>>17490617the 'women like dangerous men' is a sentence formulated by men trying to find the underlying mechanism
women don't think about what they like, they just feel it.
if there is no consciousness, you simply revert to instinct.
instincts look out for situations and scenarios fitting their respective template, and then simply push the brain out of homeostasis (getting angry, sad, horny, chill, curious, loving etc) to provoke the ego into re-establishing homeostasis (some kind of action pattern like violence or shifting body language or whatever).
human instincts are neolithic, and will only get upgraded, not reverted.
so women only ever get into the situation to notice tingles in the vjj when a man fulfills some template, one of the aspects being a _demonstrably_ competent man in dangerous situations.
the problem is, that if you cognitively understand guns, it doesn't trigger the very blurry templates of instincts, since technology is in the realm of ego-consciousness and complexes, one layer 'superimposed' on instincts (rather malleable channels for water, i.e. instinctive drive, since beating someone for talking shit is socially adaptive in one human society, and will disrupt your success (jail) in another)
so many women fall victim to their instincts, since if men at large are reasonable, it looks like they are weak to outsiders, and tragically only those with absolute retard tier impulse control and no sense of ethics at all will display violence on a high enough level to trigger the neolithic template (in some women). and so the women with less refined or less discerning instincts (less if/else statements) simply get bumped down from 20% to 10% of the gene pool over the course of ~"axial age"-2200s
and the genome goes on
