The thing is, escaping predators, eliminating competition and securing resources were being carried out alongside having sex and reproduction. So no matter how they fail at the former, the latter was always there to keep things going.
Your logic is correct, though, you have to survive to a certain age or for a while first before you can reproduce so staying alive was a priority. But something being a priority doesn't mean what comes after (the secondary consequence) can not play a bigger role than the first.
When we say the early man was able to stay alive till they gave birth to children it might seem like the early man was such an expert at staying alive but he might have been terrible at it, only making the bare minimum score, and it wouldn't matter because sex and reproduction is so easy and in geometric progression.
The requirement of staying alive was fulfilled even if one only barely managed to stay alive. One didn't have to stay alive for so long in order to reproduce. Everyone could have died in their twenties and it wouldn't matter. It's just like a man telling his son that if he makes the minimum grades he would make him CEO at the company then his son makes minimum grades and becomes CEO. Without him making minimum grades would he become CEO? But that doesn't mean making minimum grades plays a bigger role in the equation than his dad.
That's how it was for the early man. Sex and reproduction told the early man that all he has to do is live long enough to birth and it would make sure his specie never goes extinct. Staying alive is commendable, making minimum grades is commendable, I'll never down play them but what came after was just deus ex machina! An insane game changer.
Why would they prioritize sex when their threat to safety is at risk?
Am I reading this right? without first event, second event can't occur yet second event still wins?
Sex and reproduction weren't easy, in order for males to get laid, they had to be selected by females and mating selection requires competent strong males to protect the offspring for survival. Males didn't have it better and weren't just slacking, they had competition and even the reproduction had it's own hurdles beyond shooting the hoop. Have you seen how females pick their mates? they needed to have sex with the fittest.
I think you mixed up some priorities there. You need to prioritize survival first to have sex another day but all I'm hearing from you sex first for the win while prioritizing actual prerequisites to survive and have sex comes second. Do you see the flaw in this? putting reproduction first over mechanism that ensure you even get a chance to reproduce? because that's how it sounds like on the article.
I'm not saying they prioritized sex, but in their daily life even as their safety was at risk sex was still part of it. When you've retreated to the safety of caves a lot of sex happens. The urge for sex is like hunger it comes and requests satisfaction.
It's quite tricky, take this example: a guy shows up at the gym and does all the difficult workouts and at the end of the year he's built perfect muscles. Which of his actions played the bigger role in his muscles? Is it the first action which is showing up at the gym or is it the second one which is doing the actual difficult workouts? Of course the workouts played the bigger role. Without showing up at the gym he wouldn't be able to work out in the first place but that doesn't mean showing up is the real MVP here because that's the easier part in relation to doing actual work out. You see?
That's how secondary can outshine the first. In the case of the early man staying alive was important but nothing compared to the insane effects of easy sex and reproduction.
It doesn't matter how females picked their mates because at the end of the day they picked someone. Even if all the women picked one man, that one man was still able to father 100 children. Also I'll refer you back to the post, to the part where I talked about how easily accessible sex was.
Even what you said about females chosing their mates and rituals are quite inconsequential when you consider the fact that civilization was poorer and rape and men having their way with women due to the superior physical strength of the males was the order of the day. Even with all the civilization and police we have today rape still occurs how much more in a lawless jungle?
I agree with you, survival first, but remember this survival didn't even have to be properly done, didn't even have to be for so long. What comes after this survival which is sex and geometric progression is so insane and deserves most of the glory the same way working hard at the gym would take more glory than showing up at the gym.
Saying "I'm not saying they prioritized sex" then following it up a sentence that says they still did sounds conflicting. Say they prioritized sex but it was not a top priority compared to escape and eliminating predators is a better response.
I think you mistook effect as a priority than the cause that brought about the effect. If you don't survive, you can't have sex. If you can't have sex, you can still survive. I get the point you're trying to drive with sex being the real MVP here and I'm challenging that argument where you just circle around and around that it no longer adds value to your main point being challenged.
This is the part where I disagree strongly. Females don't pick males that are sickly or do not have the physical traits that could give confidence that their genes are good enough to be carried to the next generation. Their survival depends on how good they can be fertilized by a capable mate. We're still talking about primitive mating here right? Instinctual survival of the species? if so, then your argument that females don't care about who they mate contradicts how primate species tend to have an alpha male and several female on the harem.
This whole article says, sex is the real MVP but you just keep ending up agreeing on sex happens after they escape predation or eliminate threat which brings support to my claim that sex was a secondary priority in contrast to your claim it is an MVP.
How? I said they didn't prioritize sex but it was part of their lives. How is saying it was part of their lives still me saying it was a priority?
I'm not saying females don't care who they mate, I'm saying whatever selection process they went through at the end of the day they selected someone didn't they? All that matters is they ended up picking someone at last.
Also why are you talking about sex like it was all about a female selecting? Why are you not considering the fact that men also force their way?
I've given two analogies to explain this, what do you have to say about them?
Since you get the point do you agree or disagree with it? Even if you say it was secondary priority does that mean it still isn't MVP?
You wouldn't be incorporating an activity that improves survival if it isn't a priority to your daily routine.
I didn't say it was all about female selection for potential mating. Quote me what part did I specifically mention it was all about female selection for potential mating? and why did you assume I am not considering "fact that men also force their way?"? I could but I don't think using that argument helps my point.
That the article is a click-bait and an exaggeration.
I disagree with the article being sex as a real MVP as what it claims and our conversation further convinced me it is.