Do you hate your parents for ur norwood genes?

disfiguredyoungman

Senior Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
2,564
People who wants something different from life than you: OFF WITH THEIR HEADS! Something is wrong with them! You, and only YOU have the answer to happiness and this should be the same for everyone.

Also, no one cuts of their balls or ovaries but I understand you must use this kind of framing to make perfectly normal decisions look like extremist cult behavior. Reality is simply too nuanced for you.
It's a very unnatural decision, suitable for eusocial creatures like ants, or naked mole rats, not necessarily humans. But maybe this is where our species is heading. Dunno, reminds me of that experiment with the mouse utopia...
But disregard my personal opinion on this matter, the main point is undenieably true: Evolutionary speaking there is no bigger maladaption imagniable than being wired to willingly sterilize yourself.
These people will vanish from the genepool within a generation, whereas unattractive people have demonstrated to be able to reproduce over many generations (otherwise there wouldn't be unattractive people anymore) and even produce good looking offspring from time to time. In terms of evolutionary fitness it's not even a contest.

cope, lookism-cell
 

INT

Senior Member
Reaction score
2,836
It's a very unnatural decision, suitable for eusocial creatures like ants, or naked mole rats, not necessarily humans. But maybe this is where our species is heading. Dunno, reminds me of that experiment with the mouse utopia...

You know what else is unnatural? Hospitals, toilets, doctors, anti biotics, money, cars, videogames, iphones. Just because something is 'natural' does not mean it is good and and vice versa.

But disregard my personal opinion on this matter, the main point is undenieably true: Evolutionary speaking there is no bigger maladaption imagniable than being wired to willingly sterilize yourself.

We have outgrown evolution. We are so 'dominant' as a species that evolution no longer applies to us. People with maladaptive traits get a chance to live long enough to forward their genes.

These people will vanish from the genepool within a generation, whereas unattractive people have demonstrated to be able to reproduce over many generations (otherwise there wouldn't be unattractive people anymore) and even produce good looking offspring from time to time. In terms of evolutionary fitness it's not even a contest.
Not wanting children is not genetic.
 

disfiguredyoungman

Senior Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
2,564
You know what else is unnatural? Hospitals, toilets, doctors, anti biotics, money, cars, videogames, iphones. Just because something is 'natural' does not mean it is good and and vice versa.
Depends on your definition of nature. There are problems with the mainstream definition of the term unnatural as anything man-made. But yes, just because something occurs in nature does not mean that it is 'good', or desirable. I have never claimed anything to the contrary.


We have outgrown evolution. We are so 'dominant' as a species that evolution no longer applies to us. People with maladaptive traits get a chance to live long enough to forward their genes.
That's hubris speaking and wrong. As I said before, selection is still at play, just selecting for other things. Whereas in the past i.e. Polynesian seafarers with an ektomorph metabolism were weeded out, the same happens now to people born sterile, extremely crippled, or wired to embrace 'the child-free life'.

Not wanting children is not genetic.
Prove it. We live in a deterministic, material universe. Our behaviour is to a large part biological/genetic, even when exposed to the same external stimuli people react differently depending on their nature. And even if you disregard that, these external stimuli in the form of societial pressure, are largely just the result of collective genetic dispositions of past populations and their interactions with their environment. Aka another materially determined and ultimately gene driven process.

In short: A strong aversion to having children can definetely be what you would consider completely genetic no matter the upgringing. And even if your upbringing/society played a role, how you react to these external influences is as well genetically predetermined. Contraception will in the long rung select for people whose innate desire to have children is strong enough to do so despite it not being en vogue or economically advantageous as well as for people who are simply too careless to properly contracept.
The majority of people who undergo surgery to become sterile are probably already wired in a certain way, as it is not what the majority of people, even childless people would/did do such a drastic thing.
 
Last edited:

Aqalp

Established Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
101
Funfact:
The people with the most shitty genes are those attractive and bluepilled hedonists who cut off their own ovaries or balls, because they fell for the 'child-free life' narrative. People who value short-term fun, or subscribing to societal consensus more than creating a family are the most blatant genetic dead end imaginable.
Funfact: Its also easier to gain refugee status to USA or Canada by marriage and/or having children than by being single. Doesn't make it ok though.
 
Top