My child is genetically superior to your child and could totally beat him up

With rising health costs and the dramatic loss in public interest in the sciences it has become a concern whether or not our children are living up to their potential. The scary thing I propose is; what if they are? What if our crime rate is due to genetically inferior beings being born to genetically inferior parents? Are you a product of your make-up? Research has an answer to that and the newest details say yes. Yes it is. The solution to this and many other problems should and could be humanitarian Eugenics. By humanitarian Eugenics I mean that we should view this problem not by exterminating undesirables from the gene pool but instead weeding them out through successive generations of selective breeding programs.

            Another way toward this goal would be the abortion of unwanted and genetically inferior fetuses inspected via genome sequencing in utero (Mattei 505). What if, to say, you and your significant other found out that you were having a baby? Mazel tov! After either celebrating or crying over your ruined life you find out that the baby, through non-invasive prenatal testing (Meehan, 87), your unborn bundle of joy, will come out with fully formed Down’s syndrome? Would you want to keep it knowing its quality of life would be hindered and even more important, your quality of life? Would you want to know this before going through with your pregnancy? Unless you are a religious zealot you’d probably opt for an abortion, thus saving your time and money and that of our American healthcare system.

            The problem that comes up most often when the subject of eugenics is that we all supposedly have a right to reproduce and every unborn child deserves a chance. What if you knew your child would not have a fair advantage due to being severely retarded or perhaps is a carrier of a terminal virus? Would you really want that child to live that life?

            My problem with our current society is that we still hold to the motto that every man (and woman) is created equal. If people would just open their eyes, they would realize that this is definitely not true. Take me for example. I’m short and heavy set. I have a predisposition to drugs and alcohol and I encompass a myriad of emotional and mental disorders. Thankfully, I have found the right treatments for my ailments but am I really equal to a taller, more athletic, genius level IQ man or woman with no mental disorders? No. In fact, my reproducing could be harmful for the population at large, seeing as I would be passing my ill-gotten genes onto a poor unknowing little person, dooming them to a life time of mental and physical anguish. Plus, a taller, sexier person is more fun to look at.

            Should I be able to reproduce and burden society with my offspring? The answer is no. That would, in a perfect world, be a crime. However, there have been advancements in the fields of genetic engineering and cell surgery to produce the best our genomes have to offer (Fox 1). However, this is still years away from being a viable option for near do well prospective parents.

            In a chat with a like-minded colleague (Erin Chamblee), we have devised a plan that would cut down on unwanted pregnancies and that of offspring with ill-gotten genetic traits. I propose that we institute a licensing program instituted by the government Board of Health. Just the way you’d get a license to drive, you should be tested and pass a survey of qualities and IQ tests in order to reproduce.

            Far be it from me to ask that all of humanity submit to these sorts of tests, but this is in a perfect world; imagine no disease, cancer, mental illness, or violence. Who knows what the world would have been like if Osama Bin Laden’s mother had to have herself, and her mate, tested prior to producing him? It would have never come to term because we would of, first, denied them the right to make him and second, as a fetus, genetically screen him for aggressive and homicidal traits Based on said homicidal traits, he would be aborted.

            I know that many people would love to become parents, but I should draw a distinction between want and need. People may want to reproduce but it’s almost never taken into consideration whether or not this would be good for humanity at large.

            I bring upon the idea brought on by evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins, in response to those who oppose abortion, who introduced me to the idea of the Beethoven fallacy (Dawkins, 298). The Beethoven fallacy states that if you abort your baby, you could of just aborted the next Beethoven or Einstein. My problem with this is that for one, what if it became the next Hitler? Another thing would be to reiterate the fact that if your genealogy has no spectacular academics or family with any certain positive trait, then you will most likely produce an average to below average child.

