An odd observation about Women

[ClaireTalon]

If a guy behaves like a dick, he'll be treated like a dick by me, and I don't mean cock by this. The rest is a matter of taste.

Of course there's attraction towards guys who stand up for their own matters, guys you can argue with and guys that don't follow you around like puppy dogs. Too much harmony and passiveness fromt the side of one partner can damage a relationship just as much as too wide gaps, contrary interests, and too selfish behavior.

The pivot here is follow around like a puppy dog. If a guy was all around me when I'm home, shoots questions at me like an ack-ack gun, and always is at attention for me, he'd soon enervate the hell outta me. However, that's an extreme case and doesn't outrule showing interest for my matters, but he must have interests of his own, and he better won't be too giving-in.

I don't think that's odd. I'd link your observations with the challenge that a woman can have from getting an apparently uninterested guy's attention. However, I won't make a fool out of myself to get that, let that be said.

 

[Gisella]

Is everybody ready for a lesson?

Well... let's see... Homo Sapiens Sapiens appeared about 100,000 BC. It wasn't until about 90,000 years of complete prehistoric life that we developed cities and agriculture and laws and such. So, we have been "civilized" for only about 12,000 years, and only about 1000 of those years spent as modern humans. Women were savagely beat and repressed for about 90% of our existence on this earth. In order for a woman to survive, she relied upon the hunting skills of the males (I have no idea how this developed because women make excellent hunters and the female species of animals are usually better hunters than their male counterparts). The males who were the MOST clever, had the best success at hunting and keeping their clan safe from threats. Cleverness became the ONE trait that was valued above ALL others, you could be big and strong, but if you weren't clever, there was not much of a chance for your survival, all woman wanted to pass on the "clever" gene to their children. Clever men are not by any means "nice" men. They were competitive men and controlling men, and they were prone to bursts of explosive violence. These traits were valued by women for the survival of our species for about 90% of our existance on this planet.

Okay... fast forward to the "modern age", and you will find that our attitudes and surface thoughts have changed, and we look a bit more cool than our prehistoric forebearers, but we are physiological carbon copies of our ancestors. We are nothing but less hairy (some of us) cavemen and cavewomen. Women STILL are biologicaly drawn to mate with the most clever male (regardless if he is an asshole, controlling, or violent). That is just a biological urge and has nothing to do with our conscious enlightenment, which allows us to see violence and control as NEGATIVE things. We are still struggling with our lives, with one foot in the prehistoric age and the other in the conscious enlightenment that we have enjoyed as man for the last 1000 years or so. The women who are drawn to men who are jerks and who mistreat their women, are just playing out a scenario that has taken place for thousands of years. Clever men and women have been the impetus for our development and we can thank those genes for the modern society that we all enjoy right now.

This is all good and well, but as man, we need to weed out the violent and controlling genes that we share as clean shaven cavemen and women. These genes are, at this point in our development, not needed any more. The genes that we need more of are the cooperative and empethatic ones. So, the women that are drawn to assholes are just a liitle prehistoric, and women like Kotchanski and Mercurial Bliss are the future of our planet. If you women want to go out and get pregnant by some asshole and divorce him when the baby is old enough to walk and think for himself, then go right ahead. Just know that you are clogging up the world with your fucking bullshit offspring that wanna oppress others and come out on top. We need more people that want to cooperate and share. The world's resources are dwindling, and we are headed for an energy crisis that threatens to undue all of the advances that man has achieved in it's some 100,000 odd years of struggle with the environment and themselves. Ladies... kick the assholes to the curb and find yourselves an intelligent, caring man.

I do think you are exagerating when you want to give a lesson but its just your oppinion based on the way you see things..to me its a very western way to impose itself even when it "shout humanity" and what being said makes sense because of the common humanity we carry in us.

We are all humans but we are much more than that, belong to different societies and cultures as much you want your approach to embrace all its impossible because you are set by what you were influenced by our cultures, academics, personal traits, family dinamics and etc. You can choose an idealized verson of a new world to yourself but it can be embrace mostly by you and the ones who think alike with you and belong to your culture...

You can set your exemples as your preferences but not a lesson..I lesson would be one that people are free to have their own preferences, dinamics, cultural influence, preferences etc..even in societies where women seems to us too submissives and for sure they may want have same opportunity as men and etc..they may want change some things from their cultures but not be removed or change many dinamics of that culture they embrace.

