying people on any night out are extroverts who are ignorant and yet loud and imposing. An introvert can often seem contemplative and smart even if that is not true.

So those are two correlations you have tied to introverts and extroverts that I would say have no strong specific correlation to either.

 

[Rod1]

Northern climates are less hospitable, more specifically, climates more disparate from where we originally speciated are less hospitable to human populations. Thus northern climates supported smaller communities than equatorial climates. That harsher environmental pressure is the same reason why certain ecologies promoted higher IQ populations than others.

How are they more hospitable than the Saharan desert? or the Amazonian rainforest?

 

[TheGreatA]

I am not so sure about that. MOst of the most annoying people on any night out are extroverts who are ignorant and yet loud and imposing. An introvert can often seem contemplative and smart even if that is not true.

So those are two correlations you have tied to introverts and extroverts that I would say have no strong specific correlation to either.

As I said, that is the general opinion of "most people" in regards to what it means to be extraverted or introverted. That does not mean that it is the correct definition.

I referred to that very thing in the post that you quoted, by stating that the extraverted person can be every bit as socially unappealing or unsuccessful as the introvert. The difference is that the extravert will feel more frustrated by it, due to his greater need to partake in social situations in order to feel energetic and fulfilled.

That does not, in itself, yield to a greater success in social situations, just a greater need to partake in them.

Now, obviously, people who have a greater desire to be "social" will likely be more socially inclined. But the opposite can be true, as well. A desire alone, does not yield to success. A desire unfulfilled, can lead to repression and frustration.

Many people who deem themselves "introverted", due to their mistaken belief that their shyness and lack of social skills defines "introversion", are in fact people who do require regular social interaction, who do not necessarily enjoy reflecting or spending time by their self, who do require collective ideas and social groups in order to validate their existence. These are a people who simply lack the means to attain what they truly want.

That is why, I believe, it is important to remind people of the original meaning behind these terms, because it can help people understand their own strengths and weaknesses better, on a less superficial level.

 

[Greoric]

How are they more hospitable than the Saharan desert? or the Amazonian rainforest?

Well, first we didn't start out in the Sahara. Virtually nothing is living there, and that's reflected by the limited biomass in that region in absolute terms. The amazon rain forest, on the other hand, is probably the most resource abundant region on earth, as evidenced by its biomass in the opposite end of the spectrum. Whereas we started out in the rift valley, and at periods it provided grossly abundant resources to sustain human populations, albeit still nomadically and through persistence hunting. As a base understanding that's where hominids and humans alike speciated from, so we're already just more accustomed to its challenges through millions more years of adaptation as compared to other areas, which have only hosted us for tens of thousands of years. Without even addressing the brutality of winters in Northern regions as compared to the relatively stable temperature along the equator, northern regions just bring foreign challenges that our ancestors weren't primarily adapted to for life in the African plains, forcing an adaptive technological response along with a biologically selective one (reduced melanin for better Vit D absorption)... or death for those who couldn't. And again, that's evidenced by the differences in IQ from populations of those respective regions.

Maybe @Seaside can help fill the gaps to help you out here also.

 

[InternetHero]

Disagree

Oh yeah? Want to fight about it?

In a fenced off poly-angular enclosure?? Sniper by armbar, IMO.

 

[Satsui Ryu]

I legit LOLed at the first comment.

If I can jump in here with an alternative description of that continuum, it seems to be less of a descriptor on how you are in public as much as how much work it feels like for people to be in public. The best way, I've read that makes the most sense for introversion and extroversion, is whether being in social situations is draining or not. If someone is "recharged" by being by themselves or with a few people very close to them then they could be described as introverts. That's as compared to people that feel "recharged" when they're among people constantly. The counter intuitive part is that you could have an introvert that especially talkative in social situations, but its just not very sustainable because they feel like they're giving out their energy. (I'm actually one of those people and scored pretty highly on the introversion scale on a Meyers Briggs personality test).

In short it seems like introversion and extroversion has more to do with your state of preference in social setting as opposed to a degree of social awkwardness.

It's not absolute, but it would be reasonable to believe that introversion and social awkwardness are highly correlated. The general definition of the spectrum is based on how much someone is energized by social interaction, but then the question becomes why someone would feel drained by social interaction. For most activities if someone sucks at it, even a fun activity like playing a sport, they will feel drained by it while someone who is good at it will get a rush from it. Now not being good at social interaction is not the only reason someone will feel drained by it, but it is likely it is a reason for many if not most. Plus it's the old saying, practice makes perfect. An introvert will likely shy away more from social interactions which will prevent them from building those social skills especially during their development years. Unless social skills are incredibly innate an introvert is much less likely to have them than an extrovert simply from being more likely to avoid social interactions.

Also because of this I don't think being an introvert and being self reflective are very correlated as well. Hate to be cliche, but the incel types usually have atrocious self-awareness and never really realize the source of their issues.

 

[HAWTRIDDUM]

Does this study rely on women reporting things about themselves honestly?

