Best Evolution Montages

Hehe, just some silly fun.

The Simpsons -- Homer Simpson's Evolution

Big Bang Theory opening theme

Fatboy Slim "Right Here, Right Now"

I know some wannabe-badass middle-class white kid is going to be all butthurt because I did not include Pearl Jam's "Do the Evolution" here.  That is, if they are even old and decrepit enough (like us 90s teenagers) to be aware of its existence.  But I'm really not concerned.  I am not including it because man alive, that video is depressing, very violent, sociopathic, misanthropic.

If someone can't stand that I'm not including that video, and would prefer that I act all politically correct and pretend that this video is perfectly as creative and imaginative as the other three, get over yourself.  If you want to see the video so badly, go look for it on the youtube.

More Asian Students Needed to Study Liberal Arts

Dammit, Onion!  Hire me!!  Hire me!!  Look at me, I'm a good writer!!  I can totally do satire!  Why won't you hire me for freelance work??  Why won't you hire ANYONE for freelance work???
**********

Our society needs to acknowledge a growing need among the demographics of young people in higher education.  There are troubling trends in education that need to be addressed and that require action.  We need to establish scholarships for Asian students to encourage them to enter crap fields.  Colleges and universities in the western world are not doing enough to attract Asian students and South Asian students (Indo-Pak subcontinent) into, for example, business and behavioral sciences.

It is not only the fault of the institutions of higher learning.  As a society, we are not doing enough to attract Asian students to study liberal arts.  Asian and South Asian students have little to no incentive to enter, for example, health and human development.  There are no financial aid packages offered with the purpose of expounding to expose abstract wishy-washy job environments to Asian students.  There is very little effort being made to encourage Asian students to devote four or more years of their lives and approximately sixty thousand dollars (at state schools; private colleges charge even more) towards completing a degree subject that most elderly people have honorarily earned just by being a student of life.

How can we encourage Asian college students to major in such subjects as Graphic Communications, Psychology, Sports Journalism, and Business Management?  We need to do more to increase awareness and participation from Asian students into studying college majors that are not likely to get them jobs when they graduate.  Today, too many Asian and South Asian students, including international students, tend to enter the critical fields of Science, Math, Engineering, and Technology.

We must encourage Asian students to choose fields of study that will allow them to party, attend frat house social functions, get pregnancy scares, be promiscuous, and get wasted regularly, and still be able to scrape together a college degree.  Asian students wishing to attend college should be aware that these majors can be and are welcome to them.  Currently, Asian students tend to be concentrated within critical industry majors.

Deploying various strategies of advertising liberal arts majors as being more Asian-friendly would truly help out all parties involved.  This would ameliorate the gross inequality of distribution of races among college majors in any given college or university.  Doing this would allow more white and black students to enter the SMET fields because they would not be facing the brutal competition offered by their more naturally-skilled Asian competitors.  And also, in implementing this strategy, there would be more even distribution of the races among all the major concentrations.  It would be more palatable and not so politically incorrect.

Especially worrisome is the fact that among Asian and Indian students in the United States, the distribution of the sexes in the science fields is nearly 50-50.  If you look at the population of Asian students including international students, at any given university within the core sciences -- there is almost equal number of men students and women students studying mathematics and sciences.  What can we do to alleviate this gross injustice?

We must pioneer Asian students in droves, especially their women, so that they may discover the joys of slacking off and still be able to barely struggle to complete a Bachelor of Arts degree in Public Administration, Marketing, Theater, or Financial Management.

How can we adjust the number of Asian and Indian women studying science/technology versus liberal arts so that it more closely reflects the distribution of white women and/or black women?

Overall, we as a society, as a nation that used to have the most powerful GDP in the world up until about five years ago, need to do much more to increase awareness among Asian students that majors such as American Studies, Sociology, Art History, Gender Studies, and Communication Studies do exist.  They need to be aware that it is possible to drink, party, and be promiscuous for four years, (or some statistics show five to six years), and still complete a bachelor degree that is that is only marginally useful in today's hypercompetitive job market that includes international competitors.  We must do more to increase awareness among Asian and South Asian students that they should demand less from themselves than to enter a critical industry field that has an influx of skilled, talented, eager individuals from overseas.

How can we entice more Asian students to enter the vast, lucrative world of moving back home with their parents and folding sweaters at the Gap after finishing their four-year degrees in English Literature, Bachelor in Business Management, Bachelor of Arts in Biology, or Modern Languages?

Colleges and universities can certainly do their part to attract Asian students into vague subject fields by featuring success stories of Asians in the student handbooks and catalogs.  On their websites, universities could feature *catablogs* that chronicle a look inside an average day for an Asian student, whether full-time or part-time, who studies any of the liberal arts at the university.  Colleges and universities must begin early with their recruitment efforts.  They need to reach out to students while they are in high school and planning their college lives.

We must re-design recruitment efforts to be better-geared towards attracting Asian students.  This could include distributing brochures that feature testimonials from previous Asian students.  For example, an Asian student might have completed a degree in any chosen liberal arts field, and is now shift leader at Olive Garden.

Most guidance counselor offices in most high schools have a bookshelf for college advertisement literature.  They could carry pamphlets that bear photographs of Asian students enjoying a nice game of beer pong.  And it is not all just fun and parties.  Sometimes it is relaxation.  Communal marijuana bongs are a cornerstone of the world of Psychology with Emphasis in Community Studies.

