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