I think people have the right t choose be in relation that fits them better and play the part they wish too. Sure violence and abuse is against the law..but still people know their own limits and may engage in playrole etc.

And about offspring clogging...as long as 1st world nation as US still paying bills of irresponsability with welfair with all the acess people have to contraception, education, abortion whatever..they cannot preach much to the world. The world population is made mostly by 3rd world individuals who lack what 1st world takes for granted.

Than still even we cry humanity we live in diversity amoung politic societies that are unique, have their own sets of preferences, morality, justice and sets of rules etc..men are supose to be equal all over but they are not and many even not want be influenced by western way of thinking and be.

That best thing as a human is to be free and have freedom to choose to be, even obsolete savage into some civilized eyes...many cases the wild one even dont know much about 1world societies, they have an idealized picture about 1st world...there are cultures that put themselves way above in a pedestral as selling their image in toughts to the world as the right one to embrace. In my oppinion humanity will be at their most brillance when just accept and respect diversity and that are societies going on for ages and ages that wants to be friendly with all but not much into be influenced as maintaining their unique cultural ways. And not to be cloned for sure.

And about the nice man left behing syndrome...there is something very wrong with this picture being playing over and over because many weak insecure man may play this role..but they are problematic as still not dealt with deep issues issues inside and choose play victim. The victim may choose to play be walk all over and etc until they are hook up in be treat like that..and we can find this behaviour in both sex. And assholes comes in different personalities and may not even behave as a bruttus but may be part of academic elite preaching, 1/2 truths and brainwashing all over the place with PC BS.

 

[Nitrofiend]

Expecting others to be wise enough to spot your hidden virtues? You're asking rather a lot there. It sound like a formula for being a hermit.

Actually it sounds like discriminating taste to me, and I dig it. I wouldn't be with someone who wasn't wise enough to see through me to my core. Not to mention I didn't realize you were sexist until this thread.

 

[tripod]

Gisella your post was extremely difficult to understand, but I think that is due to you being emotionally charged during writing it. you are kind of combining this post and a previous post I made about the "sensitivity" of men. You are really putting too much stock in the cultural and ethnic differences between cultures. I spoke nothing of the East or West, let alone North and South for that matter. I was speaking in a sociological midset, purely clinical, it has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with the Western mindset... and the last time I checked, you are from Brazil which is a "western" culture. and I have no idea what you are talking about when you put yourself on the "other side" of the Western mindset.

What I said is not contraversial, I am not touting the virtues of namby pamby wimps and dogging the tough macho manly men. I was trying to help the gentleman who started the thread who was curious why women are interested in jerks... It is simply one of those mysteries that bother nice men who have to pick up after the messes left by these asses, and help heal the damaged women that they leave behind. I am tired of meeting women who have had their asses beat and were mentally and emotionally abused by assholes that they have had the "fortune" of dating or being married to!

It is a problem that I addressed with some VERY thoughtful remarks and observations. I know you like manly men, and that is awesome, do you think that I am some kind of dude that wilts from confrontation or that can't defend myself? I'm pretty fucking manly, I just don't have to "act" like it or "walk the walk" of machissmo, it does not interest me in one bit, I prefer to be my own unique combination of toughness, empathy, and kindness... if anyone misunderstands me, let me be clear... I DON'T CONDONE WIMPY, PATHETIC MEN, and I value strength just as much as the next guy...

 

[Principessa]

IMHO, As a single 40 yr old woman who has never even been engaged, I have given this some thought. The real problem is that the intelligent caring men are taken. They are either Gay, Republican, in Iraq, already married, or worse have had their spirits broken by some self-centered bitch who wasn't good enough to wipe his shoes on. But thats just my opinion.
njqt466

So, the women that are drawn to assholes are just a liitle prehistoric, and women like Kotchanski and Mercurial Bliss are the future of our planet. If you women want to go out and get pregnant by some asshole and divorce him when the baby is old enough to walk and think for himself, then go right ahead. Just know that you are clogging up the world with your fucking bullshit offspring that wanna oppress others and come out on top. We need more people that want to cooperate and share. The world's resources are dwindling, and we are headed for an energy crisis that threatens to undue all of the advances that man has achieved in it's some 100,000 odd years of struggle with the environment and themselves. Ladies... kick the assholes to the curb and find yourselves an intelligent, caring man.

:biggrin1: Tripod, I think I love you!