All of these techniques also can be executed with slight modification for recruitment of international students.  Colleges and universities need to increase their efforts to reach out to students currently overseas in their native Asian nations.  College representatives could visit top high schools and secondary schools in foreign nations and persuade students to consider studying liberal arts abroad in America.  They could emphasize that some of the most popular majors among American students are, for example, Bachelor of Science in Health Science; Language and International Health; and Production Studies in Performing Arts.

It is essential that the fact be emphasized that these are very popular majors among American kids.  Fitting in, after all, is just as important as, if not more important than, getting a solid, useful education that has the end goal of getting a job.

This could be done in much the same fashion that athletic scouts from big sports-and-party schools go to high school football games and try to cajole popular football players into enrolling at their school on full rides.  If we are to remain a nation that used to be the most powerful free independent sovereignty on earth until a few years ago, then we need to take action now.

Abortion as a medical issue

Every time I read of someone being vehemently against abortion, I react with vitriol and loathing.  But admittedly, every time I read of someone that insists abortion is a good thing especially for a strong capable woman in charge of her own life, I also then react with vitriol and loathing.  This is possibly one of the very few sociopolitical issues that truly is complicated.

forcing a woman to go through a pregnancy against her will is cruel and unusual punishment.  Constitution of the United States, Amendment 8.  "no cruel and unusual punishments shall be remitted..."

if a patient should be made to sit through a reciting of all the possible complications that could arise from abortion.  Okay fair enough.  However, if this is the case, then the patient must also sit through a reciting of all the possible complications that could arise from pregnancy.  Fact:  [inlclude statistics from CDC] carrying a pregnancy to term is much more risky than having an abortion.  toxemia ___.

Anyone who thinks that pregnancy is NOT a potentially dangerous medicla condition that requiers extremem caution, medical care and attention, and close monitoring -- is lying to themselves.
[[[[[    CDC    ]]]]]  here is a list of physiologicla complications that WILL happen to a woman's body as a result of pregnancy.  Not "might happen," not "possibly happen," but WILL happen.

Here is a list of complications that MIGHT POSSIBLY happen to a woman's body as a result of pregnnacy.

as far as informing a woman of complications that could arise from having an abortion, I am all for it.  this is purely for medical reasons.  jsut like with any medical proceure, a patient has a right to know all the possible risks of having a proceudre done.  same as with heart surgery, colonoscopy, kidney transplant, bone marrow transplant, prescription for insulin, gene therapy, or any other medical procedure.
but informing a patient of risks involved CANNOT be done with the purpose of swaying the patient's opinion from one side of the sociopolitical pendulum to the other.

I am of the opinion that abortion may be vile, disgusting, and repulsive.  However, it is certain that it is even more vile, disgusting, and repulsive to force someone to carry a pregnancy to term if she does not want to.

Forcing a woman to go tbrough a pregnancy when she does not want to, is in itself a form of rape.  It is vile and disgusting to force a person to do something with her body that she does not want to.

and jsut as with any other medical proceudre, a patient has a right to privacy and doctor-patient confidentiality.  what the hell was the point of passing HIPAA laws if government officials, i.e., complete strangers, decide that they know better than the patient and her doctor what to do for the patient's health?

sicne we are so concerened with the supposed medical health of uteruses, I propose that we enact some additional public rulings that have to do wth the medical health of other internal organs of patients.

Should have to sit through an instrcutional video detailing the risks of smoking cigarettes. 

hard liquor.  SHould be given informational videos and pamphlets on the risks of drunk driving.  THey would also be given literature on the risks of cirrhosis, other liver diseases such as post-hepatic jaundice, and blood alcohol.
They would have to go through a twenty-four hour waiting period.  Then, if they really want that liquor, they can come back to the store and purchase it.

A customer that wants to purchase a Big Mac from McDonalds or a Double Whopper from Burger King should be given a waiting period of twenty-four hours and should be given informational pamphlets on the risks of heart disease, diabetes, and kidney failure.

A customer's buying habits should be monitored and officially recorded.  Many customers amass purchases of large amounts of candy, soft drinks, and other unhealthy food over a period of several days.  The next time the customer goes into a grocery store, he or she should have to refrain from buying any more junk food and should be given a 24-hour waiting period so that they can think about their health.

be honest now.  you just want to punish the woman for having sex.
some commentors in support of this will even come right out and say, "if she didn't want to have a baby, then she should not have had sex."  "Abortion is murder, and if you're irresponsible and you get pregnant that's your fault."  In response to an OP:  "Why is it okay to cut spending for Planned Parenthood, but NOT okay to cut tax breaks for big oil companies?"  post  "Well, we need oil. If people can't keep their legs together, it is their own dam [sic] fault."  in essence they are stating that a woman shoiuld be punished because she had sex and whatever birth control was used (if it was even used at all) did not work.

Well, as far as the philosophical aspect, to be honest I agree with conservativees -- it is about morals and self-respect.  look, as far as the opinions about calling a woman irresponsible, stupid, also (I apolgize in advance for my upcoming offensive remarks) slut, whore, dumb bitch -- I don't know that there is much that can be done to stop opinions.  if we are going to say that opinions such as these should be kept to oneself, then that would have to be all-inclusive of all personal opnions across the board.  all opnions that call 'em as they see 'em would have to be silenced.  including calling out philandering politicians, corrupt CEOs, corrupt politicians, and the ilk.  like in that everlast song that mentioned a pregnant girl that went to a clinic to seek help, "they call her a killer, they call her a sinner, they call her a whore." 

