As I've Continually Stated Throughout This Blog, I'll Often Times Hear People, Especially Females, When I'm Roaming The Streets Or In Stores Say "He's Poor", "He Has No Money", "He's Homeless" And The Like. And I'll Think To Myself, "It Wasn't Always Like This And I Don't Consider Myself Poor Without Money Or Home Because I'm Not Poor In The Impoverished Sense Or Without Money And A Place To Call Home!" Sometimes I'll Say That Aloud, Too, And Then Tell Whoever Said Those Nasty Things To ME That They, In Fact, Are The Ones Who Are Poor, Penniless, Homeless And, Of Course, UGLY. Anyway, I Mention This Because I Was Once Heavily Invested In, But That Investment Has Gone Bad (Turned Out To Be A Bust), Especially Since My Prospect For Success (Particularly Reproductive Success) Looks Bleak. And If Something Looks Bleak And The Chances Of It Succeeding Are Not Good You Cut Your Losses And Stop Investing In It, Right? READ BENEATH THE PICTURE BELOW TO UNDERSTAND THE UNCONSCIOUS EVOLUTIONARY CALCULATION THAT RESULTS IN THIS DECISION MAKING (THIS DECISION TO TO STOP INVESTING).
It is rare for a woman to find herself socially excluded by her family, unless, of course, she is a reproductive failure. Then she may be excluded and even murdered. Her survival is no longer viewed as useful in terms of caring for the family's genes. If she has children or contributes to the well-being of other relatives, however, then a woman has permanent lifelong bonds. (Warriors and Worriers)
HEY, WHY WOULD MY YOUNGER SISTER TRY TO EMBARRASS ME IN FRONT OF THE WORLD? READ BELOW TO FIND OUT Y! (SOMETIMES I GO HOME TO MYSELF AND CRY BECAUSE I MUST BE A DEBONAIRE BEFOE I Di! SHAKE 'EM UP BAY BEE.)
I Was The Favored Child. I Was The Favored Child By Parents Who Weren't Even My Parents (They Favored ME Over Than Their Own Kids). Why? Because I Had Above Average Intelligence, Above Average Athleticism, Above Average Attractiveness, And A Pleasant Personality And Disposition. So People, Especially My Parents Wanted To Invest Time, Money, Effort, And Energy In ME. Why? So That They Could See Their Unconscious Reproductive And Social Goals Achieved. (By The Way, I Wasn't A Trouble Maker In Elementary, Junior High, And High School Even Though I Got Into Fights In Elementary, Junior High, And High School. As A Matter Of Fact, I Was Liked By Most Teachers, Administrators, And Parents In Elementary, Junior High, And High School Because I Was Well Behaved, Had A Likable Personality And Demeanor, And Was Eager To Please And Not Disappoint Teachers, Administrators, And Parents. As An Aside, People With My Background And Personality Traits Typically Don't Have A Criminal Record And Continue To Go To Jail. I'm An Anomaly In This Regard.) |
WHY KILL THE BABIES! (LET'S FIND OUT WHY BELOW.)
I'LL WRITE OUT THE ABOVE PAGES LATER AND THEN HIGHLIGHT THE MOST IMPORTANT POINTS!
Why do people kill their own children?
We do not know why this question was on Wright's 1994 list, because Martin Daly and Margo Wilson had already solved it in their 1988 book Homicide, which is partly based on their even earlier work. Daly and Wilson first point out that the answer to the question, "Why do people kill their own children?" is, "They don't." Most parents who are convicted of killing their children are actually stepfathers, who are not genetically related to the children they kill. Crime statistics make it appear as though some biological parents kill their own children, because the police, uninformed by evolutionary psychology, make no distinction between biological parents and stepparents in their statistics.
From the evolutionary psychological perspective, it makes perfect sense for stepparents to neglect; underinvest in; and, in some cases, even kill their stepchildren, so that their spouses will focus their investment of time and resources in the couple's common genetic children, current and future. Among many species, such as baboons and lions, when a new male takes over a group of females, with young, the first thing he does is kill all the existing children systematically, so that all the females will reproduce with him. It would be surprising if humans were any different.
