Well, it is pretty reactionary, but you did make both your identification of problems and proposed solutions very clear. I think sexual selection is an important and interesting topic, and it seems like its kind of taboo to even talk about.

There is a lot to unpack here, but I'll try to give a little feedback on your piece.

I think some of the points you make are quite convincing.

Liberalism and feminism turned women’s preferences from providers to seducers, thus genetically eliminating all decent men through involuntary celibacy.

Genetic elimination of all decent men is a pretty strong phrase here, but I can't say you are wrong about the change in preferences or that these changes aren't the result of feminist ideology, and I agree that this is not a desirable outcome.

Seduction is worthless, even harmful for most species, as it does not promote any valuable traits that make the species better.

You had a good example with the Fisherian runway and the peacock . You've made a strong case, and I don't disagree.

In connection to nr.2, women’s preference for a type of male changes simply based on a degree of success a type has with most women.

This one I wasn't sure what you meant. I read this as somewhat tautological. Women tend to prefer the type of men they are demonstrated to prefer? Maybe what you are getting at is that women are trained to prefer the same types of men as their peers, and this perpetuates the problem?

It is a hard fact that, even if we just take sex into consideration, more men are able to have sex in a monogamous society, even in a monogamous society without prostitution

Instead they worry about issues like drugs and prostitution, neither of which are condemned in the Old Testament.

Counterintuitive, but I think you make a strong case for this. You had me worried when you started talking about female chastity, because I have concerns about puritanism as well, but I appreciate the nuanced take you have concerning evangelicals and puritanism

You have to understand what a woman is. A woman is a relatively simple biological robot whose goal is to produce offspring that will be most optimal from an evolutionary standpoint.

Isn't that the biological purpose of males also?

Anyways, like I said, I think you make some good points that I take seriously, although I'd need more convincing before I jumped on board with things like 'women are inherently mean/bad/cruel', I've heard the reverse from feminists enough times, I'd need someone to exhaustively exclude the possibility of other societal mechanisms that might explain some of the cruel behavior we observe. Same with some of your more reactionary prescriptions, but you've definitely given me a better feel for these ideas like I was asking for and given me some things to think about. I appreciate the link and the discussion