/R9K/ ABSOLUTELY UNEQUIVOCALLY BTFO
>Trends in Ecology and Evolution sums up a number of recent studies that show the actual rate of cuckolds in the general population, based on genetic testing and ancestor research, is 1-2 percent. This challenges evolutionary psychologists who have suggested that human women "routinely shop around for good genes by engaging in extra-pair copulation to obtain genetic benefits." This idea came in part from studying socially monogamous songbirds, which mate for life but have roughly 1 in 10 babies as a result of "extra pair" matings.
>human extra-pair paternity rates "have stayed near constant at around 1 percent across several human societies over the past several hundred years."
>Why are there so few cuckolds? The authors speculate that women may be remaining faithful due to "anti-cuckoldry tactics, such as male sexual jealousy, religious practices that regulate female sexuality, and strongly negative reactions towards female adultery." It's also possible that they fear sexually transmitted diseases, spousal abuse, divorce, or "reduced paternal investment by the social partner or his close relatives if the infidelity was discovered."
>"the (potential) genetic benefits of extra pair children are unlikely to be offset by the (potential) costs of being caught, particularly in such a long-lived species as humans with heavy offspring dependence and massive parental investment." Basically, women aren't cheating because the costs are too great.
http://arstechnica.com/science/2016/04/cuckoldry-is-incredibly-rare-among-humans/
>trusting "research" after academia has been thoroughly ideologically corrupted
>>27672010
Did they count stepchildren?
If not, this fucking "study" is bullshit.
>>27672018
Behold, the final form of the anime nazi. He'll go on all day and night about how white men are more "logical" and "facts-based" than everyone else, and yet when faced with research more sophisticated than Return of Kings he curls into a ball screaming about the Jews.
>>27672010
>The authors speculate that women may be remaining faithful due to "anti-cuckoldry tactics, such as male sexual jealousy, religious practices that regulate female sexuality, and strongly negative reactions towards female adultery."
>male sexual jealousy
>religion
>negative reactions
All things women are attempting to get rid of.
1-2% is too much.
A woman who attempts to cuck a man should be branded so everybody can see what she did.
>>27672042
lmao top post. 100 percent true.
>>27672018
>thoroughly
Tell that to the nerds down at the engineering lab.
Well it's over
Moot shut this board down
Everything they live for has been shot down.
Now they have to face the fact that they are failures at life.
>>27672052
well ok, you can have that as long as there are consistent suitable consequences for married men with illegitimate children.
>>27672108
That is completely fair.
I have no objection to that.
>>27672033
Pretty much. A cuck by any other name is still a cuck.
>>27672010
>research made by phd Goldberg Kikestein of the university of liberal leftists
>calm down goyim your used up whore wife is definitely not getting spitroasted and impregnated by other men while you slave your wife away to provide for her and the government that brings in niggers to make your labor cheaper and work harder to find, also you will pay for their welfare, hehe enjoy life stupid goyim :^)
>>27672190
robot internet defense force shows up
>1-2%
>incredibly rare
That's between 1/100 to 1/50 men. That is not an insignificant figure certainly not an "incredibly rare one". And this only accounts for cuckholdery in the purest sense, a man raising a child who he doesn't know isn't his. So it doesn't account for the dudes who do know yet still raise the kid. Besides, how did they even gather such data and come to such conclusions?
>>27672010
>women may be remaining faithful due to "anti-cuckoldry tactics, such as male sexual jealousy, religious practices that regulate female sexuality, and strongly negative reactions towards female adultery
hating chad, fedoras and sluts CONFIRMED for saving human civilization
>>27672321
So when return of the kings or some other meme man movement states its closer to 25%, a source is not needed.
Study you dont like must have source.
Sounds legit
>>27672042
>>27672190
See? The screaming has begun. Why provide evidence for your assertions when you can add a smiley face on the end to show how sarcastic you are.
>Basically, women aren't cheating because the costs are too great
how is this against what we are saying?
>i dont murder because its against a law
>i really would if i could get away with it
>but im a good boy
OP is a retard
women do everything to make that cost less and less, to a point some actual males feel bad for what the nasty ass skank is doing
>>27672042
But he didn't say anything about any of those things nervous tribe member.
Have something you're desperate to hide do you?
>>27672010
Two problems with this
>This assumes women are rational enough to weigh up the benefits of cuckoldry vs it's risks.
They do not make this calculation. In one heat of emotion they cheat with someone and get pregnant, and that's where it starts, rather than through a plan of action.
>Religion, patriarchy and gender roles stop cuckoldry
These are all falling apart fast, so naturally, what's going to stop women from doing what I described above now?
>only 1% of humans through history were cuckolds
How did they find this out?