 

[Nitrofiend]

IMHO, As a single 40 yr old woman who has never even been engaged, I have given this some thought. The real problem is that the intelligent caring men are taken. They are either Gay, Republican, in Iraq, already married, or worse have had their spirits broken by some self-centered bitch who wasn't good enough to wipe his shoes on. But thats just my opinion.
njqt466

Your last case scenario describes my ex girlfriend before my current one. I was a lot more idealistic and romantic before She-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named .

 

[D_N Flay Table]

I think being humble is a huge turn on to women.
also, letting them come to you... let them have the chase.. you win every time

 

[Nitrofiend]

I think being humble is a huge turn on to women.
also, letting them come to you... let them have the chase.. you win every time

I agree, I'm what you call a "trapper". I dangle myself a little away from the crowd, and that tends to filter people who I'm with. If I'm noticed and they come to me, I play shy for a bit and then *WAP*. I'm like a penis flytrap.

 

[Gisella]

Gisella your post was extremely difficult to understand, but I think that is due to you being emotionally charged during writing it. you are kind of combining this post and a previous post I made about the "sensitivity" of men. You are really putting too much stock in the cultural and ethnic differences between cultures. I spoke nothing of the East or West, let alone North and South for that matter. I was speaking in a sociological midset, purely clinical, it has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with the Western mindset... and the last time I checked, you are from Brazil which is a "western" culture. and I have no idea what you are talking about when you put yourself on the "other side" of the Western mindset.

What I said is not contraversial, I am not touting the virtues of namby pamby wimps and dogging the tough macho manly men. I was trying to help the gentleman who started the thread who was curious why women are interested in jerks... It is simply one of those mysteries that bother nice men who have to pick up after the messes left by these asses, and help heal the damaged women that they leave behind. I am tired of meeting women who have had their asses beat and were mentally and emotionally abused by assholes that they have had the "fortune" of dating or being married to!

It is a problem that I addressed with some VERY thoughtful remarks and observations. I know you like manly men, and that is awesome, do you think that I am some kind of dude that wilts from confrontation or that can't defend myself? I'm pretty fucking manly, I just don't have to "act" like it or "walk the walk" of machissmo, it does not interest me in one bit, I prefer to be my own unique combination of toughness, empathy, and kindness... if anyone misunderstands me, let me be clear... I DON'T CONDONE WIMPY, PATHETIC MEN, and I value strength just as much as the next guy...

Nah..not emotionaly charged but just reacting what I perceive to a lesson and "Americanism"/USA ways.

As much I'm Brasilian and from Latin America I do think there is a vast difference from the North America anglo countries as one was influenced by protestantism and others south the border by Catholicism and patriarchism. Where the law say one thing and people behaviours do another thing. As abortion still illegal in most Latin American countries. Patriarchism in LA could be compared at least in some point to some Arab nations and other nations. Plus we as 3rd world have in commom many strugles as many 3rd world allover the world may have. In many regards I do identify myself with undeveloped countries than with 1st world ones even when I'm a resident of a 1st world one..plus I tend to think globaly too because I can help not think this way because there are more influences than just protestantism catholiscism christianity influences going around for sure.

Sociological mind set is influenced by culture as much some one may be disgusted with the macho man others hates in the same level the new order of the bitch woman. To me both are very angry ,insecure, scared people. And for sure not talking about strong minded opinionated people but the problematics ones that have issues that affect families, community etc. as domestic violence, abuse, disrespect etc can go both ways.

I do believe in compatibility and that opposites do not attract and equals functions better as complementing one another. And before we engage in relationships it would be wise we know ourselves, work on ourselves 1st as we want to engage in healthy growing relationships.

Be in a position of always learning and not get there yet is a good thing as we live in a planet with a cultural mapping going on with 65 societies (I think) that are all human that have their own sets of values. Than a lesson in humanity and society must involve all as letting themself express in the matter or leave the door open for it..or than just be an oppinion of us as individuals.

 

[tripod]

Gisella I was talking about the prehistoric, evolutionary growth of man's social behaviors. Again... Homo Sapiens Sapiens appeared about 100,000 years ago and the "cultures" that you speak of didn't start until MUCH later. Mesopotamia didn't happen until 10,000 BC. The cultural differences between third and first world have only existed for the last 300 years and have really only manifested themselves since the industrial revolution of the 19th century. Those differences are MEANINGLESS in a timeline that lasts some 102,000 years. So by your account, the last .10% of man's existence has had more of an effect than the other 99.9%? That makes absolutely NO SENSE! And what Americanism were you speaking of? The word or entity America did not even ONCE enter what I had to say, and the lesson wasn't for YOU, it was for the people who were confused by this subject.