So the numbers are probably far higher than 30% then

 

[Rod1]

Well, first we didn't start out in the Sahara. Virtually nothing is living there, and that's reflected by the limited biomass in that region in absolute terms. The amazon rain forest, on the other hand, is probably the most resource abundant region on earth, as evidenced by its biomass in the opposite end of the spectrum. Whereas we started out in the rift valley, and at periods it provided grossly abundant resources to sustain human populations, albeit still nomadically and through persistence hunting. As a base understanding that's where hominids and humans alike speciated from, so we're already just more accustomed to its challenges through millions more years of adaptation as compared to other areas, which have only hosted us for tens of thousands of years. Without even addressing the brutality of winters in Northern regions as compared to the relatively stable temperature along the equator, northern regions just bring foreign challenges that our ancestors weren't primarily adapted to for life in the African plains, forcing an adaptive technological response along with a biologically selective one (reduced melanin for better Vit D absorption)... or death for those who couldn't. And again, that's evidenced by the differences in IQ from populations of those respective regions.

Maybe @Seaside can help fill the gaps to help you out here also.

Something being resource abundant doesnt means its easy to live in, pretty few people live in the equator because despite its high productivity the land isnt good for farming.

Also major civilizations were created by people living in temperate climates. These were the people that created the seed civilizations that uplifted the rest out of prehistory.

This map shows in black the different regions where agriculture was invented, they pretty much overlap with the ancient civilizations, and high populations

 

[SmilinDesperado]

Lol I'm not saying anyone is right or wrong here, but threads like these always make me wonder what would a group of girls think if they were to read this.
I never hear girls have these sorts of conversations, so what would they think about a bunch of dudes talking about how girls are wired

 

[MikeMcMann]

Lol I'm not saying anyone is right or wrong here, but threads like these always make me wonder what would a group of girls think if they were to read this.
I never hear girls have these sorts of conversations, so what would they think about a bunch of dudes talking about how girls are wired

Women know men talk about things. They know how much rent they take up in the heads of insecure men who think focusing on controlling a woman's behaviour and relationships is the key to preventing her from cheating and they laugh as even women in Islam wanting to cheat find ways (as mentioned upthread).

In the end I think they laugh knowing they have the upper hand in this regard because in fact it is the woman exhibiting control over the man if he is so focused on her and yet so utterly incompetent in controlling anything outside himself.

 

[cleetus]

Vice = alt-left propaganda wing of democrats

Advocating that women whore themselves out, which is essentially what this "research" promotes, serves a couple of different purposes for the alt-left. For one, promoting this behavior will subsequently destroy family stability, something the left relishes. Second, it could lead to either more abortions or more unwanted babies that are statistically more likely wind up jailed or on welfare - with welfare being another HUGE boon for the democrat voting block. Third, it allegedly "empowers" women while neutering men. We already see this in society with the societal enforcement of feminism of men, highlighted by the current beard/beanie/tight jeans look that these sensitive nancy boys are really proud of. A beard used to mean you could change a tire or cut down a tree. Now it means you hang out at the local poetry stage and sip on wine coolers while taking selfies with other males confused about their identity.

 

[unimackpass]

Without the proper education and choices, we are designed to kill our rivals, enslave or murder their progeny, and mate with their women to their shame.

I somehow think we can do better.

What's interesting is the latest groop think is to be set free from any "social construct" that would oppress their true self and inner desires.
"Who are you to say there aren't multiple genders and I can pick and choose depending how I feel from moment to moment."

 

[DanMMAleague]

Women not only don't respect, but outright despise men who they see as weak. Unfortunately for many idiotic women they misinterpret kindness as weakness. Same goes for many dudes as well, but they're easier to set straight.

This is true but ‘weak’ men etc. are often the cleaner, minimum wage worker, someone socially isolated.

A lot of men think chest beating and strength are one and the same.

 

[DIDM]

I'm sorry, was there a rebuttal to my statements there?

Yes, the women men don’t want to fuck become lesbians, are you clear now?

 

[HomerThompson]

so utterly incompetent in controlling anything outside himself.

TBH, most men can't control themselves either.

 

[MikeMcMann]

TBH, most men can't control themselves either.

lol. agreed.

 

[octopus]

Something being resource abundant doesnt means its easy to live in, pretty few people live in the equator because despite its high productivity the land isnt good for farming.

Also major civilizations were created by people living in temperate climates. These were the people that created the seed civilizations that uplifted the rest out of prehistory.

This map shows in black the different regions where agriculture was invented, they pretty much overlap with the ancient civilizations, and high populations

You make decent points but I stayed with a shipibo tribe in Peru for two weeks. And while they didn't have farm lands there was an absolute abundance of river fish, wild fruit, and avocados... seemed like pretty easy living compared to places with winters where you'll die without proper preparations. You don't even really have to build a house/hut out there, I slept outside on a hammoc with a mosquito net(didn't even need a blanket). Obviously all climates have their challenges but I don't see how anyone can make a case that equator living isn't significantly easier then the latter