Even the few cases where biological parents kill their genetic children can be explained by Daly and Wilson's notion of "discriminative parental solicitude" They point out that all parents have limited resources to invest in their children. Their task is to maximize their reproductive success - not by maximizing the number of children but by maximizing the number of grandchildren. From this strictly Darwinian perspective, any resources invested in children who are not likely to survive to sexual maturity or find mates and reproduce themselves are entirely wasted. Thus, parents are far more likely to neglect, abuse, and kill their biological children who are deformed, handicapped, ill, or even physically unattractive and to shift their parental investment of limited resources toward those children with more promising reproductive prospects. As uncomfortable as we may be with such a conclusion, the truth appears to be that parents do favor some of their children over others, even among their own genetic children, to say nothing about stepchildren to whom they are not genetically related, and they overwhelmingly favor those who are intelligent, beautiful, healthy, and sociable.
Kill 'Em If They Retarded!
Why do children love their parents?
At first glance, this question may appear absurd. Of course children love their parents; it is only natural, but why?
If you really think about it, there is absolutely no evolutionary psychological reason why children should love and care for their parents. Some people (usually parents themselves) have suggested to us that parents will be more motivated to invest in children who love them back. But this is not true; from an evolutionary psychological perspective, parents have to love their children, whether the children love them back or not, in order to motivate their parental investment. And, as Daly and Wilson's work on discriminative parental solicitude shows, parents are motivated to invest not necessarily in the children who love them the most, but in those who have the greatest potential to attain higher reproductive success themselves (more attractive, more intelligent, healthier children, or boys if the parents are wealthy, girls if they are poor, etc.). If parents with limited resources have two children, one an intelligent, physically attractive, and healthy child who hates them, and the other a handicapped, unattractive, and sickly child who loves them, the cold evolutionary logic dictates that the parents invest in the former, not the latter. So the children do not really have to love their parents.
This is especially true for adult children. While the parents are still young, they can potentially produce further offspring with whom the children share half their genes. So it might make sense for the children to invest in and take care of their parents, so that they can produce more siblings. But once the parents are past the reproductive age, this is no longer possible. So it makes no evolutionary psychological sense for adult children to take care of their elderly parents.
Yet the overwhelming evidence from most human societies shows that children do love their parents, and this is a theoretical puzzle for evolutionary psychology - although probably only for evolutionary psychology.
Here Are Some Thoughts That Are Unrelated, Yet Related To The Excerpts Above.
If You're A Physically Attractive Male With Above Average Intelligence And Above Average Athleticism, But No High Status Job (Or No Job At All, For That Matter) Or No Wealth And High Status Amongst Yours Peers Or Society As A Whole, Your Chances Of Attracting, Mating, And Reproducing With A High Mate Value Female Are Slim To None And You'll Be Resigned To Developing Relationships And Mating With Females That Are NOT Your Equal (Not Your Equal In Genetic Quality And, In Some Cases, Not Your Equal In Social Class And Socioeconomic Background) Because You Lack The Wealth, Power, And Status That All Females Have Evolved To Seek In A Male Mate. The Same Goes For Females Who Are Unattractive (UGLY) And/Or Older (Past Their Reproductive Prime). These Females May Have A High Status Job, May Have Wealth, And May Have High Status Amongst Their Peers And In Society As A Whole, But They Lack The Traits All Males Are Looking For In A Mate, Which Are Beauty (Signaling Good Genes, Fecundity, And Health) And Youthfulness (Signaling Fertility Or The Fact That One Is In Their Reproductive Prime).