            The idea that everyone is entitled to offspring is outdated in my opinion. Another nail in the pro-life coffin is the fact that we already have so many people on this Earth that there is already a shortage of food and medicinal care for everyone. Sooner or later a quarter of humanity will die out in a Darwinian fashion. We must think Darwinian if we are to progress in this life.

            The majority of humanity may very well oppose the concept of eugenics, but I think the Nazis using it gave it in the way that they did gave it a bad rap. I am not talking about genocide, but instead implementing a licensing program with existing human beings. Those who qualify for reproduction will be able to breed legally and those unfit will not.

            It is supposed that reproduction is a basic human right and obviously those who subscribe to pretty much any religion in existence will oppose the idea. But to them I ask, why let unfit and abusive beings reproduce and bring a child who may be overly aggressive by design into a violent and / or oppressively poor household (I say poor, both in the financial sense as well as emotionally and intellectually).  A child may be doomed to repeat mistakes that his or her parents have previously done and would do so in the sense of nature and nurture.

            The idea that a fetus must not be aborted does not actually appear anywhere in the standard King James Bible, in which most Christian religions take their teachings from. The hypocrisy of the situation is that it does however teach the concept of ‘an eye for an eye’, stating that those who commit certain crimes should not be subject to God’s punishment and mercy (he’s pretty big on that in the New Testament), but instead we as humans dole out his wrath.

            Why must we draw the distinction here? We get rid of those who are undesirable and unfit for civilized society yet we do not give this same distinction toward those who have yet to be produced via the tried and true method of sperm and egg unitization. We have the capability not to do this and it will only gain acceptance as the newer generations accept the sciences as a rock solid fact of life.

            Religion and fundamentalism are on the decline as society begins to think for themselves, but there is still a strong right in this country and it is very vocal despite its declining numbers. Hopeful successes have already come to fruition with a newly elected mostly liberal congress and forward thinking president.

            Again, as I said, I am not stating that we euthanize those less desirable than the top percent, but it would be a good start to sterilize those with a family history of vagrancy and poor living skills. It has been said that your genetics do not determine the person you are. Happily this myth is being debunked little by little every day as science progresses.

You are your genes. Do you really want to pass them on?

 

Dawkins, Richard, The God Delusion, Oxford Press, 2006

Fox, Dave, The Illiberality of ‘Liberal Eugenics’, Journal Compilation 2007, 1-25

Meehan, Mary, Eugenics Triumphant in Prenatal Testing, Human Life Review, Fall 2012, Vol. 35 Issue 4, p87-104

Mattei, Jean Francois, Humanity and Human DNA, European Journal of Medical Genetics, 2012, 503-509

Holland, Brian, Way Down The Line, Ixnay on the Hombre, 1996

Where's your God now?

Why not celebrate this 4^th of July by putting yet another nail into the coffin of Fundamentalist ideals. One common argument for us atheists is usually either “Creation scientists have proof though!” or “If there is no God, then how did everything come to be?” And the answer my friends is literally out of thin air! You see, Scientists believe that at the very spark of the big bang there was nothing but energy and primitive raw particles that would wind up decaying into the original hydrogen. But hydrogen without mass is nothing at all. We now believe that this Higgs Boson particle (AKA: The God Particle) appeared in a trillionth plus more of a second after the big bang and decayed into particles giving mass to everything.

                I’m sure I’m not 100% spot on but I think the general gist is there though.

Everything Evolves

                Why are so many people against evolution? One could say that it is but the small minded majorities who still don’t believe that it is true but a good share of them have to be intelligent enough to think it through for themselves, right? I am one who believes that IQ is no indication of intelligence but merely a number expressed by academics in order to score tail at democratic fundraisers. No, I believe everyone is capable of understanding the wonders of life and all it has to offer in the scientific sense. Some are smarter at certain things than others. I can write a twenty page essay that is coherent and meaningful in less than thirty minutes but give me an Alan wrench and some Duck Tape then expect me to fashion an air conditioning unit out of spare parts and I am completely left in the dark. Surely everyone must agree on one thing, things change.