yeah, so?  what else would you call it?  everyone can have all your opinions, I'm fine with that.  I beleive in freedom of thought; you cannot censor opinions, and that includes conservaticve republican opnions.  and by the way, personally I do agree with those opnions.  I am also of the opnion that a person is an irrensonsilbe idioit if they had sex butr did not bother to use birth control.  I am also of the opnion that a person is an idiot if they have sex but do not want to deal with the possiblity that pregnancy could occur.  everyone has a right to judge all they want.  like I said, freedoim of thought includes the freedom to judge.

but this does NOT give anybody the right to legistlate that a woman should be forced to go trhough a pregnancy.  from the standpoint of a healthcare employee, from an ethical standpoint, I cannot force a woman to carry a pregnancy through to term if she does not want to.  morally and ethically I see that as being wrong.  many other healthcare workers agree with me.

you want to be offended by the fact that women have sex.  fine, whatever.  but your personal opinions, incuding things that you are offended by, cannot mandate governemental legislature or medical practice.

also, since we love making people sit thorugh lectures, I propose that we also do the follwing.  Anytime a customer goes to a restaurant and orders veal or lamb, and also any time a customer goes to a grocery store and purchases veal or lamb or any other animal product, we should make the customer sit thorugh an informational video that includes footage of the innocent happy little animal frolicking through lush green fields, minding its own business, occasionally stopping to graze on the silky green grass.  the customer should also have to sit through a video that documents the farmhouse slaughter mthods, the killing of the animal, the skinning, and the cutting up the meat for the butcher.

then the customer would have to wait twenty-four hours to think on it, and then would have to come back to the restrurant if they truly still want to order that menu item.

now, as most people will probably agree with me, forcing a customer to sit thorugh all that crap is idiotic.  it is also encroaching on their right to eat whatever the hell they want.  it is ludicrous, tedious, preachy, didactic, and a royal pain in the ass.

please do me a favor and don't bother preaching about castles in the sky as a so-called arguemtn against abortion.  do us all a favor and don't bother yakking eloquent on cotton-candy clouds of imagination.  "how many untold potential geniuses have been aborted?"  "how many world-class scientists have been aborted?"  "how many of those babies might have cured cancer?"  please just stop it.  all of the above is a mythological, non-existent ether.  it does not exist.  there is nothing out there.  they are not living, they never were living, they will not be living.  resorting to non-existent gods out of machines is simply not illogical.

I know America hates science and math from every possible angle, from extremist Christians that think that studying science is a sin, to liberals that believe in social promotion regardless of actual achievement and who think a structured learning environment is too constricting and limiting, and that we should not judge anyone based on how stupid they are, etc.

there are tons of things that licensed medical doctors, i.e., not the patient, have to take care of that is the patient's own damn fault.  a diseased lung, a diseased liver, diabetes and heart disease brought on by eating unhealthily, being lazy, and not taking care of oneself.  how is abortion any different?

"a human zygote *is* a full-fledged human, merely at a very early stage of his or her development"

Oh geez, blogger, you're going to try for that "age ain't nothin but a number" crap?

I believe that's the same argument that pedophiles use for molesting children.
---
"But age, like race, sex, sexual orientation, and a thousand other things, is just a characteristic of an individual."

No, age is not the same thing as race, sex, or sexual orientation. Those last three things are absolutes that do not change throughout an individual's lifetime.

Age, on the other hand, is by its very definition something that changes throughout an individual's lifetime. This includes age and developmental state of a fetus or that of an infant.

It denotes emotional maturity, ability for logic and reasoning, physical maturity, and sexual maturity. Just as it is not possible for a child to give consent to have sex with an adult, it is not possible to equate an undeveloped fetus with a fully-formed human being.

"Phineas and Ferb" TV Show

That cartoon show on Disney, “Phineas and Ferb,” is awesome.  I love how they randomly break into song at random times throughout the show.  I want "Kids, Defeat That Gelatin Monster" as my new ringtone.  Do you have any idea how much work, thought, planning must go into that show to come up with several songs per episode?  I remember some a&e reviewer saying about the show “Glee,” that the writers could not possibly come up with original songs for every episode.  Well, Phineas and Ferb does it.  They can handle it, so why can't Glee?  I love all the characters.  Question-- why does Ferb have a British accent if he’s American?  Answer-- he gets that from his father.  Um, yes, but--

Moving on.  I love the character Baljit, the sweet nerdy science-y, very high-frequency-voiced Indian kid.  You see, Asians meaning Far Easterners have been in popular culture for so long that they have been gaining cool ground; they are no longer seen as science nerds.  However, South Asians, individuals from the Indo-Pak subcontinent, are just recently entering pop culture.  Many people are not aware of them yet, so I am happy that the “Phineas and Ferb” creators have acknowledged this rather sleepy cultural trend that is barely tiptoeing in the snow towards us.

One theme of the show that demonstrates how ingenious the creators are...
....and the thing that drives Candace the older sister completely batty... is the fact that one problem solves another problem.  Somehow it always works out that Doofenschmirtz Evil, Inc.'s latest R&D project renders moot Candace’s latest complaint about her brothers.  Doofenschmirtz manages to cancel out any ricochet [[[or delayed-reaction]]] effects on society or the space-time continuum that Phineas and Ferb’s latest endeavor causes.

I don’t know why this show receives almost no media hype whatsoever.  Whereas that other show, SpongeBob Squarepants, has been hailed everywhere, from SNL to Conan Obrien, to MSNBC.  It made a huge splash on the collective psyches of our nation, and it is forever ingrained in our sense of selves.  (By no means do I mean to malign SpongeBob of course.  I love SpongeBob; I totally named my kitchen sink scrub brush after him.)