 

[Pumblechook]

Expecting others to be wise enough to spot your hidden virtues? You're asking rather a lot there. It sound like a formula for being a hermit.

Haha, it would seem so. However, as I mentioned, there is a good group, although counting all the people I have met in my life, still a small one, that has been capable of seeing this "hidden virtue," as you put it. Therefore, there is no reason to believe that there aren't people capable of this. The only conclusion that you can make is that there may not be many of this type of people. Thus, not a hermit (i.e. someone who lives in isolated seclusion and with no person to person contact), but rather only a few more worthy people really get to know me well. And, before you complain at me for being haughty for saying people "worthy" of knowing me, let me again point out this. I take no control nor choice over the worthiness. It is entirely a decision made by the people who meet me. Again, if they want to know more and see value in me, it happens. If not, it does not happen. Therefore, by doing absolutely nothing, I only end up knowing the best of people that I can know.

 

[Wrat]

Woman do have all the power. Why should you fear it? Women rule the world. I think its wonderfull.:smile: A song by Joan Armatrading- If women ruled the world. Listen to it. Learn something........

I disagree.
I have been in a marriage where the woman wanted all the power, yet was not qualified to manage it.
That is...if you insist on managing the bank then you had better know something about money.

What a disaster.

 

[Gisella]

Gisella I was talking about the prehistoric, evolutionary growth of man's social behaviors. Again... Homo Sapiens Sapiens appeared about 100,000 years ago and the "cultures" that you speak of didn't start until MUCH later. Mesopotamia didn't happen until 10,000 BC. The cultural differences between third and first world have only existed for the last 300 years and have really only manifested themselves since the industrial revolution of the 19th century. Those differences are MEANINGLESS in a timeline that lasts some 102,000 years. So by your account, the last .10% of man's existence has had more of an effect than the other 99.9%? That makes absolutely NO SENSE! And what Americanism were you speaking of? The word or entity America did not even ONCE enter what I had to say, and the lesson wasn't for YOU, it was for the people who were confused by this subject.

I dont make sense? Sure..I hold no fossils and blame the cavemen and their violent genes the behaviour of ignorant and out of control men/women in relationships.. because even if you take this excuse to a court of law they will lock you up as excuse for violent behaviour, as some societies will may hang you.

By my account I take the last impact of cultural evolution, industrial revolution and .10%very serious and I choose to live the today acknowleging Homosapiens way way down the line as last one I will bring at remembrance as why "Joe" behaves as a jerk...

You dont need to go far as couple of generations to see the gens and tendencies individuals have to drink, have mental instability, depresion and many things that may affect their behaviour plus things learned around than as bad exemple to treat anyone. That are things you carry and thigs you aquire by learning at home, comunity whatever.

Plus the alpha-male modism that is going around in some circles is pure crap to me...such individualist society nowdays men have not many mentors going on to learn as animals do in packs..or not are born with natural leadership traits in them. What many are learning is from best sellers and the new thing to look for or engage in...

Violence generated today is because of poverty, lack of opportunity, etc etc frustrations many may feel..and no way to run from their destiny..they feel loosers and behave like one. Lets get real and to the present whats going around us all over the place.

Its not meanless the state of youth in many places what is meanless is bring dead bones and pre-historic civilizations as much they are part of past history... survival situation in 2007 is going on and must be deal at the present and as Americanismis very real force, and the culture affect the ones embebed in it as preaching, giving lessons to others, they choose not learn themselves, not looking at their own contribution with the state of affairs of the present, consuming most of the oil resources of the world, be amoung the worse in polutions direct or indirectly, starting seriuos conflicts and etc.

What you may call a lesson, to me is just your oppinion and choice to approach the issue. To me confusion going in someones mind about behaviours dealings etc some honest self acessment, couseling, psicology etc may resolve or help individual confuse about the issue. But then is just my oppinion.