                I believe that the intellect in all of us has at one point or another has rejected the possibility of evolution at some point or another because it contradicted what is supposed to be the one basic truth, that the Holy Bible and all of its fantastical stories must have happened. To reject this would be at odds with a creator who may or may not exist. Simply betting the odds in this case won’t necessarily take away from life’s glories but it sure does make for a pretty inclusive existence. Then again, if we’re wrong then what’s the harm? We’d be dead anyways. But as the world has progressed and evidence has mounted has there ever been a better time than now to reconsider that the bible may have been wrong or at least interpreted a little too literally?

                Even high ranking officials at the Vatican lost their battle with science and conceded that life had to have evolved over time instead of one instance of creation. Although to be fair they still keep the faith that God had a hand in it. But to me I would like to think a creator would try to avoid or at least fix mistakes in the gene code that allowed for such things as gluttony and hatred. Even the fact that a man’s testes has a chord that goes from them, around the midsection and then back into the prostate should be a concern over why didn’t a better plan just be for them to go from the testes to the prostate in a more direct route? As much as I would like to, I will not make this a paper on atheism, although that would be an interesting topic for another discussion, I would like to instead pronounce my enthusiasm for the facts and theories of evolution as an unbiased observer.

                (If I came off as being anti-God please forgive me, I am just an intellectual asshole who has nothing better to do with his time than to pick on the resurrection of Christ.)

                First off let me explain the difference between a theory and a scientific theory. A theory in the contemporary sense is an educated guess on how things work. A scientific theory uses evidence to make an informed hypothesis (also an educated guess, just wordier) meaning that if you had a fossil record that seemed to transition from one thing to another you would use a theory to test your hypothesis, such as using the now standard DNA model of detection. We first saw this theory arise when Darwin conducted his biological studies and found that some newly discovered fossils looked different but slightly less so than current living species. As the century progressed we used his theory model to conduct real time experiments on sexual selection (aka: breeding for certain traits in dogs or racing horses) to and natural selection (putting a group of bacteria in a jar with finite amount of food and saw which strands strived to reproduce over their lesser equipped counterparts). It is to say, that a lot of work goes into gathering facts before a scientific theory can be accepted as truth. And we have the facts for evolution.

                One of the worst things about history deniers to me is that they say there is no proof, that the world’s scientific community is lying to cover up God’s work. My question to them would be how can a million scientist be covering up something without having to first devote their lives to such a grandiose lie? Why on Earth would somebody spend their days pursuing something they didn’t believe in just to spite others who have no direct relation to them? It’s a waste of time and energy, and, just as natural selection has taught us, this would be quickly weeded out of society seeing as it is of no good to the propagation to the greater good.

                But what these people fail to realize is that it has probable saved their lives and made them better to boot at least a million times over by now. If we never had the theory of evolution then we’d be puzzled as to why white lab mice have almost identical immune systems as we do or even why a chimp would act so human. With it though we can see where certain things stack up with our DNA code and then use the similarities in order to produce medicines and treatments that actually work at bettering ourselves. Knowing that a mouse carries the same gene for depression has helped us make prescriptions for anti-depressants. Knowing whether or not bacteria strive under certain conditions due to certain genetic conditions will either help us or hurt us has formed the basis for anti-bacterial and pro-biotic medicines.

                In fact genetics simply would not even work as a science without our understanding of evolution. It is the basis and concept for everything in biology. It is a thing that has stood the test of time and very critical and analytical minds of the past century.

                The idea to me that nothing is simple makes me want to know more about how things work. Doesn’t it you? Saying that a rainbow appears out of nowhere during a rain shower does nothing for me because there is nothing to explore about it. But saying that it is a product of the prism effect of rain drops in proportion to sunlight makes me think that there is more going on in the world. The fact that everything comes from something, and that something comes from something, that comes from something we have yet to discover makes me anticipate the day that we discover it. If only to then turn and try to find out where that something in fact came from.

