weak gene theory

Page 1 of 2 [ 31 posts ] Go to page 1, 2 Next

Joined: 5 Feb 2006
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,989

16 May 2013, 10:00 pm

I getting sick and tired of secular evolution fundies telling us aspie guys, the reason we aren't dating is because of bad genes,
we will produce bad offsprings, so evolution is preventing us from ever dating.

that women only want to date the so call alpha male because they will produce the best offspring.
that is a bunch of bs, Now, I have some problems and most likely won't get married and I don't want kids.
but this is not about me. guess what folks who believe in the weak gene theory

There are asperger men that have kids, there are nerds who have kids, there are even gay men who have kids,
and guess what, a nerd can have an alpha male son.

telling me and other aspie men we can't date because of some stupid evolution theory about a bunch
of f----king cavemen did 30,000 years ago is no difference from a religious fundementalist telling
a woman that she has to be 100% loyal to her abusive husband because god command it.
or someone deny gay rights because they say it's against god's plan.

evolution psychologist is the secular answer to religious fundementalist.
it's the same damn thing.

before some of you secular evolutionist fundies tell me that Im full of crap and women only want to have kids
with the alpha male, look around, how many men you know with kids, that are not alpha.
I know jerks with kids, I know nice guys with kids, I know mild disable men with kids, I know
bisexual men with kids, I know ugly fat men with kids, in fact I have an alpha male friend
who has no kids, how do explain that? how can an overweight fat guy have a kid, when a
good looking alpha male doesn't

BlueMax
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Aug 2007
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,285

16 May 2013, 10:13 pm

I suspect it has little to do with procreating and a lot more about which men make her all excited so she'll mate in the first place. After all - her orgasms increase the odds of impregnation, so the hotter she is for the guy, the more likely she'll have sex AND get pregnant.

The knuckle-dragging alphas are so full of confidence, swagger, and power, many women lose control of reason and make the stupid decision to be with them (for at least a short time.)

Many might regret the decision afterwards because he was a rotten person, but not necessarily regret the hot, good sex she had with him.

(Merely a reckless theory based on observation and the experiences of people I know.)

billiscool
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 5 Feb 2006
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,989

16 May 2013, 10:28 pm

BlueMax wrote:

good answer. the first answer I do is the typical evolution fundie
evolution fundies: according to them, the reason the woman had sex with hot alpha male is because she wanted to have kids with him,
because his kids will be strong and tough like him, because 30,000 years ago, that what bunch of cavemen did, in them days, the tough caveman had tons
of sex with many cavewomen, and while the loser cavemen got nothing. all cavewomen want to have kids with that one tough caveman, because
his kids were going to be tough.

the religious fundementlist answer:'' oh, it because adam and eve ate the forbidden fruit, and sin came into the world. The reason the woman had
sex with that alpha male is because of sin. she was commitng a sinful act.''

notice the similiarity both take a present day thing and claim the reason that it happen is because of something that happen in past.
why men like to have tons of sex, oh because of what the cavemen did 30,000 years ago or because of original sin, and we are all sinners,
and only jesus can save us, the only reason why men are having tons of sex is because of sin. oh no,

why do some women sleep with hot guys because they just want too. why do some men sleep with many women, because they just want too.
that it.

billiscool
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 5 Feb 2006
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,989

16 May 2013, 10:43 pm

here some link: http://www.alternet.org/story/104149/ca ... tereotypes
http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... sychology/
http://gooseberrybush.wordpress.com/201 ... hauvinism/
http://disruptingdinnerparties.wordpres ... erscience/

fueledbycoffee
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Nov 2010
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 566
Location: Baltimore

16 May 2013, 10:46 pm

The instinct of sexual attraction is such that we are attracted to people with perceived strong genes. However, we can't necessarily determine what are strong genes. A guy could be hot as hell and ripped, but he could also be carrying a Huntington's gene.

Darwin was of the opinion that sexual selection was possibly even more of an influence guiding our evolution that natural selection. People are attracted to what is considered sexually appealing in their time. This is fluid and explains why fat people were considered hot in the middle ages and repulsive today. It has little to do with strong and weak genes and more to do with what is accepted to be attractive.

That's the Darwinian answer, my friend.

Flyer
Blue Jay

Joined: 14 Sep 2010
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 93
Location: Lithuania

16 May 2013, 10:47 pm

BlueMax wrote:

Yes, but don't forget that genes don't control us directly. It's like programing semi autonomous robots. Even the best programmer can never be 100% sure robot will do what it's supposed to do.

Also don't forget that evolution is a very slow process. It may have made a prefect sense to look for an alpha male many thousands of years ago. It may not make any sense now, but we're stuck with these genes for a while.

But genes aren't smart. They can't reason. There's no reason why someone would not be able to choose a mate rationally. If you make a poor choice and date an alpha male or female, it's your own choice. You shouldn't complain that you were poorly designed for a modern world.

1000Knives
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Jul 2011
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,036
Location: CT, USA

16 May 2013, 11:06 pm

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZY_PCUbQU4g[/youtube]

Song that comes into my head when genetics is spoken of.

