Are they serious.. money to impress the 2D picture on the screen or what?
In men, at least, visual stimulus seems to be hooked directly into deeper behavior sections of the brain. I have posted before my own crank theory why this might be so, and certainly the porn industry would suggest it is true.
So it may be irrational, but it's not unexpected, that men would start courting behavior ("money to impress...") based on nothing more than a picture.
Well, according to Professor J. Philippe Rushton (http://www.ssc.uwo.ca/psychology/faculty/rushton.html [Broken]), Northern men court women through their show of social status and money, while the women show off their sexuality. In other words, Northern men want looks, Northern women want money/social social status/intelligence.
But, Rushton says that equitorial men attract women by showing off their muscles, penis size, and athletic ability, while equitorial women are the same as Northen women, or something like that. The evolutionary explanation for this is that in equitorial regions, high intelligence was not really needed to reproduce successfully, but in the North, larger brains were needed to figure out how to find shelter, make clothing, find food. Women were better off choosing intelligence over strength in the North. Plus, tribes were highly separated from each other in the North; finding shelter and food was more of a problem than fighting rival tribes. But inter-tribal conflict was much more of a problem in equitorial regions, such as in Africa and the Middle East. Here, strenth to fight off rival tribes was more important.
Of course, though the above is the natural inclinations of people, it is possible to resist such urges and make wiser reproductive choices. I am part of an equitorial race and I am always thinking about female's naked bodies, but since I am a eugenicist, I will only reproduce with a female with good genetic stock (high intelligence, good behavioral traits, no genetic diseases) and sooth my sexual desires via masturbation.
Forgive me, but the professor's explanation strike me as self indulgent fanasizing; just-so stories in fact.
As to your eugenic concerns, have you found anyone who measures up? Would you accept a woman who met your IQ and health constraints, but was of another race? Remember, you can't affect the population quality of the future if you don't reporduce!
This seems to perpetuate the myth that women don't care about what a guy looks like. Before you even have any chance with a woman, you have to pass her physical attraction test, at least in the beginning.
It's usually "common sense" that women are not as concerned about looks as are men -- I don't have any real numbers to back it up, but it sure does seem to be true in my experience. (Hey, don't throw any tomatoes!)
In fact, I once saw a website gallery of photographs of beautiful women with horrifically ugly boyfriends.
Yes, women do generally care about whether or not a man is attractive -- but much less so than men care about whether or not a woman is attractive.
His site which I posted has ample physical and psychological data. But I do understand your emotional reaction, most of us are like that when presented with an argument antagonistic to our individual world views. It takes time getting used to new data.
IQ and health are just two of the factors, I also want a mate with good personality/behavioral traits, such as high conscientiousness, Typical Intellectual engagement, healthy ethnocentrism, balanced altruism, and creativity. Once I find such a mate, I will produce 3 offspring.
With regards to race, I am only attracted to East Asians, Whites, and Hispanic women.
First, according to the professor, you can't generalize all women as the same, but you must divide them into Northern women (East Asians and Europeans) and then Equitorial women (South and South-East Asians, Arabs, Africans, Mullatos, etc.) What Professor Rushton says is that the Northern women place more emphasis on social status/intelligence/wealth than do equitorial women. But yes, all women do value good looks too, after all, what female wants to have sex with a very hideous male?
Beating my wife is illegal and I obey the laws.
Second, such things as number of offspring desired is something we must agree to before getting married. If we have different idealist viewpoints, we would not get married.
A) Why get married then? It seems you've already assigned your wife a purpose: as a concubine to produce your three offspring. You certainly don't need to marry her. Just use her as a breeding machine, then throw her out the door and raise the kids yourself. After all, she'll probably try to get involved in decisions about their parenting, and that would be intolerable!
B) You don't date much, do ya?
Please learn the rules of rational debate at http://www.infidels.org/news/atheism/logic.html
I don't recall engaging in a debate. I recall making fun of you for your views on the utility of women.
Please don't reduce the quality of this forum by engaging in ad hominem.
Second, I consider both males and females as utilitarian objects. I am a pragmatist and stoic, you obviously are a sentimentalist. To each his own.
And, like I said, that attitude probably means you'll never get laid -- much less the requisite three times.
Heil Heil ve vait for the 4th Reich...
Argumentum ad hominem
More details at http://www.infidels.org/news/atheism/logic.html
But, if you would like to change the topic to sexual practices of both individual and groups, perhaps at the level of differential psychology, I can start a new thread.
Argumentum ad hominem
But, if you want, we can start a new thread on National Socialism.
You seem to also be implying that I am a National Socialist, but I am Mexican and am not allowed into the movement. The leading National Socialist organization is the National Alliance based in America. According to them, I should be deported back to Mexico. But that is obviously not in my best interest.
Nope... I am impling that you are a faciast, I dont care where you are from or what colour your skin is, the bottom line is your "Tone" and attitude seems to be in parralles with "The master Race"
People are not objects or any type of utility....
Anyway good luck finding your "Suitable Mate"
Actually, you're wrong. I was not arguing ad hominem. I don't know who you are, what your credentials are, or anything of that sort, and therefore was certainly not using such information against you.
Instead, I was directly attacking your statements -- your attitude is generally the sort of attitude that will not result in much luck with concubi.. I mean women. That is all.
Separate names with a comma.