Monogamy is a bad system to Humans

Post Reply New Topic

I spent plenty of time on it. I typed out a lot of thought-out, reasoned comments on what I thought, then deleted them, because I realised there is no way I could possibly approve of eugenics. I don't even approve of making pure-bred dogs, let alone with humanity. This is, and was, the Nazi philosophy. Breed the strong, kill the weak, and create a racially pure reality.

Never mind the fact that 'strong' and 'weak' are subjective. Are we going for whether they're good-looking or not, which divides even people as undiscerning as pornographers? Are we going for intelligence, which can never be truly measured? Are we looking at emotional strength, how well someone deals with a crisis? If you aren't over your dead husband in a week, will you be shot? Will I be not allowed to breed because I have long hair, which chavs don't like, or dark hair and dark eyes, which isn't Aryan, or an IQ below 150, or glasses, which could mean my children have bad eyes, or, better, yet, autism?

AS and Autism are not signs of human's evolution as many many fellow aspies claim, the social skills are becoming more and more essential for humans survival and success.

Even shyness is becoming a bad trait:



So the usual man's success formula of today:

Good Social skills ==> Good social life ==> Good professional Life ==> success(=money,good provider,fame,social status etc....) ==> attraction

Success is the most attractive trait in any man for many reasons.


Aspies lack the social skills , it's true that sine autistic/aspie savant are successful like Bram Cohen but these aspies are successful because they are SAVANTs and not because they are autistics. Autism might helped them to be obsessed with their research but It's not what made them geniuses but because they have other high mental capabilities : High IQ, Photographic memory ...etc. These autistics are successful because of their savants skills and they are married now because they are successful (ie Bram Cohen).

And these savants are only a smart part of autistic population while most of the other autistic (no-savant) are struggling miserably in the work life and so as consequence in the romantic life.

Autism = lack of social skills so it cannot be genetically favorable by females. Just look at the "I am the XX year old virgin. Add your name to the list." thread and you would be surprised by the number of virgin autistic adults who are above 20 there. What does that proves? It proves that Autism/AS are not genetically favorable traits in the natural selection.

Last edited by LePetitPrince on 21 Jan 2008, 5:56 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Many users here are quickly comparing my reproduction strategy with the Nazi strategy (or even the Spartan strategy).

I am going to repeat that for that last time:
My concept encourages selection of good genes AND diversity of genes.(Refer to 6th Post in Page 3)

While Nazi way only encourages selection of good German genes only.

There's a genetic world of difference between the two strategies.

Again read the post #6 in page 3 of this thread to understand how.

Regards,

I'm sure there are a lot of virgins out there. I don't think that has much to do with the Asperger/Autistic diagnoses. I think it has to do with the male being to shy to let the female know he is interested. If more people realized the traits of Aspergers the female would be more able to tell a male what she wanted and needed. I'm thinking a male with Aspergers would probably be just like a neurotypical male in under the sheets. The only difference would be maybe he wouldn't be so full of himself and that would make a better experience for both. Maybe I'm different than most, but when I'm around someone I have complete trust in (not people that have many girlfriends) I have little problem telling what I want and listening to what he wants. That being said I am 41 years old and have actually only been with 2 people sexually (both were neurotypical and complete jerks.) I had much rather be mooning over a guy with Aspergers than dealing with any of what I've had before. And at this time that's exactly what I am doing mooning over him, but I think he is worth the wait!! !! !! !!

Your system is effectively creating a "second class" of people of those you have deemed "defective". That's why people make those analogies. I know that I, for one, will not tolerate being arbitrarily deemed "defective" by some random person.

Not , I am not disappointed ,thank you for your concern anyways. Before I launched this thread I expected such reactions and to be honest I expected worse than that . I knew that my thread would be a shock to many users here.
I expected that Creationists would say things as : "Noooo this is not the way of God!!
And I expected that romance-believers would say :"What about loveee???"
And I expected some males would say:" What??! Adopting and raising children of another man??"


To all these users: Relax!