 

[kamikazee_club]

Gisella I was talking about the prehistoric, evolutionary growth of man's social behaviors. Again... Homo Sapiens Sapiens appeared about 100,000 years ago and the "cultures" that you speak of didn't start until MUCH later. Mesopotamia didn't happen until 10,000 BC. The cultural differences between third and first world have only existed for the last 300 years and have really only manifested themselves since the industrial revolution of the 19th century. Those differences are MEANINGLESS in a timeline that lasts some 102,000 years. So by your account, the last .10% of man's existence has had more of an effect than the other 99.9%? That makes absolutely NO SENSE! And what Americanism were you speaking of? The word or entity America did not even ONCE enter what I had to say, and the lesson wasn't for YOU, it was for the people who were confused by this subject.

While I agree with the core of what you say I do have a take on the section I bolded. I think it would perhaps be more accurate to say have we (in what Gisella would I think call the '1st world') have only been aware of these differences for 300 years because we have only really known of the very existence of what we now consider 3rd world cultures (depending on how one defines 3rd world in a cultural rather than economic sense) for that 300-400 years. Clearly those '1st/3rd world' differences were extant, all 'we' have really done since the 18th/19th century is perpetuate and deepen them, to our shame.

A little off topic but for example the Aboriginal culture has existed for an estimated 30-40,000 years. The former Kerma civilisation at about 5000 BC is a toddler by comparison and yet still predated most 'western' cultures as we know them today by millennia. It begs the question whose is really the 3rd world culture?:smile:

That said I entirely agree that in the broad context of human evolution our entire 'cultural/recorded' history is a mere footnote.

I can (I think) understand where Gisella is coming from but I think she may be giving modern (the last 500 years or so) 1st world behaviours undue weight in changing human behaviour in an evolutionary/species sense when compared with our deeply ingrained evolutionary behaviours as a species over the preceeding 100,000 years.

In terms of our cultural/social development and behaviour modification I think the position is less clear and feel the pace of change is much more rapid. Of course how this will play out over the next few centuries (or longer), or however long it may take for change to embed I don't know. Of course being biologoically identical to those first humans so the question is possibly better phrased as:

"Can [500] years of social evolution overcome 100,000 years of biological stagnation?"

Despite the above it still makes me mad that so many great women are seemingly involved with assholes......perhaps there's hope yet.

PS Gisella, I don't know what the '65 societies' are that you refer to?

 

[tripod]

While I agree with the core of what you say I do have a take on the section I bolded. I think it would perhaps be more accurate to say have we (in what Gisella would I think call the '1st world') have only been aware of these differences for 300 years because we have only really known of the very existence of what we now consider 3rd world cultures (depending on how one defines 3rd world in a cultural rather than economic sense) for that 300-400 years. Clearly those '1st/3rd world' differences were extant, all 'we' have really done since the 18th/19th century is perpetuate and deepen them, to our shame.

Very well said sir!!!!! The "West" is directly responsible for the "3rd world" civilizations. Economic oppression so there will be chaos and anarchy, allows for the pilfering of these indigenous people's natural resources. France did it in Haiti, they killed all of the natives and had to import African slaves to do all of the work, they also did it in French Indochina after WWII for their precious rubber resources (leading to the Vietnam war), and there have been COUNTLESS other examples for EVERY country in the West... it is the evil underbelly of colonial expansion. Gisella is correct to feel the rage felt by the poor peoples of South America and all over the world. The United States is still doing this and "still" fighting the "Indian Wars". It sure will be hard to colonize the moon without any "injuns" to do all of the work!!!!!

 

[Rihanna]

They always say if women ruled the world there would be no war, and i agree. But based on female's friends ships with other femals every nations CIA would be conducting so many secretive operations against each other. One nation would infect another with Ebola, and then be the first to offer help lol:smile:

Sad, but probably very realistic. Women do rule the world. But, we deligate so much of the dirty work to men. I think it's foolish to presume women would run things in some kind of eutopian manner. We'll see, when Hilary get's in. I bet she'll be the toughest and meanest President in history.

 

[b.c.]

All a lot of philosophical hokum if you ask me. Men were put here to rule the roost. Women to be dominated by man, to answer his every beck and call. Man is supposed to be king of his domain, of his castle, if you will, and woman's only job (which if she did right she'd be quite happy) is to satisfy her...

wait... my wife is telling me to put out the garbage. (Yes, baby...I'm coming.)

 

[JoeWide2]

Anyone, men or women, can know their boundaries and ask for what they want/need in a relationship without being an asshole.

