Where women are not dependent on male labor to survive, women choose their mate based on immediate attractiveness alone, not his providing abilities. This has been the case historically in tropical societies, and now is becoming the case in Europe (and the US).
Found this on a blog (it’s in French, but here is the link anyway: http://leplouc-emissaire.blogspot.cl/2017/05/la-derive-tropicale_22.html)
Societies have been based on agriculture for almost all their existence (it just changed in the mid 19th Century). Thousands of years of habits have been developed by that.
In tropical societies (Caribbean, Africa, etc) agriculture is easier as soils are fertile all year long and are bland to work on. As a result, women would mostly be in charge of agriculture, gathering food, whereas men would serve a political role (making decisions for the tribe), train as warriors (defending the tribe against other tribes) and serve a reproductive role.
As women don’t need a provider because they have access to food, they would choose their mate based on their immediate attractiveness, not on long-term criteria such as whether the man will be a good provider for the child. As women are less dependent on men, men could have multiple children with different women without too much cost. In African tribes, the closest male to a child would often be a relative to the mother, not the actual father.
In European societies, agriculture is rougher as soils are hard and are infertile at least a quarter of the year during winter. To work the soils, which are riddled with roots, means hard work to plow the grounds, often with the help of a strong animal like a horse or a cow. As a result, men would be in charge of agriculture, and women would be dependent on them to survive. Where tropical women look for a ‘reproductor’ (i.e. Alpha), European women looked for a ‘provider’ (i.e. beta).
In Europe (and I think this can be expanded to the US) a man and woman would therefore make an alliance, with the man monopolizing his hard-earned resources for his one woman, and the woman monopolizing her fertility for one man. Worst-case scenario for a woman would be to have to raise a child on her own, and for a man to be out of a job, or to raise children who weren’t actually his. European societies set a lot of rules (about marriage, adultery, etc.) on this premise.
As women became independent in Europe during the 20th century, men’s strength wasn’t needed anymore. Automation, women labor, and welfare mean that women were no longer dependent on men for their survival. The provider is now mocked as the ‘nerd who can’t get laid’ and spends too much time working. Women now seek a reproducer (alpha) rather than a provider (beta).
Before that, male ideals for women were the knight, the businessman, the aviator who were seen as attractive providers. They have now been replaced by the bad boy, the rapper, the boy-toy with muscles. Like in African tribes, the accent is now put on the immediate attractiveness of the male for reproduction.
Europe has become culturally tropical before it even started becoming ethnically tropical through mass immigration.
We’re going towards a society where fatherless children will be the norm.
If you’re in the top 20% you’ll be able to have plenty of women at the same time