Surely they didn't ask women to disclose themselves
god you guys come up with some stupid shit
>>27672010
>1, or 2 percent
> roughly 1 in 10 babies as a result of "extra pair" matings
wouldn't that make it more 10% or am I in the wrong here ?
I don't trust studies like these, not the numbers anyway.
How can you even begin to determine something like this when you're testing not even a tenth of a percent of the global population?
Even with the restrictions placed by cultural or religious influence, the only thing that would really deter a woman from cucking her husband is him legally being able to kill her if he finds out. Most countries don't operate that way, except islamic ones.
This is only about the rates of extramarital offspring and not the extent to which women cheat.
Also, here's a juicy bit from the aautho in her concluding statement. Make of it what you will.
>Or, you know, it could just be that researchers have completely misunderstood the role of extra-marital sex in women's lives.
>Why are there so few cuckolds? The authors speculate that women may be remaining faithful due to "anti-cuckoldry tactics, such as male sexual jealousy, religious practices that regulate female sexuality, and strongly negative reactions towards female adultery." It's also possible that they fear sexually transmitted diseases, spousal abuse, divorce, or "reduced paternal investment by the social partner or his close relatives if the infidelity was discovered."
Hilarious. Even the feminist shill authors couldn't possibly imagine women staying faithful because they're loyal. All of those reasons and none of them involve loyalty.
Loyalty does not exist in women.
Roasties completely and utterly btfo.
>>27673263
>>27673198
>>27672748
>>27672685
>>27672396
>>27672190
>>27672018
Who knew there were so many mgtow shills on here?
>>27673337
>I have no argument and I must scream
>>27673337
Don't you have a fembot feels thread to whiteknight in or something?
Enjoy your (You) for your le epic trolling, pal.
>>27672018
>I've made up a conspiracy theory that allows me to dismiss out of hand any and all evidence that diagrees with my established views. Neat, huh?
>>27672187
Of course not, the "cucking" studied here is when someone is tricked into raising offspring they falsely believe is theirs. The rate of deception is what is being studied. It does not take into account any form of adoption, use of sperm donors, surrugacy, etc. since these are all situations in which no deception occurs.
Now you may ideologically believe the above to be exactly the same as cucking (even though it is clearly not), but that nevertheless does not change the subject of the study, which is the rate of deception.
>>27672190
See the problem is that if you dismiss any research that you don't agree with as a jewish conspiracy, then your beliefs are not falsifiable since ANY evidence can be dismissed. Hence your views are irrational. There is no point at which bias is overcome. For example, I myself believe that homeopathy is bullshit because current research shows that it is - but if someone would find evidence to the contrary then I accept that evidence and I would change my mind.
It's one thing to actually look into the university and the people who did the study, and maybe find some suspicious connections. This sadly does occur, most often when certain industires (but sometimes powerful political groups) have vested interests. But you have done no such thing. The mere fact that this paper disagrees with you is all the proof you need that it was the Jews.
>>27672991
>when you're testing not even a tenth of a percent of the global population
Because that's how statistics works, you dolt. You only need a sample size of the population, and it need not be that big at all in order to determine things with an acceptable confidence degree.
>>27673263
>Loyalty does not exist in women.
Actually, loyalty does not exist in evo psych models, which all assume that people are rational utility (and fitness) maximisers. Loyalty as a concept would not be accepted as an explanation, but would it self need to be explained: that is, someone doing evo phych would ask WHY we have the capacity for loyalty and why people sometimes display it and sometimes do not, i.e. what evolutionary benefit it carries.
One could argue, and it has been argued, that evo psych hence tends to assume what it is supposed to prove - i.e. that all human behaviour can be explanied by an evolutionary model in which we are utility and fitness maximisers. But this study does not challenge the base assumptions of evo psych, but attempts instead to disprove an evo pysch model on the basis of it's own assumptions.
As this >>27673198 anon says:
>Or, you know, it could just be that researchers have completely misunderstood the role of extra-marital sex in women's lives.
Now, I don't this the writers of this paper have misunderstood this, but that evo psych has. Women (and men) cheat but this does not necessarily have evolutionary explanations in the modern world. The desire to cheat may have had an evolutionary advantage in our history, but the motivation can nonetheless be a different one today.
>1-2 percent
That's a significantly higher percentage than the percentage of rapists in society
Does this mean we're living in a cuck culture?
>>27673263
Loyalty is for slaves and dogs man owes nothing to anyone and should never feel bound by such restraints.
>>27674947
Really, you think so? I did and i will post it so people here realize this is not a meme. It's literally jewish lies.
Author: Annalee Newitz
>As her father was Jewish and her mother was a white Southerner former Methodist, Newitz describes herself as "biethnic".[1][12]
Pic related, clearly a mentally ill, kike hag lying for the media like every jew in a public position ever. Brainwashing dullards that have no idea who creates their media and why. I sincerely hope Russia or China or anyone really nukes the fuck out of the USA, the purest cancer to ever touch the earth.
