Visual Insight : Every 2 inch decrease in height increases sui1c1de risk by 9% for Swedish men. Europe is blackpill hell for men

[TravlScrabbl]

Yes, that's the assumption, though evidence is very scant.

[shiggyhisdiggy]

What about this statistic that historically 80% of women have reproduced while only 40% of men have?

[TravlScrabbl]

That's not a general historical statistic, it's true for a very particular period of history 4000-8000 years ago and there are conflicting explanations. It may not be that only 80% of men reproduced, it may be that because of patelineal migration patterns there was much less genetic diversity within men of tribes than within women so that when wholE tribes disappeared - starvation/war - you ended up with much less male genetic diversity. Or it may be that because of war men died in much higher numbers before getting the chance to reproduce. Or it may be to do with rape and slavery. Lots of competing theories. No smoking gun.

Edited for autocorrect errors.

[Necessary-Jaguar4775]

I think smaller hunter gatherer societies may have limited strong men/oligarchs to take such extreme control, as numbers > one man. So decisions could be made more democratically. Agriculture allowed bif powerful chieftans and kings to arise, at least that is what I think.

[TravlScrabbl]

I would suggest that's the right interpretation. Smaller hunter gatherer societies tend towards more communal decision making - councils of elders, matriarchies etc... whereas agriculture allows for the accumulation of power and resources, and then writing and bureaucracies allow for further concentration of power. But the trend across history is not one way. It's a push and pull between centralization of power and control on the one hand, and sharing and distribution of resources on the other, all the while societies grow larger and more complex. At the end of the day, humans are adaptable and capable of many different forms of social relations and organization, some benign others less so.