                Evolution is seen in everything we do. From us divulging from single non-organic molecules into self-replicating non organic molecules to organic and so on, to the fact that technology (in principle) becomes twice as fast and effective every two years is just the start. Why not think of our solar system as having evolved, and why not with the idea of natural selection? The elements were forged in the first stars (which came together from gravity and hydrogen) and through nuclear fusion became all the elements that we know of and then exploding, which released those elements which in turn are seemingly randomly selected to form new stars and now life giving element rich planets? Without those first stars we would not have oxygen or carbon, the two things necessary for us to exist in the first place. And when our star dies it will release more of those same elements and become new stars and planets (Okay so our sun may not go out in an explosion but the birth of new planets and stars are as inevitable as you having to eat something at least some of the time to keep your body going.)

                Evolution is everywhere. We have the facts, and we use those facts to form theories. To me a world without science would be a never ending rut of plague and disease and disaster. Why wait for a God to cure your cancer when you can go to a hospital and receive treatment? To do so is sound and we rarely think of it in this day and age. But there was a time when going to the doctor meant death by contamination and blood-letting to cure your cold. Medical practices have too evolved over time. Evolution is an unavoidable part of life.

                The next time you see a pretty flower, think not that it was just made, but think of it as a wonder of biology that took millions of years of trial and error to become so beautiful and complex. Wouldn’t that be more fulfilling in the end? I think so. And I hope that you will too someday.

Five things that can give you whiskey dick.

1: Alcohol – Yeah this one is obvious. You drink too much and your whole nervous system sort of shuts down on you, making it hard to feel any real sensation at all. Although many have tried and after hours of due diligence they’ve been able to complete the process. Hats are tipped to those who have been able to wear out a vagina into a shaffed and sore little mess in their efforts to bust a nut.

 

2: Cocaine – This one is actually a stimulant which means you should be able to stimulate the hell out of your manly organ right? Wrong, coke numbs the shit out of you. It blocks touch sensations and a form of it is actually used in anesthesia medications. From Novacain to Litacain, they all have one main ingredient.

That’s right! They’re made from the coca leaf.

When the Mayan’s weren’t busy sacrificing their young to the sun God, they were chewing on coca leaves just to get them through the day.

We’ve been doing shit like this for thousands of years folks!

3: Opiates – Now this stuff you’d expect to make your Willy a useless piece of skin. Its main job is to block pain receptors and give you a nice warm buzz by bonding to your opioid receptors. The reason we even have these things is because we already have a natural pain blocker in our own brains that releases whenever we are hurt or in shock. Endorphins are in the opiate class and that’s why you feel so good after exercising and other strenuous workouts (Hint, it won’t be sex!)

Even getting aroused seems like too much work when you’re high on this stuff. You’re body’s more apt to use it’s time doing things like lying around and hugging your cat.

Come to think of it, I never came once while I was on methadone! I remember trying and becoming frustrated. In fact  I think it’s the only time I ever faked an orgasm just to make the whole deal just stop.

4: Too much sex – Men have a refractory period after they orgasm, meaning that all things sexual shut down for at least ten to fifteen minutes before you’re able to go at it again (This statement does not reflect those of you who use and abuse Viagra).

Plus after each successive try your vital bits start to not respond the way it was before you started this marathon. Being that it is one of the most sensitive parts of a man’s body (Tip: One of the others is the nipples, hear that ladies?) it can easy become over sensitive and cause pain. Plus your body has already spent all that energy on the first round or two so it’s sort of in storage mode, meaning you have to work harder each time to get the same results as before.

Wouldn’t you rather have some anti-depressant medication instead?

Oh wait, that’s right…

5: Anti-depressants and other medications – If you think it was bad enough that you snorted all that coke and took too many Viagra pills, wait till you try to come down with some of these medications. Serotonin is a vital part of any healthy brain function. It controls your body’s temperature, your mood, and other chemical processes in your brain.