"Community" TV Show

I only recently started watching the television show "Community."  Yes I had heard about it before now; I understand the first season just ended with the 2009-2010 season.  I had seen the pre-air promos way back last summer.  But the few times I caught the show on TV, I always happened to catch the very few, very boring episodes.  Like the paintball episode.  I swear I've seen like a million TV shows where the people take a game of paintball waaay too seriously.  And there was the psychology episode where the students finally start taking notes on the psychology teacher, kinda predictable.  In related news, maybe I watch too much TV.  Anyway, on to more optimistic things.

I love the speed and pacing of this show.  Jokes come at you fast and furious, a hundred miles a minute. By the time the first joke sinks in, they've already delivered the next one.  Try to keep up, sweetie.  Plus, I can relate to the show because I went to community college myself.  And I gotta say, whoever does the set design, has it absolutely on the money.  I wonder if they film on an actual vocational/technical college campus.  The libraries, the study rooms, the dean's office, all that good stuff, that really is what a community college looks like.  And I am loving that school spirit clap thing that keeps playing in the background throughout the first episode.

Boring shows that are full of themselves and so enamored by their own witty selves like “The Office” get awards and crap out the wazoo, get hyped everywhere by everyone in the media.  And "Community" gets no recognition, nothing.  I didn't even bother to pay attention to this show until I happened to be watching NBC one late spring evening and they were running a "Community" marathon.

I like the way that the jokes are deployed.  A lot of other shows will set up a bon mot or observation, and then will immediately, apparently to rebel, will demonstrate the complete opposite as an exhibition of the opposite extreme to tear down the set-up.  Even some of our beloved favorites do this:  The Simpsons, 30 Rock, Scrubs, there are others.  But “Community” doesn’t do that.  They are much more creative, and somehow always get me.  Witness this exchange during the Christmas episode, between the Joel McHale character and the bully.

***Update:  Darnit, youtube removed the video.  That stinks.  Well, take my word for it, it was funny.

I didn’t think he was really going to be so naive as to actually try that…  Oh wait, he did.  Admit it, it’s not original to see victims try to stand up to the bullies on TV.  "Community" is building upon the jaded cynical audience who have seen tons of the same crap recycled on TV -- we have seen victims stand up to bullies and it worked; more recently we have seen victims stand up to bullies and it did not work because the TV show was trying to be irreverent and wanted to show the painful truth behind all that feel-good psychology crap.  So we're really not sure what direction "Community" will go.

However, the constant other-TV-show references merely make them seem waaaaaaaayyyyy too self-conscious.  It’s like they are shifting uncomfortably in their seats and saying in a slightly whiny voice, "We know.  We’re going ahead and accusing ourselves of this before anyone else can.  We’re going on the offense and preemptively addressing ourselves so that no one else can accuse us of it."

It’s like they're trying to prove too hard that they are uncomfortably aware that they are picking and choosing little bits and pieces of inspiration from all manner of TV shows that have come before them.  Then the writers and producers and directors thrust some reels into my hand.  "Yeah... we know the places that we are taking cues from.  Here are the spools that we found to prove it.  Preemptive strike."  Still, funniest show I have seen in a while.

Liberals and Other Babies

*This is a copy of a post entry on my other blog.  But it is of such great importance that it bears repeating.
----------

Sigh of exhaustion.  Okay, look, I have tried my damnedest to pretend that unplanned pregnancies are equally the male and the female's fault, that responsibility is shared 50/50 between the two parties, that it takes two to tango, et cetera.

But sigh, I just can't keep up this charade any longer.  I have been beating myself in the head forcing myself to feel what I do not feel, forcing myself to be politically correct, forcing myself to pretend that my feelings are not what they truly are, and forcing my logical to not arrive at the conclusions to which it arrives.  I have been shoving my cognition processes and natural feelings into doing what society at large approves of, and when I say "society," I mostly mean the mass media.  Ever since time immeasurable, liberal media pop culture has promoted an unrealistic extreme stance that is mostly reactionary to religious zealot born-again Christian unrealistic extreme stance.

My long treatise where I am taking mostly females to task for not wanting to accept any responsibility whatsoever for creating a fetus.  The females are saying it's entirely the male's fault for getting them pregnant, that she herself had no hand in the matter, she was a good pure angelic little angel that did absolutely nothing to warrant a pregnancy.  The males do not want to take any responsibility whatsoever, they skip town, they haul ass, they take a bus ticket and leave, blah blah.  Conservatives tend to only blame the female, and liberals tend to only blame the male.  Come on, people, Lauryn Hill has already told us all this, twelve years ago with “That Thing,” but it seems that skulls have only gotten thicker since then, so it bears repeating.

First of all I need to establish clarity that I am specifically talking about consensual acts between two people similar in age.  I am NOT talking about r---, pedophilia, statutory, or other sexual abuse.  That is not the same thing as sex between two people who both agreed to do it.  Those are sick depraved crimes that the a-hole needs to rot in prison for, and after that in hell, and that is another issue entirely.

****

I thought feminism was supposed to be about women having rights, including rights over what do with their own bodies.  And rightfully so.  That is absolutely correct.  That is finally having some long-awaited evolution in human thought and procession that has been a long time coming.  Women should not have to sell their bodies.  Women, just like men and children, have the inherent human right to decide not to do something with their bodies.  They have the intrinsic, undeniable right to say NO.  Women should never have to be faced with the cruelty of having to cough up a reason NOT to do something with their bodies.  You have to believe me on this, I am glad that this is the case.

But then you know what?  That also means you have to take that much *responsibility* for your actions.  That means you have to take that much responsibility for your body.

