More on r and k selection in regards to society and women

So my last post has given me a lot of thought, and I want to expand it.

As a refresher: r selection is about quantity of off spring, k is single offspring with increased investment.

What is interesting, is off course humans are pretty heavy on the k-selection naturally.  Regardless of what we wish or do, babies are defenseless, utterly reliant on the parents for years.  Compare this to some animals that can walk the day they are born.  Keep this k-selection in mind as we proceed.

1: Now despite protests of political correctness to the contrary, different groups are very diverging on this scale of r/k selection, take for example Africa, a hell hole for most intents, the kids there are cranked out in very high numbers, and most die in childhood- very characteristic of r selection.  Little parental involvement, and simply by their numbers does anyone make it to adulthood.  Take for an interesting hybrid example china: where they have as many kids as they can in an attempt to get a male (its really bad how many girls are abandoned/killed) but once they have their single male, do everything in their power to get him to adulthood.  Then you have the developed nations, where our birthrate is usually below replacement levels, but for intents lets say 2 kids, typically these will be reared in good circumstances, and get to adult life with low casualty rates.

2.: Again, going with this theory I read about how liberalism tends to be an outsider/traitorous gene, a lot of things in the world make sense.  Because on an individual vs individual basis, an r-selected person could not hope to out-compete a k-selected, they have inferior genes.  So their innate traitorous element would seek to undermine the k-selection society they find themselves in so that their superiors will be killed, and the r selectors will either repopulate in the chaos, or find favor with the new conquerors.

Put 1 and 2 together, and surprisingly, we find America- slipping into harder and harder r-selection and equating nicely with the rise of feminism.  Where we have this huge rise of single mothers (r-selection as hard as it gets) ‘freed from the slavery of marriage’.  We have males systematically lambasted as useless and worthless (worthy only of occasional sperm injections and not help rearing the offspring).  We have the demonstrable rise of minorities, and the decline of the white population.  We get weird things like white liberal girls loving black street thugs, and wanting to give them money.

The white (k-selected) population built this country, despite any revisionist history to the contrary, and it is systematically being destroyed, not just by minorities, but by women, and pussy ass men inevitably r-selected by their general lack of aggression/decisiveness.  Does this not sound like the modus operandi of r-selection?  Take down the k-selection group they find themselves in so that they can out populate in a crisis, or find mercy in the conquerors.  (How sweet, all those young liberal girls talking of social justice for black thugs, really just their subconscious trying to gain favor with a potential conqueror.  Pathetic.)

Here is where things are interesting: birth control.

So again proceeding with the theory that in general liberalism is a marker for more r-selection, given the liberal rise of our culture, is it ANY surprise sex has become rampart?  Consider the not so long ago where a girl was married to a man in her teens, and they stayed together for life.  Not a lot of sex with multiple partners going on.  But due to feminism, they have somehow justified rampart sex with anyone as an okay state of affairs.  (r-selection again, polygamous mating, not life-bonding).  Thus we have liberal girls for all intents…sluts.

But the magic of birth control is on the scene.  So imagine for a moment if this didnt exist, but out culture was still in place.  All these girls slutting around on college campuses, normally the biggest threat perhaps an std, but now within the first year half or more of them fall to having a kid.  Woah, suddenly things are looking different eh?  Of course nothing is going to stop these girls, so maybe some abortions are in order, or at the very least a bare bones rearing so she can concentrate on HER life.  If BC didnt exist, we would see this r-selection much more clear for what it really is.

The irony of course, is it is partially self defeating.  While the destruction of society is definitely notable (because it has to be changed to accommodate the r-selection strategy) BC stops a majority of them from ever having kids, because their fulfill what should be their role with rampart sex, but never actually pass genes on, and when they get off it in the 30s+ their reduced fertility sees to the end of their story.

Anyway, this is an interesting theory I am working on, so share any thoughts and lets talk this over!

 

Birthcontrol throws an important wrench into this

 

Advertisements

29 thoughts on “More on r and k selection in regards to society and women

  1. “So imagine for a moment if this didnt exist, but out culture was still in place. All these girls slutting around on college campuses, normally the biggest threat perhaps an std, but now within the first year half or more of them fall to having a kid. Woah, suddenly things are looking different eh?”

    You need one more caveat…the government social net in place. Last location I lived had one of the highest teen pregnancy rates in the country. One highschool senior had three children. The state paid for childcare so there was no incentive not to have more…as long as someone else was watching them and she just kept her social life going…add to the the other government subsidies.

    • Liz, that is just terrible. THREE kids while in high school? Gah…*shudder*. I weep for this new generation and our tax dollars. 😦

  2. Hmm, one additional point.

    The question is also not so much birth control, but also antibiotics. Massive misuse of antibiotics has only made an inevitable conclusion come along much sooner. A new antibiotic can take up to 10 years to get into preliminary tests on the market, while bugs are mutating at amazing speeds all the time. We already have not just superbugs like tuberclosis, but also super STDs like gonorrhea (strains impervious to oral antibiotics), syphilis (completely impervious to all antibiotics) and chalmydia (no symptoms whatsoever but causes sterility in women).

    Birth control isn’t going to do squat for these, and as far as I’m concerned, these degenerates of the bonobo masturbation society can dig their own graves for all I care. I hear unprotected sex in the San Francisco area is already off-limits.