It’s so important that it has even been linked to sudden infant death syndrome as the main cause. You see when you are a baby everything is still getting wired and rewired and it’s hard for a young’en to withstand so much change. They’re brain tells it to release more of that good stuff and sometimes it just goes overboard, to the dismay of many a mother I’m sure.

I’m not exactly sure how it does it but this shit will make you last until you are too tired to go on any further.

That is if you can even get it up in the first place.

Evolution of our wangs.

Did you know that the gene that controls toe size also controls penis size as well?

It must be true! Learn more about the elusive HOX gene here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hox_gene

Let me start this off by saying that I’d like to think of myself as a connoisseur of the male genitalia. Small, medium, large, they’re all good! Nice and cut or uncut, long or short. I don’t know how I would live without my friend the penis. I’m sure many of you even have one of your own, and for those who don’t I’m sure you enjoy them just as much as we enjoy them ourselves.

I mean, they’re great! They don’t cause men to cramp up in the middle of the month and bleed out like a deer that’s been shot. Its only purpose is to tinkle and make sex just awesome. Seriously, you should try it sometime!

As amazing as this male organ is does anyone ever take the time out to really think about and appreciate the pink torpedo?

You got to think that while it is an awesome tool it serves a basic biological function, which is to deliver sperm to the female’s uterus so it can fertilize any available eggs that may be floating around. Us men are the proud owners of a Y chromosome and very little else.

When you compare our penis sizes with that of any other primate you find that we are definitely in the lead here. A chimp’s dick only measures about three inches. Same goes for the mighty gorilla, which makes him way out of proportion! We humans average at about 5.5”-6” down in the nether regions and that is the biggest non boned package in the animal kingdom.

Did you know that they have to make special condoms for India because the males there are so small?

Yeah… But hey, they made the Kama Sutra right?

What made our penises get so long and thick? There are two theories (I personally think it’s a combination of both) that try to explain our magnificent thingamabobbers. I mean seriously, they’re awesome! Thank you Darwin!!!

Let’s start with the first theory shall we? It’s known that we have the genetic markers for spines on our genitals. Not unlike cats and dogs we used to have spines that came out of the shaft and hooked onto the female. The spines are supposed to clean out competing sperm and make way for your own. In the arms race that is evolution however it appeared that the longer and thicker the penis was the better chance you would have of fathering a young’n. You see the longer and thicker it was the more ease in which it scooped out the sloppy seconds out of the vagina!

Since we don’t have those anymore we now have a mushroom capped gland which does pretty much the same thing.  An evolutionary psychologist by the name of Gordon Gallup devised an experiment to test this theory.

For off he bought two dildos and then another one but it didn’t any top to it (it was all shaft). He got some realistic rubber vaginas and implanted a substance resembling sperm into the cavities (from what I heard it was just water and flour) and put the penises into them and mimicked a few minutes of sexual intercourse. After they were done they found that the two normal dildos scooped out nearly 91% of the simulated sperm while the headless control only brought out a meager 35%. So with this there seems to be some logic for the argument that bigger penises mean more reproductive success.

Plus you got to think practically too. A longer, thicker penis would displace a lot more semen closer into the uterus than a smaller one. Sorry fellas, size matters. At least when it comes to trying to get your best friend’s spooge out of your girl.

How did we lose our spines you ask? That’s where the second theory comes into play. There are three types of selection for evolution to thrive:

Natural selection – Nature takes its course and does what she does just to see what comes out.

Selective breeding – This is when you purposefully mate a species until something new comes along.

Sexual selection – Generally the female picks the man she wants. This is true in almost all the species of anything on this planet that reproduces by sex.