I'm sorry women, but the notion that someone else has to take responsibility for what *your* body does is illogical bullshyte.  I do not understand the justification for this pseudo-philosophy at all.  It is frankly insulting to me as a woman that some people think that a female should not be considered responsible for causing her own damn pregnancy.

It is also insulting, not to mention illogical, that a woman should only be considered 50% responsible and no more.  That's right, I said it.  I fervently believe that a woman inherently carries greater responsibility for causing a fetus than a man does.  I don't care how politically incorrect this sounds; it is common sense.  Not to mention, it is simple biology.  It is the truth.

I rescind statements in my earlier articles wherein I insisted that a pregnancy is equal responsibility of the two contributing parties.  Pregnancy is NOtttt equally the responsibility 50/50 of the two participants.  I had been beating my brains out for many years trying to force myself into believing that the fault lies equally with both parties.  But I cannot deny what I truly think.  Sorry, but I don't buy that.  I never truly have.  It just seems plainly illogical.  Your body, you are the one that would get pregnant, therefore your share of responsibility is greater than the male's.

It is insulting for a woman not to be considered the responsible party, because it implies that she is a stupid invalid who does not understand cause and effect, actions and consequences.  It implies that she is a primitive idiot that has no control over what she decides to do with her body.  It is insulting because it means that a given female does not possess rational decision-making capabilities.

Shockingly and unfortunately, in this modern day and age females are the ones primarily making this false claim that they bear little responsibility for creating a fetus.  Females are astoundingly the ones making the false claim that men are responsible for making sure females don't get pregnant.  Females are trying to make the claim that what their own damn uteruses do is someone else's fault.

This is illogical and bizarre.

You can't be all, "it's MY body, I have the right to do whatever I want with MY body" -- But then at the same time, then refuse to take responsibility for what you consensually did with your own body.

Sorry girls, but it doesn’t work that way.  From a practical, logical standpoint it does not work, and from a philosophical standpoint it does not work.  Come on, females, I figured this out when I was twelve years old in the seventh grade while watching news stories about teen pregnancies.  And now that I look over things, I realize it does not work that way with anything in life.  If you have that much rights, then you have that much responsibility.

Why are you girls being that ignorant and expecting someone else to care about YOUR body?  If you can’t even be careful enough to respect your OWN body, you sure as hell can't expect someone else to care about your body for you.

For god's sakes, it's *your* body, so act like it.  It's YOUR body, so it's YOUR responsibility.

I just don’t get the way some females think.  For goodness sake, it’s YOUR body; YOU are the one who would have to pay the biggest price if things go wrong with sex.  Therefore it only makes sense that YOU should be more careful and less sloppy than a guy would.  It only makes sense that you would be more vigilant.  Have some goddamn accountability for what you do to yourself.

Being a woman, I know for a fact that if something goes wrong with the birth control, anything at all, *I* am the one who would have to pay the biggest price, *I* am the one who would have to suffer the worst consequences.  This is basic biology.  Therefore, it only makes sense that I am the one who should be more vigilant about these things.  It is the logical, common sensical thing.  That I should be more vigilant about taking care of MY body, more vigilant about respect for MY body.  Why the hell would I want to risk screwing up my life, screwing up my body, screwing up my health for some guy?  If some guy doesn’t respect that, then you need to respect yourself and kick that guy out of your life.

Feminism has demanded that men, and other women of course, respect our bodies.  They should, there is no question about that.  It only works, however, if you respect your own body first.

Do some of us girls need to review basic biology?  Ever heard of pregnancy?  Ever heard of how it happens?  Ever heard of which of us humans would have to do it?  If you are pregnant, you are not going to be able to unload and shove the pregnancy onto the guy with whom you got that way, as much as you would like to.

I remember back in the early 1990s, the news was ablaze with all those reports of how "ohmigosh the guys are getting girls pregnant.  The teenage boy pigs with their evil sadistic sperm are getting these sweet angelic pure little teenage girl angels pregnant."  And yet almost simultaneously, the current events were also fired up with stories of how "strong capable women are in charge of their own bodies."

Even back then to my own tween ears, this sounded patently asinine.  If she is really in charge of her own body, then why is it only the guy's fault?

If the consequences are such a biiigg responsibility that it would jeopardize your life, then guess what.  It should have been a big enough risk to think about before you had sex.  Do me a favor and don't tell me, "hindsight is twenty-twenty" or "Monday morning quarterbacks" or any of that crap.  One, this is a basic rule of biology.  And Two, this is a major derailing from course if things go wrong.  Together, that should give anyone with half a brain lobe enough incentive to think before they act.  (Not even half a brain is required; only half of one lobe is sufficient.)

YOUR body -- YOUR responsibility.

You are greater than 50 percent responsible for bringing that baby into the world.  Yet you are sitting there acting as if you are zero percent responsible.  When you made the decision to have sex possibly with crappy birth control, you knew what the consequences were going to be.  Again, perhaps we should review basic biology.

I will not ever, nor do I ever plan to, understand why so many females sleep with males that do not give a crap about them.  I am going to declare the following statement and I do not care how much this offends liberals.  I do not care how much this offends those rather unhinged, few-screws-loose whory nutbags who deign to call themselves "feminists" or "girl power" or whatever.

Here is the statement:  If you females don't want to get pregnant, then don't have sex.  Simple as that.  This quite literally is not rocket surgery.

Perhaps we need a trip back to sixth grade sex-ed class.  Believe it or not, sex can lead to pregnancy.  Yeah, new groundbreaking research, just discovered.  (Turn to the person on my right.)  Did you know that sex can lead to pregnancy?  (Turn to the person on my left.)  Did you know that sex can lead to pregnancy?  Cause I did.  And apparently I am alone in this super duper multi looper top-secret Pentagon-security clearance-level knowledge.