    By the by, have you heard of Edenistic Theory? It proposes a reason for r and k-selection. Here’s a primer if you’re interested:

    http://excavatingeden.com/2013/02/13/edenism-101-part-one-core-concepts/

      • Sure.

        Two main problems prevented people from screwing around as they liked: one, unwanted pregnancies, and two, STDs. Before the discovery of antibiotics, STD were a terror – they have wiped out nations and caused the tide of history to turn quite a number of times. Of course, with the discovery of antibiotics, all that fell away – for a while.

        http://vault-co.blogspot.sg/2013/01/did-you-know-stds-have-wiped-out-nations.html

        I’d say antibiotics were MORE important than birth control in promoting promiscuity.

        Now that STDs are rapidly becoming immune to all conventional treatment, any promiscuous fool who doesn’t use a rubber or just gets unlucky is going to either a) die outright from the disease, b) be crippled enough to be unable to survive, or c) become sterile, or simply not breed thanks to no one wanting to catch the clap or something worse. In any case, these degenerates will get removed from the gene pool one way or another.

      • @Erudite Knight

        Yes, it’s due to the virus HPV-16 though, not simply from the act of oral sex. And men can give it to women as well (from an unprotected blowjob). Most women in the US are given vaccines against it by age 18 by their gynecologist…the problem is that many people are having sex BEFORE they get the vaccinations, and with more and more partners.

        Easy way to protect against it is to
        A. Get the vaccination, and
        B. Use a condom for fellatio and a dam for cunninglingus. They are free from Planned Parenthoods, or you can buy them cheaply at adult stores.

        Or just go with my favorite option C, and limit yourself to one trusted and healthy partner! 😉

          • Yes and no.

            I am 27, and have been sexually active since I was 21. He is the only person I have ever had any sexual relations with, even 6 years later. But no…he will never be mine, so eventually I’ll have to find a new partner. I hope that is years down the road though, as I have no desire to find another lover.

          • If you really want to know…We are FwB, but he is already *ahem* taken. I believe the term for women like myself is “Domina domina” in Latin, if that helps.

          • Ha, fair enough. I’m one of those “other women”, but not the bitchy kind who wants him to leave his family or is after him for gifts/money. Quite the opposite in fact; I don’t want a family or someone to live with, so I’m happy he has a nice life to go home to. And since I have a better job than him, I bring home nearly double what he makes…if anything, *I* spoil *him* with gifts. So I’m not even a “kept” mistress, not that I’d ever want to be.

            Better yet, he can’t get me pregnant and I can’t give him STDs, so we don’t even have to use protection. It’s a damn good deal, in my personal and admittedly biased opinion.

          • Don’t get me started, I’ll get nostalgic and break out my SNES.
            Though I am going to say goodnight now. It’s 1:30am, and I have work in the morning.

            So long and thanks for all the fish 🙂

          • How so?
            I know for a fact I have no STDs (not really any way for me to get them) and he got “snipped” 7 yrs ago, so there’s truly no danger of pregnancy.

  3. Awww, Observer…you stole my thunder! I was going to make the same point. 😉

    I would like to point out that the more educated an individual is, the less likely they are to have hordes of children (unless they are Fundies, then all bets are off). It’s an interesting correlation, to say the least.

    • Regarding the antibiotics, it would have been so much easier if we didn’t insist on using them willy-nilly. Oh well, you abuse it, you lose it – my #1 rule.

      Regarding education – I’m pretty much convinced we’re already in a dysgenic society, not big surprise, as they say.

      • What, you mean we are supposed to let our nature-given immune systems do their job? Who woulda thunk it? 😛

        As for your idea of us being a dysgenic society, well…I’ll quote Green Day and say that I’ve “been around the world and found that only stupid people are breeding”.

        Obviously this is not entirely true (looking at Liz here), but it does seem to be a legitimate problem we are facing.

      • Hey, thanks for the exception! 🙂
        But stupid people do breed more, particularly true in societies with a large government social “safety” net for those at the lowest end of income scale that changes the cost to gains equation. When that social safety net was provided by the direct families and community ties the equation was far different.

        Interesting angle about the antibiotics. I hadn’t even thought of that one. Sulfa drugs are a bit older and were used before penicillins, but they were pretty harsh and less effective. I do wonder what they did back then, according to Steinbeck brothels were ubiquitous in most every town around World war I and before.

        • Hey, being an exception is important sometimes! I would know, lol.

          As for previous treatments of STDs, most of them did nothing or worse. For example, mercury was used to “treat” syphilis…but only led to the sufferers going batshit crazy. If you had a disease that caused welts, sores or lesions your doctor was likely to simply cut/burn the offending area. Women were sometimes advised to douche with various acidic chemicals, which not only killed any of the good bacteria we have, but also led to having the “fun” of chemical burns.

          Men hardly had it any better, as some old “cures” involved putting needles into the male areas, or using Violet Ray machines or small jolts of electricity to their unfortunate testicles. One idea that didn’t help any people (and thankfully did not last long) was the whacked out idea that a man could cure himself of genital herpes by having sex with a young virgin female.

          All this because people refuse to either wrap it up, or be aware of their partner’s body!

      • Correct me if I’m wrong, but in Africa didn’t the people over there had sex with virgin women in an attempt to cure their STDs?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s