So if you were a female back in those cave days and you had two suitors wanting to have sex with you. Which one would you choose? The one with the spines or the one who would hurt less. I think that after a few hundred thousand to a million years the spines were phased out of the gene pool. This allowed for more competition since sex does feel great and it started the ball rolling for mass distribution of our kind across the planet.

After sex was made readily available for the first time (girls no longer had carotene scraping their vagina walls) we just had at it!

The idea behind the second theory is that a bigger penis just looks more attractive to the opposite sex. Just like a peacock would show off his feathers, it was impressive to see something bigger than normal so it was more enticing to mate with that individual.

A bigger thing also stimulates the vagina more, which makes it attractive to prospective females.

After we started wearing clothes this probably put somewhat of a damper on the progress by repressing our urges and curiosity.

Sex was made to feel great because without it we would die off. Of course it’s going to be one of the best feelings aside from heroin that you’ll ever feel.

Just remember fellas. Sometimes there’s a thing as too big!

Reference: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=secrets-of-the-phallus

Tall people have no feelings

Men, from an evolutionary standpoint, are major sluts. This goes for the entire male population. Not because they exhibit such tendencies but because we (as males) are biologically adept at basically having the forethought to screw anything with a hole.

Women have to be picky over their mates for practical reasons. Such things like the nine month incubation time it takes to foster a healthy baby to the maternal bond that develops even without any sort of knowledge exchange between both mother and child. Most females (if not all of them) feel something for their offspring even if it aborts. This engrained instinct ensures our survival by giving us a natural advocate for growing and being nurtured into successfully reproducing adults. Our advantage over other animals may not be as cut and dry as survival of the fittest but instead it may be the fact that we are raised and trained to be who we are sans genetics.

Other animals such as cats are born then weaned on mother’s milk. Once that period is over then the kitten is on his own. Us however have the advantage of being raised beyond that. This is of course under the idea that the parent(s) are stable both mentally and emotionally enough to pass on their skills and knowledge of the world at least until school age. Why do we ask our parents for advice? I believe it’s because we know that they were sexually successful therefore we look to them for our early examples.

Without going off point I will now focus on the male. By our very nature we are basically peacocks with available sperm. We are very sexually active due to the fact that we have so much competition from other men. Even evolution was in on the joke early on when men had barbed penises just like many other animals in the past. This was to not only inseminate the female with our sperm but to scrape out other dude’s spunk so that we would have a better chance at knocking up the female with our own genetic offspring. The same thing can still be seen as we have large glands at the ends of our penises and some believe that this is a more subtler version of the spined shafts of our ancestors.

Why are some males more successful than others? It has been studied and many scientists have come to the conclusion that females want alpha males as sexual partners but intelligent men as mates. This has been shown in tests looking at females who are on the birth control pill. The pill tricks the female’s body into thinking that it’s pregnant, therefore the need for a strong male to impregnate her is null and she seeks out a smarter and more reliable companion. However sometimes when the two people are wanting to conceive and she goes off of the contraception then she sometimes finds herself less than impressed with her selection. Her mind may say he’s perfect but her body wants somebody who can pass on strong genes and protect her and her child through the rearing years. Which is an anomaly seeing as the male is still prone to wander because of his engrained instincts.

Those who are healthier and more attractive to ovulating females are at an advantage of making more babies. Even with the advent of condoms these men still go for the healthy females in hopes of (at least biologically speaking) getting her pregnant. The male is nomadic in this sense because he is but one of many, he has to stand out in a chance to spread his genetic material around in hopes that he will procreate. Such things that promote female response is basically what we find attractive in modern males. Height, weight, penis size, and other factors.

Height means health and tall people are statistically more successful not only in sex but in the work force as well. We look at a tall fit young man and we are instilled with a sense that he knows what he is doing even though he may not. We naturally gravitate towards these individuals because it is thought that they are the panicle of reproductive success, even if he is a virgin. That’s how deep this goes. Both men and women flock towards these people without their conscious mind reasoning why.