People who feel they have to be a bit of a "dick" or in some cases, a "bitch", are often resorting to passive aggressive measures to gain attention when they could be getting what they want the easy way - by asking. And if someone is not willing to give you want or need in a relationship, leave. You're wasting your time if you stay.

Very well said!

 

[cute5]

Woman do have all the power. Why should you fear it? Women rule the world. I think its wonderfull.:smile: A song by Joan Armatrading- If women ruled the world. Listen to it. Learn something........

As completely F~(<#D as the world is, women couldn't possibly be ruling it.

 

[stretcher74]

Is everybody ready for a lesson?

Well... let's see... Homo Sapiens Sapiens appeared about 100,000 BC. It wasn't until about 90,000 years of complete prehistoric life that we developed cities and agriculture and laws and such. So, we have been "civilized" for only about 12,000 years, and only about 1000 of those years spent as modern humans. Women were savagely beat and repressed for about 90% of our existence on this earth. In order for a woman to survive, she relied upon the hunting skills of the males (I have no idea how this developed because women make excellent hunters and the female species of animals are usually better hunters than their male counterparts). The males who were the MOST clever, had the best success at hunting and keeping their clan safe from threats. Cleverness became the ONE trait that was valued above ALL others, you could be big and strong, but if you weren't clever, there was not much of a chance for your survival, all woman wanted to pass on the "clever" gene to their children. Clever men are not by any means "nice" men. They were competitive men and controlling men, and they were prone to bursts of explosive violence. These traits were valued by women for the survival of our species for about 90% of our existance on this planet.

Okay... fast forward to the "modern age", and you will find that our attitudes and surface thoughts have changed, and we look a bit more cool than our prehistoric forebearers, but we are physiological carbon copies of our ancestors. We are nothing but less hairy (some of us) cavemen and cavewomen. Women STILL are biologicaly drawn to mate with the most clever male (regardless if he is an asshole, controlling, or violent). That is just a biological urge and has nothing to do with our conscious enlightenment, which allows us to see violence and control as NEGATIVE things. We are still struggling with our lives, with one foot in the prehistoric age and the other in the conscious enlightenment that we have enjoyed as man for the last 1000 years or so. The women who are drawn to men who are jerks and who mistreat their women, are just playing out a scenario that has taken place for thousands of years. Clever men and women have been the impetus for our development and we can thank those genes for the modern society that we all enjoy right now.

This is all good and well, but as man, we need to weed out the violent and controlling genes that we share as clean shaven cavemen and women. These genes are, at this point in our development, not needed any more. The genes that we need more of are the cooperative and empethatic ones. So, the women that are drawn to assholes are just a liitle prehistoric, and women like Kotchanski and Mercurial Bliss are the future of our planet. If you women want to go out and get pregnant by some asshole and divorce him when the baby is old enough to walk and think for himself, then go right ahead. Just know that you are clogging up the world with your fucking bullshit offspring that wanna oppress others and come out on top. We need more people that want to cooperate and share. The world's resources are dwindling, and we are headed for an energy crisis that threatens to undue all of the advances that man has achieved in it's some 100,000 odd years of struggle with the environment and themselves. Ladies... kick the assholes to the curb and find yourselves an intelligent, caring man.

Tripod, I agree that an understanding of this quite real phenomenon probably lies in the relatively new(last 15-20 years) field of Evolutionary Psychology.

However, having read quite a bit on the subject I'd have to disagree about females having no sexual choice in pre-historic societies. Humans are sexually dimorphic(men are bigger), but not dramatically so as in other species.

People are easy to kill, especially males after they have orgasmed and are sleeping for instance. Other tribal males are easy to recruit in the killing of men who don't behave.This makes rape a high risk reproductive strategy usually employed only by the desperate.

The greater portion of the calories in these societies are actually gathered by the women and food=power. Hunting may exist as moreto demostrate prowess and fitness than to provide reliable food supplies.

The human brain with 100Billion neurons 100Trillion Axions is too big for just chasing animals around and throwing spears at them and digging up tubers. The latest thinking on the subject is that big brains, music, art, etc are largely a runaway fitness indicator designed to showcase the male's fitness(lack of mutation) for FEMALE sexual selection. Like a peacocks' tail.


Some books I highly recommend to the interested:

The Selfish Gene (why your genes don't care about YOU)
The Mating Mind (origins of the human mind in sexual selection)
The Red Queen (runaway competion in evolutionary processes)
Sperm Wars (you won't think of women as quite so powerless ever again)