Especially if you did not bother to be hyper-vigilant with the birth control.  This is a subtle truth that seems to be lost on a lot of people.  Just one form of birth control alone is usually not enough to prevent pregnancy.

This is also something that was covered in middle school sex ed.  I remember we got a chart that listed all the different types of birth control available, and it also listed the statistical efficacy of each of those birth control options.  I remember that condoms hovered at about 90%.  Hormonal birth control pills were at a crisp 99%.  But again dood, if you are only relying on your sex partner to take care of fetus prevention, then it is your own fault for being a gullible idiot.  You don't want to face responsibility, then take precautions yourself.  Just because you didn't learn about this stuff in sixth grade is no excuse not to know now.  What the hell are any of you thinking, having sex without making sure you don't reproduce?

YOUR uterus -- YOUR responsibility.

Oh, waaaaiiiiit now I like totally get it.  So you’re saying you're nothing but a plastic mannequin dummy that does not participate in your own life.  You have no control, you have no say over what happens to you, no control over what you make happen to yourself.  You’re saying you’re an auxiliary spectator bystander in your own damn life.  Suuuurrrrreee.

You don’t want to take care of your own body, and you expect him to take care of your body for you?

Wrong.  YOUR body -- YOUR responsibility.

This is going to elicit a predictable response from a lot of people -- “Oh you have no respect for women, you think women should be staying in the kitchen barefoot and pregnant.  Oh you hate strong independent women.”  These people think I am saying that the girl is wrong for giving it up without a wedding ring and the ilk.  And then they accuse me of not liking strong women, ad nauseum.

Sigh.  Forehead into my hands.  Lord, you don't even know.  You really don't have a clue, do you?  I am NOT saying you females are being too strong and independent.

I am saying that you females are not being strong and independent *enough*.  For god’s sake, have some cynicism.  Have some healthy skepticism, have some suspicion.  It will serve you well in life.  If the guy says, "yeah baby don’t worry about it, I’ve got it covered, I’ll wear a condom" -- don’t believe him.  Take whatever precautions you have to, to protect yourself.  You need to worry about yourself first.  You need to do what you have to, to preserve your own physical health and safety.

YOUR body -- YOUR responsibility.

Some analogies:  a) Free speech -- the first amendment is supposed to mean that with great freedom comes great responsibility.  (However in weird ways this has been both abused and restricted, but that is a different essay.)  b) Medical doctors -- if they are given that much authority, given that much power in society, then so too do they have that much responsibility to be benevolent and magnanimous to their patients.  c) Corporate execs that run the economy thought they were above and exempt from responsibility that naturally accompanies economic power, and look where the country is now.  d) Celebrities, though not actually powerful, more like just subject to constant peeping tomfoolery, engage in cheap publicity stunts all the time -- sex tapes, wardrobe malfunctions, cokeouts and other forms of public OD-ing.  But then they turn around and whine and complain that people don't respect their privacy.  It is a comical, pathetic degree of non-self-awareness.

What I’m hearing is that apparently a lot of guys say to girls, "don't worry baby, nothing will happen, nothing will go wrong."  Apparently the girl believes him.  Again, let us review basic sex ed class from sixth grade.  (Well, then again, I had sex ed in fifth grade, sixth grade, seventh grade, and eighth grade, and then also in tenth grade, so maybe I'm more informed than most.)  There is no birth control that exists that is one hundred percent fool-proof effective.

"""Well I totally say he should stay and take care of his responsibility..."""

Oh yeah?  How’s that working for ya?  He could skip town, and then what would you do?

*****

And YOU.  (Rounding on the males this time and yelling at them.)

Unfortunately, this is the reality for males.  After you have delivered your genetic material, there is not much more you can do after that.  The male is not really able to take part in the decision of whether or not the blastula and zygote will be allowed to grow to full term.

You are probably thinking this is incredibly unfair.  I agree, it is unfair.  Unfortunately, once the horse has left the starting gates, there is not much you can do about it at that point.  After that, because the fetus is housed within the female's body, it becomes solely her decision whether or not to keep it.  And once it becomes an actual human being and is popped out, you have to support it.  That is the morally right thing to do.  After it is born, it is a human being, and it the duty of both parents to support it and take care of it.

I know what you are thinking.  You are thinking that with this mention of being "morally right," the female should have been morally right and not had sex with a casual acquaintance in the first place.  I agree with you, she should not have.  But we have witnessed that she is phenomenally stupid.  Her decision-making abilities, judgment, and morals are woefully subpar.  Her respect for her own body and reproductive capabilities is nil.

By associating with a female like that, you are stuck.  You should not have taken a chance with a chick that is so stupid that she can't be bothered to care about her own reproductive health.

I remember an episode of ER where a girl came into the emergency room, and she was pregnant in addition to whatever ailment befell her.  She wasn’t showing yet, it seemed the pregnancy was in the early stages.  She wanted to keep the baby.  The um, father, sperm donor, whatever you want to call it, vehemently did not want her to keep it.  I honestly don’t remember if she expected anything from the guy or not.  (If she did expect the guy to stay with her and help with everything, she was 100 percent justified in doing so.)  But she was willing to keep the baby.  She was going to be a mother -- she had accepted that it was happening and she made her peace with it.  And I dare say, now that she had accepted it, she was looking forward to it and was happy about it.

Unfortunately... he served her some sort of herbal concoction, some sort of tea or something -- that induced a miscarriage.  He served it to her with the specific purpose of inducing a miscarriage, will full intent of doing so.  I believe he had to go to some sort of specialty shop that was really far out of the way to obtain that herbal stuff.  In short, he aborted the baby without her consent.