Such strategy can't be applied today because it needs a fundamental change of people's mentality which was influenced by many things over the last decays :Religion,tradition, Media, love songs ...etc.
It needs a fundamental change of what is 'immoral' and 'moral' in relationship and it needs a fundamental change of the family concept (parents are always biological parents of the children).

So it's no that easy.

My strategy can only applied in an Utopian world with people of totally different mentality. I am not the first one who imagined similar weird strategy , even the Greek philosopher Plato has imagined a similar strategy and he was well aware that his strategy can only be applied in an Utopian world.
Many people think that Plato's idea were discriminative like many users here think that my strategy is discriminative ....well, Nature itself is discriminate so live with that fact!
Plato knew that every humans has its limits and he suggested a strategy that can allow the whole society to benefit from every optimal human's capability. Plato had herd thinking , a way of thinking which can be good for a all the group(country/civilization) and not only for one individual. Still I still believe that every human should have the freedom to choose his own career.

Last edited by LePetitPrince on 21 Jan 2008, 4:38 pm, edited 3 times in total.

I said nothing about 'second class' and 'first class' , I didn't said that with_disabilities/omega males in my imaginary system would be treated less than alpha males or would have less rights than alphas. I only mentioned the reproduction/social strategy in my system but I didn't mention any political strategy. I never said for example that omega males must be cleaning workers while alphas must be CEOs and GMs , I didn't say that I am going to put a rule that disallow betas and omega and ppl with disabilities to be candidates for presidency and for any other high status .
Many omegas with genetic diseases are smart and can be artificial alphas by gaining success but a materially successful person with disability would stay genetically an omega . I am just biologically classifying ppl but I am not classifying their status based on their biological classification (like Plato which I disagree with the way of his careers classification).


But if you read between the lines in the initial post , you would realize that I am giving the omega males a primordial role too: 'social fathers'. A social father must be a good provider to be a good social father so he has the motif as much as any alpha male to gain success.

I'm sad that you actually feel the way you do. Do you not want to find someone to love you exactly the way you are? I think it's a good thing that we are all not the exact same. That's the reason that different things attract different people and I don't think that has anything to do with like attracting like. If what you are saying is true then the only people who would be blessed enough to have children are the ones that are over six feet tall, intelligent and look like models. I'm none of those things and I don't expect others to be either. Do you have a diagnoses on the autism spectrum? And by the way many people who have Aspergers are tall.......

sands,do you have children?

Yes, I have a son that is 15 and has type one diabetes. And I wouldn't trade him for anything else in the world. I wish he didn't have it, but it doesn't make him any less of a person.

Yes, I have a son that is 15 and has type one diabetes. And I wouldn't trade him for anything else in the world. I wish he didn't have it, but it doesn't make him any less of a person.

I have a 15 year old son that suffers from type one diabetes, but I love him more than I do my own life.

I refuse to accept a definition of utopia where mass descrimination, withholding of medical care, prevention of 'breeding' have to be undertaken before it exists.

A utopia is somewhere where everyone is happy and everything is great and perfect. Nothing is perfect about a society that has wiped out all of its ills by letting those people with 'defective' genes get weeded out of the pool. If they had never existed, yeah, that would be a utopia, because we would have a world free of disease already. But not this way.

Yes, I do. And I am HFA ,not aspie. I started talking at age 5 and kept having serious spelling(in speaking) difficulties till about age 9 or 10. I learned to read earlier than other children tho.


Here my first post in WP:http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt11732.html

I can forward you emails if you want to know my whole life how it was like.

Yup. That is the problem with this whole thread. What good is a utopia if it isn't actually someone anyone would want to live? LPP's imagined 'utopia' sounds pretty miserable to me.

Eugenics predates Hitler by, idk, 2000 years and was expounded by Plato, one of the most influential philosophers in Western history. Saying "Nazi<=>eugenics" is a redonkulously simplistic analysis, and completely ignores the history of the concept. No one has proposed killing anyone. The concepts absolutely do not go hand in hand.

And it really isn't hard to find correlates for happiness and success. And if I were going to have a child, I would want them to have the potential to do whatever they felt the need to pursue.

Edit: proposition 3 retracted

Last edited by twoshots on 21 Jan 2008, 5:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.