Evolutionarily speaking, women are more sexually selective than men. That’s partially why twice as many of your reproductively successful ancestors were female, not male. That’s also why men are sexually rejected at a rate ten times greater than vice versa while women judge 80% of men as below average. Furthermore, women’s biological predisposition to devalue the average man in an overtly lopsided/asymmetrical manner very likely at least partially accounts for the fact that women file the vast majority of divorces.
Throw in the fact that women are infinitely more likely to complain about male sexual advances (not to mention male attention more generally) and it becomes all but impossible to deny that, as an evolutionary class, women seem to be at least somewhat gender-cidal towards men. Of course, none of these observations are hugely surprising. As a society, we understand that virtually all women deserve to replicate their genes just by virtue of being born female (human beings) while men (human doings) must prove themselves to women if men wish to pass their genes on to the next generation. In other words, men are more or less the only sex that we enthusiastically treat as a potentially disposable genetic crop.
Furthermore, why in the world would concerns regarding male reproductive sexual success provoke such overt hatred from our society if not for the undercurrent of biologically driven female supremacy? For those who don’t believe this is a real phenomenon, go out in public and express concern regarding the fear that every fertile woman who wants a baby in her womb might not get one. Nobody will express any hatred towards you whatsoever. Then, express concern regarding the sexual reproductive success of all men. People will try to take your head off for daring to even remotely suggest that all male genetics are in any way inherently sacred.
Even more disturbingly, women seem to like it this way. After all, do many women want to alter this underlying one-sided gender-cidal dynamic of female on male hyper-selectivity? With rare exception, the answer seems to be emphatically no. The vast majority of women do not want to change the fact that women are primarily valued just for existing while men, on the other hand, must prove themselves according to a dramatically harsher standard of selectivity if men wish to avoid the intergenerational Darwin Award. The male hypogamy/female hypergamy dynamic appears to be all but entirely irreversible. This begs the question: Are virtually all women female supremacists in this regard? Do virtually all women view men as a potentially disposable genetic crop while viewing women as the selective face of Mother Nature? And if so, is this not a vaguely femi-nazi-esque world view?
What percentage of women currently living in the Western world are for culturally enforcing civilization wide demands for premarital chastity and lifelong monogamy in order to help ensure that all men have something approximating the same sexual and reproductive chances as all women? And if the answer is virtually none, what does this say about women as a class? Are virtually all women female supremacists when it comes to matters of genetic replication? Is this lopsided expression of gynocentric sexual selectivity not one of the primary underlying causes of widespread misandry? And if so, what would it take to live in a truly pro-male society?