I suspect that his conjecture that somehow P4P somehow allows for cheating by lesser biologic specimens in competition to satisfy the drive to mate. Yep, we're cheaters. We didn't deserve the right to mate because we didn't fight it out like the two lions did. He tries to equate the sex process as a biologic need on both sides, men and women, and factors in instant cash as unethical in it's disturbance to natural selection.
Originally Posted by 2short@desky
That is 1000% wrong. Prostitution isn't cheating. It is totally natural.
http://www.zmescience.com/research/h...nkey-appeared/
One of the researchers, during the chaos event, observed how one of the monkeys exchanged money to another for sex. After the act was over, the monkey which was paid immediately used it to buy a grape…
The male lions duke it out, and the woman gets the winner. With the woman having nothing to say about it? That is literally the same bullshit Gaston was peddling to Belle.
Not only is that not true among most mammals, it is not true among the previously believed to be monogamous prairie voles. Here is the link and relevant quote, https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/526d/c2781f6094002810f8eeb0b604e5ad 155486.pdf"Of the 26 litters assessed for paternity, 21 (80.8%) were
sired by the paired mate of the mother". Got that? One in five babies were linked to a male who was not the "husband".
So even if you win the fight between lions, chances are pretty good your female mate or mates is banging some beta or gamma male on the side without you alphas knowing it. And you would never suspect it right? Why would your "wife" be banging anyone else when you are the "best"? It would have to be the money right? Have you ever considered that some women may find some of the alpha males not attractive but insufferable egotistical assholes? Of course, you would actually have to ask the women that rather than just assuming you know how they think or should think.
When I was in the part of my career when I was investing, I would constantly meet these management types that were tall, good looking white men who were just airheads. I coined the phrase "tall good looking white guy who expects six figures a year for not working but literally just showing up to work". It got shortened to "tall good looking white guy" by others, and the phrase took off like fire in the business world. To a lot of contrarian investors like myself, we actually saw that CEOs who were unattractive did a much better job than attractive ones. In that vain, I never saw an unattractive black female as CEO or in upper management anywhere, but if I did, I would look very hard at investing in that company. If she got the job on merit, she'd have to be a 100x better manager than the tall good looking white guy.
In one of my previous jobs, I supervised over 600 ladies, and many of them I wanted to bone. The reality is though, that it is just as socially unsanctioned to accept advances or make advances without being exposed to a charge of fraternization as is P4P is socially unsanctioned. His concept of a roomful of ladies like he described just doesn't exist....it's similar to the concept many men, including myself, dream about being the last male survivor on an island loaded with hotties and tasked with the burden of continuance of the species.