Carry on.

Tyri0n
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 24 Nov 2012
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,879
Location: Douchebag Capital of the World (aka Washington D.C.)

17 May 2013, 12:35 am

billiscool wrote:

Secular Evolution fundies? lol. Sounds like you need to get help.

1000Knives
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Jul 2011
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,036
Location: CT, USA

17 May 2013, 12:36 am

Because we got indigo starchild genes too good for the rest of mere mortals to possess.

billiscool
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 5 Feb 2006
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,989

17 May 2013, 12:45 am

Tyri0n wrote:

[

Secular Evolution fundies? lol. Sounds like you need to get help.

it's evolutionary psychologist, the atheist version of religious fundamentalist.

1000Knives
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Jul 2011
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,036
Location: CT, USA

17 May 2013, 12:49 am

billiscool wrote:

Tyri0n wrote:

[

Secular Evolution fundies? lol. Sounds like you need to get help.

it's evolutionary psychologist, the atheist version of religious fundamentalist.

I actually don't believe in evolution in the sense that people believe man is an evolved ape.
*runs*

Tyri0n
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 24 Nov 2012
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,879
Location: Douchebag Capital of the World (aka Washington D.C.)

17 May 2013, 2:30 am

Quote:

telling me and other aspie men we can't date because of some stupid evolution theory about a bunch
of f----king cavemen did 30,000 years ago is no difference from a religious fundementalist telling
a woman that she has to be 100% loyal to her abusive husband because god command it.
or someone deny gay rights because they say it's against god's plan.

You're confusing descriptive study with prescriptive dogma. Nobody is telling you that you can't do anything.

Women pick their mates for a variety of reasons. Outside of high school, alpha is a meaningless concept.

BlueMax
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Aug 2007
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,285

17 May 2013, 3:14 am

Tyri0n wrote:

Women pick their mates for a variety of reasons. Outside of high school, alpha is a meaningless concept.

I wish!

20 years after high school, it's like it never ended - no matter what kind of workplace I've gone to!

katkore
Blue Jay

Joined: 12 May 2013
Age: 44
Gender: Female
Posts: 91
Location: Italy

17 May 2013, 3:28 am

Ehm... why weak gene theory? As far as I have read the change is at a phenotype level and no change in the DNA structure at a genome level occours... which pretty much means that stating an Aspie can't be an alpha-male equals stating that short guys can't be alpha males...

o.O

_________________
Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.
Albert Einstein

The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 42
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 33,116
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.

17 May 2013, 3:35 am

fueledbycoffee wrote:

The instinct of sexual attraction is such that we are attracted to people with perceived strong genes. However, we can't necessarily determine what are strong genes. A guy could be hot as hell and ripped, but he could also be carrying a Huntington's gene.

Darwin was of the opinion that sexual selection was possibly even more of an influence guiding our evolution that natural selection. People are attracted to what is considered sexually appealing in their time. This is fluid and explains why fat people were considered hot in the middle ages and repulsive today. It has little to do with strong and weak genes and more to do with what is accepted to be attractive.

That's the Darwinian answer, my friend.

I keep hearing this a lot but if you check the Egyptian statuettes/paints (and Goddesses) and Medieval European paintings you find it's not quite true, in most eras the ideal body for a woman was slim to curvy, not fat.

Same for the ideal male body (Ancient Greek arts, Egyptian art, Gods,...), it was always from slim to ripped, not fat.

katkore
Blue Jay

Joined: 12 May 2013
Age: 44
Gender: Female
Posts: 91
Location: Italy

17 May 2013, 3:41 am

The_Face_of_Boo wrote:

fueledbycoffee wrote:

The instinct of sexual attraction is such that we are attracted to people with perceived strong genes. However, we can't necessarily determine what are strong genes. A guy could be hot as hell and ripped, but he could also be carrying a Huntington's gene.

Darwin was of the opinion that sexual selection was possibly even more of an influence guiding our evolution that natural selection. People are attracted to what is considered sexually appealing in their time. This is fluid and explains why fat people were considered hot in the middle ages and repulsive today. It has little to do with strong and weak genes and more to do with what is accepted to be attractive.

That's the Darwinian answer, my friend.

I keep hearing this a lot but if you check the Egyptian statuettes/paints and Medieval European paintings you find it's not quite true, in most eras the ideal body for a woman was slim to curvy, not fat.

Same for the ideal male body (Ancient Greek arts, Egyptian art...).

Mmmm... it all depends in what is considered "fat" I guess, but the above mentioned theory applies if rather then looking at paints we consider the medieval cultural aspect reported in many books that a rounded shape in a woman was considered sign of wealth both phisiologically and economically.

Just to be pedantic, how about the prehistoric statuette of fertility? :lol:

_________________
Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.
Albert Einstein

Page 1 of 2 [ 31 posts ] Go to page 1, 2 Next

Jump to:

weak gene theory Post Reply New Topic

weak gene theory