Actual rates of cuckoldry have been impossible to determine with any real authority until very recently, and the moment it became possibly to determine this sort of thing, it's highly likely that female behaviour started to change to take this into account.
What we do know is that women (especially feminists) promote the idea that men who aren't the biological father should be obliged to pay for them, feminists have repeatedly opposed moves to encourage systems that would make paternity clearer. When women are engaging in this sort of dissimulation on a political level, doesn't it suggest that they'd do the same happily on a personal\group level?
I've personally pretended to be a pregnant girl a couple of times on a counselling site, and most of the time the women were suggesting that I should tell the truth, but in one case I spoke to a woman (an American woman in her 50's) who was telling it things like "it's better that men don't know these things", "he doesn't need to know", etc. So I know that some women are clearly willing to support lying about something this insanely evil.
>>27672010
They're just trying to get us to lower our guard. There's a black cock behind every blade of grass.
>>27675371
Another conspiracy theorist without sources, who is lampooning as a crazy bitch.
>>27675237
My point still stands. All you've done is double down on your efforts to be a nazi idiot. Scientific results are not invalid because they are produced by someone of Jewish ancestry (NOT a Jew, btw, since her mother is not jewish) or a lgbtq person, or because of someone's fucking hairstyle. That's... just not how it works in the real world. Evidence is evidence, regardless of whom produced it. Anything else is literally an ad hominem attack.
And that's how science works; it doesn't care about your looks, sexuality, gender, race or religion but only about the quality of your work. In that way it tends to break down these barriers. This is why science is ultimately at odds with a nazi world-view, even though nazis might claim to be logical and scientific: to a nazi the truth is WHITE and everything else is Jewish lies.
There can be no argument here. Your mind is made up and nothing in the world could change you. No argument, no amount of evidence. In fact the more arguments and evidence you're presented with, the more convinced you will become that the Gay Jew Atheist Socialists are behind it and trying to destroy the world. Meanwhile you could hear from any random person on the street that "whites are the best" and you'd believe it in a heart-beat no matter how strong the evidence against it.
This reminds me of a quote by Richard Dawkins on creationost Kurt Wise: "...This leaves me, as a scientist, speechless. I cannot imagine what it must be like to have a mind capable of such doublethink. It reminds me of Winston Smith in 1984 struggling to believe that two plus two equals five if Big Brother said so."
>>27675542
Lots of bullshit boiling down to
>believe the literally jewish feminazi nutsack brainwashing media good goyim, there is no conspiracy or anything
you can keep repeating the same thing but for all i care you can get ran over by a bus and i would chuckle at best, you have been btfo by your own stupidity
>>27675542
I'm not the guy you're responding to. I think you're both confused. This Jewish female is the one reporting on the scientific publication, not the one who conducted the research. Glancing through the research paper, as a non-scientist, non-genetistic, etc I can't say how valid\invalid\authoritative it is, but what I notice is that the way she's reporting this is rather dishonest. The researchers are clearly saying in the paper that the rates of cuckoldry were lower than they expected in the past, and they suggest this is because of various systems that most feminists who label "patriarchal". They're also saying that the rates are very likely much higher today, and that this is because of a lack of these various "patriarchal" systems.
R9K hasn't been "BTFO", there are thousands of unique posters here and a constant flow of new people with different ideas. I've never seen the actual issue of cuckoldry and paternity fraud as something that's frequently discussed. I've seen it mentioned by unique posters, but it's not a "big issue". You can easily verify some of this by looking at the archives.
The issue with cuckoldry and paternity fraud are that they're such disgusting moral acts that they do warrant attention. A man who marries a woman, shares a bed with her, works for her, raises his children and then one day finds out she's been lying to him the whole time suffers something significantly worse than even the most brutal rape, or even murder. Even if rates were as low as 0.01%, this is a very significant issue. Rates of 2% would justify society-wide attention, but you won't see attention given to an issue like this, because male suffering is ignored.
>>27675646
Lad the jew did the article not the study you seem confused
>>27672010
>someone needed to do a study to prove a stupid meme wrong
wew. its almost as if porn is fake and shitposters like to post shit
>tfw when I thought that the cuck thing was all a meme about a fetish
>tfw large numbers of people on this board unironically believe it happens regularly in real life
Anyone else surprised that people here think cucking happens regularly in normal life?
(Also I saw the same thread on pol a few minutes ago)
So basically
>all females are cheating whores, even in other species
Looks like r9k is right again
>>27672784
1 in 10 baby birds. That's where "cuckold" comes from in the first place.
>more cuckolds on the world than trannies
Where are our rights movement?