And the ER resident physician called the cops on his ass for committing murder.  I agree with the physician one hundred percent.  Damn right he should have called the police.

Look, biological father dude, she has decreed that the fetus will become a human being, and that decision is final.  She decided it is.  Therefore it is.  This is reality.  Accept it.

Dear reader, whether you are a man or a woman, you might have picked up on another point I’m trying to make.  I've noticed this for a very long time, at least since high school.  Women in general are not nearly as “pro-choice” (i.e., pro-abortion) as the media makes them out to be.  And men are not nearly as pro-life as the media makes them out to be.  To be honest, this is really rather puzzling to me, but it is what's out there.

Sure, the media hypes that all women are pro-choice and all men are pro-life, but this is a far cry from what I have witnessed in my dealings with actual people.  Most women I have seen and read comments from, are overjoyed to be growing a fetus.  This is usually regardless of their marital status with the biological father (which frankly I find exasperating and abhorrent but that's not the point).  I have also seen in message boards the internet over, in various word-choice permutations, men keep writing sickening crap synonymous with the following:  "waaaaaahhh!!  why don't us poor mens get a choice not to take responsibly for keeping a fetus???  if it takes two to create it, then it should take two to decide if it lives!!!  this is going to cramp my game!!!  I don't want a fetus so she should have killed it!!!"

I’m pro-choice enough, but even I have to admit that if a woman does not want to kill her fetus, then she does not want to.  End of discussion.  To demand a woman kill her fetus against her will is pretty gruesome and abusive.

*****

I will end this diatribe with addressing all of society, specifically both the men and women conservatives that demand, that do not want women to be in control of their own bodies.

Extreme conservative republicans in society will probably reply aghast, offended.  "So wait a minute -- are you saying that it’s all up to her??!  Are you dare saying it is ultimately up to the person who is actually carrying the fetus and would potentially have to go through forty grueling weeks of backbreaking labor beginning with morning sickness; completely changing around her metabolism and chemistry; devouring a great deal of her body's nourishment, blood supply, and oxygen requirement; making her more susceptible to various viral or bacterial illness because in order for a pregnancy to work a woman's immune system has to almost completely shut down?  What about the rest of society?  Are you saying WE don’t get a say in whether or not she should keep the fetus?"

DAMN STRAIGHT.

Yes, that is EXACTLY what I am saying.

That is the pregnant woman’s decision -- the decision is ultimately hers, about whether or not to have this fetus.  It is the woman’s job, that right, the pregnant woman’s decision, whether or not this fetus is a baby or not.

If she decides to keep the baby, and raise it and grow it into a human being, then back the hell off.  That is her decision.  If she decided to get rid of the fetus, then back the hell off.

You conservatives don't want her to abort the fetus.  But she wants to, get the hell over it.  Now, I do agree with conservatives in my personal opinion of abortion.  I do consider it morally reprehensible, if it is not in the case of extreme need and is simply used as a form of birth control.  However, it is that woman's body and she has a right to keep her body healthy.  Nobody on this planet has a right to harm her body.  Yes, that's right, from a medical scientific standpoint, pregnancy does more harm to the body than good.  And therefore if the woman is not one hundred percent consenting to grow the fetus to term, that is harm to her body.

Some conservative will ask, aghast:  Oh dearie me, are you saying that the woman who houses the fetus has the ultimate say in what happens to that fetus?  Are you saying that it's up to the woman tasked with the burden of carrying it, to decide whether it will live or not?  To decide the course of time-space that this timeline will travel?  The course of what will potentially or won't potentially happen in this crossroads??

Yes.  That is exactly what I am saying.

Liberals and conservatives are both incredibly stupid for the most part.  They usually fall neatly into two very disturbing, pathologically far-gone camps.  One school of thought states that people including women should take responsibility for their own actions, for their decisions, for what happens in their life.  That's fine, but unfortunately this is extended to the notion that absolutely anything that happens in a woman's life is her fault.  Including the situation where (god forbid) she is a crime victim.  Still conservatives have the sick, nasty notion to blame the woman for a crime that some sickeningly subhuman hominid carried out on her.  The other equally depraved, troubling, but on the opposite extreme of the spectrum notion, that of liberals, declares that nothing, absolutely nothing that happens in a woman's life is her responsibility.

To pop culture atheists- a word to the self-proclaimed "wise"

To Sam Harris and all you lot:  Yeah, right.  As if people need religion as an excuse to be aholes.  They can do bad all by themselves.

Re:  your declaration that North Korea is not truly an atheist country.

Who was it that said that a lot of moderate religious types, no matter what the denomination, have a sort of stock answer?  If confronted with the reality of self-proclaimed "Muslims" or "Christians" committing violence and abuse, the moderate declares that those are not "real" Muslims or Christians.  Therefore this declaration, and subsequent refusal to discuss nitty gritty details, kills any meaningful discussion of the topic.

Oh, that was you, wasn't it?

I hate to break it to you... aw hell, no I don't.  Revelation:  you are using the exact same argument that religious types use, only now it is framed from your reference.

Time Keeps On Slippin'

http://www.amazon.com/tag/textbook/forum/ref=cm_cd_pg_pg2?_encoding=UTF8&cdForum=FxSTS4YUE7GADZ&cdPage=2&cdSort=oldest&cdThread=Tx1YK0QNSJ43U9L

It’s not just a matter of that -- students wanting to buy textbooks used because they cannot realistically afford the latest edition; or publishing companies gouging college bookstores, which in turn gouge students and their parents.  This debate about used book stores has been going on for a few years now.