As I said, the taller and more fit an individual the more appealing he is to both sexes. Boys look up to their fathers when they are little because the male is bigger than they are at that point. Being bigger promotes the idea that that person can protect you and be there for you because he seems to know what he is doing, therefore giving off the illusion of success even when it comes to some five year old wanting to follow in the image of his dead beat trailer trash father who beat his biological and non-biological mothers. It is this illusion that sticks with us way into adulthood.

Attractive males are more likely to get a job over someone shorter and less endowed because of this illusion. A taller fitter more handsome male will win over because we think he is more likely to do the job right seeing as he is in good health. I believe this can misfire with persons afflicted with eating disorders. Again it comes back to illusions and what our minds are really after. A sickly thin person may not be healthy but his body gives off the message (as misleading as it can be) that he is healthy and will perform his tasks better than somebody who is shorter, not as strong, and who is heavier, therefore unhealthier than the seemingly fitter individual. We are predetermined to seek out these people on a model of humanity that goes back millions of years.

Back in the day (pre homo erectus) we were hunters and scavengers who just learned how to use nature to our advantage. The taller alpha males (we’ll call them stupid frat boys) were the ones going out and getting the food, while the smarter and less physically intimidating ones were the glue that helped form the ideals of basic human needs beyond food, water, and shelter. A frat boy was unconcerned about the health of one particular female because he had so many to choose from. The nerd’s body still tried to mimic the frat boy because that is in essence inside all of us men to try and be the provider / protector. Ever see a small dog take on a bigger one in a battle of wills? Same thing, but does the small dog ever win? In nature usually not.

In response to this I believe we developed intelligence to find ways for the less physically attractive males to compensate for the features they lacked in order to woo potential mates. We now see these actions in the form of bring a girl flowers, talking to them about their feelings, cuddling, and basically anything you’ve ever done to someone you wanted in order to get laid. You may have felt an emotion behind such actions but the main focus was to bust a nut inside her and pop out a child, making it all but positive that your genes survive.

Males are naturally territorial. We will fight one another over the right to fuck someone, even if it’s just two guys joking with each other in a bar in front of a woman. Tearing each other down and exposing faults in hopes that one male will emerge victorious.

It is a myth that females (and gay males) are not fully driven by outward appearance (which I’ve said can be an illusion) because first looks are the mediator between talking to somebody and ignoring them. It’s in us all and to say that we don’t notice things like that is a lie to one’s self. It’s almost always after the fact that we delve into that person’s psyche for emotional compatibility. After all, once the deed is done then the male really has no tie to the female other than his child, which in nature means little to the male’s fidelity. Animals and humans have evolved our sense of belonging and companionship out of the need to be taken care of beyond the reproductive aspects. We barter and need to love and be loved. But why?

Obviously what’s good for the species is good for the individual. If we take care of someone else then we are helping to preserve our shared DNA. Deep down instinct is still not to the point where it can be shut off. We still gravitate toward the more imposing of persons only to judge character after they’ve spoken or performed an altruistic feat.

All males have the need to reproduce. Tall good looking males are just better at it from that standpoint of outward illusion. The conscious comes after the fact of instinct. Leaving other males behind means nothing in this sense as long as the goal is achieved.

From this idea comes the stupid jock who fucks half the high school and the male model whom girls and guys want to be with without ever knowing the mechanisms behind these urges.

It is good sense to breed with somebody who is fit and healthy and can take care of itself in the long run. Given this all other things that come after the fact is arbitrary, the dick head who never had to develop a full intelligent personality will generally have first picks, leaving those others to use other means to their advantage.

This rule applies to smaller men who are fit as well. Taller ones are just more likely to be jerks due to their size and previous successes as opposed to the smaller ones who develop nasty personalities due to perceived defects.

As intelligent human beings we can get along in a superficial sense, but deep down the fitter males know they can get laid. Making them hunters and promiscuous.

Biologically speaking, tall people have no feelings.