should the man be the head of the house?

I really didn't bother to read through that tbh, as I said you're just looking for an argument, but you have your opinions, stick to them

I would respect you more if you conceded defeat graciously rather than pretending you just choose not to discuss the issue anymore.

The effects of dominance were variable and
more complex. Women displayed preferences
for high dominance only within the context of
male–male competitions. This is consistent
with the idea that women’s preferences for
dominance reflect a desire for romantic part-
ners who are able to protect them from male
conspecifics or that are able to dominate other
men in physically competitive contexts more
generally

Each to their own then.

You've really never heard this view?

Not really

Hmm, quick google search of "what traits women find attractive", a lot of places mention traits like assertive, ability to take lead etc. Ofc this isn't what I'm basing the opinion on, just something quick.

Fair enough then. I suppose I can see where they're coming from.

that will be the man the vast majority of the time.

Do you have any evidence to the contrary? because even Ronove study contradicted what she said in the end

I don't think that's necessarily true. Whoever earns the most contributes the most to the financial security of the couple. That is it. They don't contribute 'worth' to the relationship.

I'm not saying the contrary is true, I was just questioning the point.

So neither of you have any argument? so m'dear how did she win the argument exactly?

I never claimed to have an argument, like I say I was just questioning the point So Instinct made.

Generally I think when people say 'I didn't even bother to read that' or anything to that effect, they're certainly not winning the argument.

I don't concede defeat, if I knew my points were baseless why bother starting the argument in the first place and waste my time? I'm very pragmatic like that. I just know you're just looking to argue just to argue like I said. All my points are backed up by facts and you're delving into semantics and other superficial nonsense, I mean, just browsing your post now, you suggest that the first article I posted related solely to offspring survival and the point about them having extra martial affairs suggesting their greater sexual capacity and attraction by other women, but you just take that to mean "dey only cheats alots"

Even your counter study supports what I say.....



You see what I mean now?

I really don't have the patience or energy to back/forth like this. As I said, go debate with trolls who may actually not know what they're talking about.

'worth' doesn't put food on the table.

Ah fair enough, but when I went back and read it, it just reinforced everything I've said. I mean what more do I need to prove when someone's own counter study discounts what they say?

I don't understand why the either of you think I'm superimposing this view on women, this is something most women prefer. If they didn't prefer surely I would agree with the contrary which would in turn increase my chances of success with women?

Debates don't really need to be about winning an argument..

You pick one sentence which you think supports your point and ignore the entire article which goes against it? Good ****ing job. You win at interpreting articles. If you're just going to take the absolute piss, feel free not to post.