Some Of You Who Are Reading What I'm Writing See ME Pushing A Shopping Cart With My Bags And Belongings In It As I Stroll From Place To Place. The Conflict Between How I Portray Myself On The Internet And What You See Of ME In Real Life Lead Some Of You Two Think, "Is He Somebody? No, He Can't Be Somebody. He Walks Around All Day Pushing A Shopping Cart!" Now Imagine If I Was Writing These Same Things (The Same Things I've Written On All Of My Blogs And Youtube Paiges), But Driving A Bentley With A Highly Attractive Blonde Haired, Blue-Eyed White Girl. What Would You Think Of ME Then? You Would Think, "THAT'S SOMEBODY. THAT'S A SUCCESSFUL ASS NIGGA!" Especially Considering All Of The Names I've Dropped And The Fact That You Now Know Who My Father IZ!
One More Thought. Technology Is Allowing Those Who Aren't Genetically Inclined To Loquaciousness (Talkativeness) And Extroversion* To Reproduce. How? By Allowing Them To Convey Their Thoughts, Beliefs, Interests, Preferences, And Emotions Through Nonverbal Means To Potential Mates. In Other Words, Thanks To Modern Technology And, Particularly The Internet, People Can Now Communicate With One Another Without Speaking And Needing To Think Quick On Their Toes. It Wasn't Always Like This, Though. In Fact, Since The Invention And Inception Of The Telephone And For The Vast Majority Of Modern Human Evolution (i.e. The Past 100,000 Years Ago Or Since We Evolved The Ability To Speak) It Was The Exact Opposite. You Had To Verbally Communicate And Be Able To Interact Face-To-Face With A Potential Mate And If You Couldn't Do This Well (If You Gave Off A Bad Vibe, If You Couldn't Hold A Conversation Or Maintain His/Her Interest Or Effectively Convey Your Thoughts, Feelings, Beliefs, Interests, Humor, Etc. To He/She) You'd Lose Him/Her And Thus Lose The Chance Of Reproducing With He/She. However, Because Of All Of The Nonverbal Technology That One Has Access To Today, The Necessity To Be Quick-Witted And Verbally Gifted Has Diminished. Why? Because You Can Now Rely On Text Messages, Emails, And Other Forms Of Nonverbal Communication Via Social Media To Get Your Point Across (Transmit Your Thoughts, Beliefs, Feelings, Etc.) To Potential Mates And Thus Potentially Win The Right To Mate With A Mate Without Being The Greatest Of Verbal Communicators. (The Selective Pressure On Being A Great Speaker (Having Great Verbal Ability), Having A Great Memory, Possessing Great Knowledge, And A Quick Sense Of Humor Has Lessened To A Large Extent. Females, Because Of Nonverbal Communication, Can Now Select Males To Have Children With Who Aren't As Great In These Regards.)
*The Same Reasoning Applies To Males And Females Who Are Less Sociable, Less Outgoing, Less Self-Promoting, Self-Aggrandizing, Less-Self Important, And More Reclusive, Reserved, Reticent, And Self-Effacing. Thanks To Modern Technology, Specifically FACEBOOK, INSTAGRAM, TWITTER, Etc., These Less Gregarious, Less Braggadocios, And Less Loquacious Types Now Have The Ability To Broadcast Themselves Via The Internet And, Hence, Advertise Their Personality Traits (Especially Those Traits Concerning Family And Friends), Abilities (Gifts/Skills), Interests, Beliefs, Preferences, Etc. To Hundreds Of Millions Of Potential Mates, Thus Allowing Them To Attract A Greater Number Of Mates And Potentially Achieve Greater Reproductive Success Than They Could Have Imagined Had This Technology Not Existed. (LOOK AT ME. WHAT FEMALES WOULD HAVE BEEN SEXUALLY ATTRACTED TO ME IF I HADN'T BROADCASTED ALL OF THIS INFORMATION ON THE INTERNET ABOUT MY FATHER, FAMILY, AND I AND ADVERTISED MY GENETIC SUPERIORITY? A DECENT NUMBER, BECAUSE I'VE ALWAYS ATTRACTED A DECENT NUMBER OF FEMALES, BUT NOT AS MANY AS THERE ARE NOW NOW THAT THE WORLD KNOWS I'M A SEXY* SON.)
