It's interesting how women naturally revert to the mean, by reproductive success, more than men do.
There seems to be some upper-ceiling on positive traits in human females, such as intelligence, height, slimness, career-orientation, athleticism, etc. at which point female fertility becomes depressed, and the overall population slowly evens out, again. This is happening within native ethnicities, in wealthy countries (now, even the Dutch!), and doesn't seem to merely be a result of migration.
The female cohort with peak reproductive success (number of children alive when she is 45) seems to be:
1) average global height (between 5' and 5'8")
2) normal weight or slightly overweight
3) average IQ compared to the local population
4) primary schooling to 12th grade education
5) homemaker or working part-time
6) physically active, but not in serious training
etc.
The fact that these tend toward the mean rather than the minimum, implies that they are positively correlated with reproductive success, but some other variable begins to dominate after exceeding the mean. Since you have accounted for all the physiological variance the missing factor must be ideological.
I posit that it is the mere perception of being exceptional that is the problem. Pride. It is just pride. Humility allows women (and men) to live more freely for others and for greater goals than themselves.
The implication is kind of entertaining. If a society is steeped in a sense of humility then it is precisely the women who will cause an upward trend in the means of beauty, intelligence, athleticism etc.
Nature doesn’t really reward females in nature the way we measure performance. It’s almost as if being female is a reward on itself and reason alone for males to chase after
Yeah, you would think there was some point to being female that is different to being male, but whatever. Crazy idea. Let's just forget about it. 😆
When you say it, it seems obvious, but only to those who recognize that men and women are different (and complementary).