*"I'M TOO SEXY FOR THAT MOTHAFUCCIN' WOOD, WOOD...I'M TOO SEXY FOR THAT MOTHAFUCCIN' GHOST RIDA!" - MR. FELONY
This Is What All Of You Look Like When You Plays Wit YO Technologies!
*The Same Reasoning Applies To Males And Females Who Are Less Sociable, Less Outgoing, Less Self-Promoting, Self-Aggrandizing, Less-Self Important, And More Reclusive, Reserved, Reticent, And Self-Effacing. Thanks To Modern Technology, Specifically FACEBOOK, INSTAGRAM, TWITTER, Etc., These Less Gregarious, Less Braggadocios, And Less Loquacious Types Now Have The Ability To Broadcast Themselves Via The Internet And, Hence, Advertise Their Personality Traits (Especially Those Traits Concerning Family And Friends), Abilities (Gifts/Skills), Interests, Beliefs, Preferences, Etc. To Hundreds Of Millions Of Potential Mates, Thus Allowing Them To Attract A Greater Number Of Mates And Potentially Achieve Greater Reproductive Success Than They Could Have Imagined Had This Technology Not Existed. (LOOK AT ME. WHAT FEMALES WOULD HAVE BEEN SEXUALLY ATTRACTED TO ME IF I HADN'T BROADCASTED ALL OF THIS INFORMATION ON THE INTERNET ABOUT MY FATHER, FAMILY, AND I AND ADVERTISED MY GENETIC SUPERIORITY? A DECENT NUMBER, BECAUSE I'VE ALWAYS ATTRACTED A DECENT NUMBER OF FEMALES, BUT NOT AS MANY AS THERE ARE NOW NOW THAT THE WORLD KNOWS I'M A SEXY* SON.)
*"I'M TOO SEXY FOR THAT MOTHAFUCCIN' WOOD, WOOD...I'M TOO SEXY FOR THAT MOTHAFUCCIN' GHOST RIDA!" - MR. FELONY
"You Know My Homegirl Loquacious?!"
There is evidence that females of a species as varied guppies,
Japanes medaka, black grouse, and Japanese quail prefer to mate with
males who have recently mated. Females use other females' choice of
males as evidence of their genetic quality; in other words, they copy
each other. And some suggest that human females might do the same.
The
idea is simple: If a woman meets a strange man, she has no basis on
which to form an opinion of him. He can be a high-quality. He can be a
high-quality man, or he can be a low-quality man; she just doesn't know.
However, if he has a wife, that means that at least one woman, who
presumably closely inspected his quality before marrying him, found him
good enough to marry. So he couldn't be that bad after all; at
least one woman found him desirable. So being married (the presence of a
wife) is one cross-culturally transportable ornamentation or lekking
device that signifies men's superior mate value
HOW WOULD THEY HAVE BEEN ABLE TO FORM A POSITIVE OPINION OF ME IF I HADN'T BROADCAST MYSELF AND MY UNIQUE, SUPERIORITY ON THE INTERNET? I DON'T HAVE A WIFE, I'M NOT A FAMOUS CELEBRITY, AND I DON'T HAVE PEOPLE SPEAKING ON MY BEHALF (VOUCHING FOR ME) ON TV OR THE INTERNET. SO HOW WOULD THEY HAVE KNOWN? THE SAME GOES FOR THE REST OF YOU ON SOCIAL MEDIA. HOW WOULD THOSE POTENTIAL MATES HAVE KNOWN ABOUT YOU AND BECOME SEXUALLY ATTRACTED TO YOU HAD YOU NOT HAD SOCIAL MEDIA?
I'm Working On A New Book. It's Going To Be Entitled Rich Kid, Poor Kid: How To Go From That To That At The Drop Of A Hat. (I'm Downwardly Mobile. Read Robert http://robertdputnam.com/ And His New Book!)
"THEY GONE LOVE YOU WHETHER YOU WANT 'EM TO LOVE YOU OR NOT PIMP! (PARENTS THAT IZ.)" - Peter Dagampat Ph.D.