But previously it has been more focused on the fact that UBS owners still have to pay publishing companies some sort of royalty, even though the pubcom has already BEEN paid royalty the first time that a specific book was sold, wherever it was sold. 

It also lies at the heart of freedom of information, which in my opinion is the only thing that freedom of speech is good for.  Textbooks are genuine information, they should be readily available to people who want to know the truth.  Same as news and current events.  How many Americans really truly know what the government does, what the govmit's motivations are?  I do not, and you do not.

This is very bad, because that means there is a blocking of freedom of information.  How many Americans really know what the healthcare industry's machinations and inner workings are?  That means all healthcare workers including physicians, the health insurance industry which is sickeningly for-profit, any and all biomedical research, biochemical research, treatment research.

Why does the law, federal and most state, allow credit card companies and banks that offer loans, to force a customer's wallet to bleed to death?  Why have workers'/employees' wages risen only 20% since 1980, yet the price of goods and services has risen 400%?  If the prices have risen, then money has to be paid for those prices of products and services.  And that money has to go somewhere -- but where?  It is not going to the employees' paychecks.  We know that -- employees’ salaries have only risen 20%.  The rest of the money paid by customers is going to the CEOs/bigwigs/fatcats only.

I digress.  The topic was textbooks and bound-print media.  There is a much, much bigger silent revolution occurring here, for the better or for the worse.  It is the reason that newspapers all over the country are going out of business.  It is like the Chinese say, a slowly waking giant dragon, something like that.

Well, in this case it is not really a "waking giant."  The giant has only been created as a laboratory experiment recently, and it is now slowly being unleashed and foisted on the public.  Some dumb liberal tongue-pierced-and-other-extremities-pierced liberals often screech "all content wants to be free."  How the f' would you know?  Are you content (KAHN-tent)?  Have you ever written or otherwise created anything worth discussing intelligently?

We are moving away from a paper and pen ink society, to a digitized society.  That one editorial writer noticed this in regards to monetary transactions.  We are moving slowly but surely, away from a paper bills and coins economy towards electronic everything -- debit cards, online banking, online bill paying.

We’ve been doing this with music for a few years now.  Ten years ago I predicted that musicians will judge popularity of a song based on how many downloads it gets on peer-to-peer file-sharing networks.  Guess what -- that came true.  The “Opus” comic lampooned this trend, showing a young kid gawking confusedly at paper and thinking it was like crispy Kleenex.  Amazon.com found a way to make money off of this with its "look ma, no paper" Kindle toys.

I do not know if "cultural revolution" is the best term to call it, for what does digital vs. ink-on-tree have to do with culture?

Game changer.  Should we be alarmed?  I think that maybe none of us fully grasp the ramifications of this.  It is changing, it is really changing.  If this leads to much more open, truly available information, then it is good.  Witness the NCBI site.  You want to know the nucleotide sequence for any of numerous allergy genes, and the corresponding protein sequence that that nucleotide directs?  That’s your guy.

We are on the precipice of a universal paradigm shift to a majority digitized society.

Are We De-Evolving As A Species?

I have noticed a weird trend now for a few years:  Are we as a human species de-evolving?

several factors documented in news reports support this thesis.  First of all, let us review certain truths about evolution and progress.  behavior is the [[[[primary, foremost, utmost___]]] is most indicative of evolution.
let me emphasize that behavior is the number one determinant of evolution.  physical or sexual biological imperatives are not indicators of evolutionary fitness, not any more.

1)  in terms of stupidity and/or in terms of being violent and easily excitable.
back in caveman days, stupid or violent overly aggressive people [[[untimelydeqth nope not quite.]]]]
These would have been the first ones to die out.

2)  unfortunately, the behavior indicators of empathy, compassion, and pity for fellow humans -- when together with the former, have a backfiring effect.  from the majority population....
instead of letting violent psychopaths, drug dealers, and other criminals meet their just demise,
__instead we take pity on them and offer them welfare. ((just remb, would have to have been 2005, in my ultra-conservative days of hattting on welfare queens.)))  offer them rehab.  liberals make the rest of society subsidize and give them "guidance" rather than exacting justice and making them pay for their crimes.

3)) also the ones that are horrible at future planning, risk assessment,
e.g. the ones that have way too many babies with no regard to their well-being, their safety, or their probability of living in safe, clean habitable conditions.
--eegg., no regard to how to take care of oneself;;;make one's own livelihood,, no job planning, no career prospects, no thought to how one will support oneself in the future.  nor any future progeny.
--no regard to how they are going to feed and clothe all those offspring.  how are they going to really invents and take care of them in the way that humans do, wash and bathe them, keep them clean, teach them to read and write and count, teach them manners.
--in traditional evolutionary [[[measures, spectrums, spectra]]]
    the extraneous surplus babies would starve and die out.  allowing nature to maintain an equilibrium.  the population numbers of [[[___]] would be kept in check by natural selection.  Even if they were too ignorant to___, nature would make sure they could not get away with it.  (Perhaps "ignorant" is not the correct word; animals are not accused of being ignorant.

***•** notes on whyy hvnf abrt <<<<isss>>> taking care of your reaponsilbity.
** actu not tooo crazy about this
all the reasons that they had a baby out of wedlock and were stupid and irresponsible -- are all the exact same reasons that they would be terrible parents
-so it's better that that they just nip it in the bud.
---save society the pain and heartache ___of having to deal with a juvenile delinquent.  __and save society the pain and suffering of having this individual ___which will probably reach age eighteen and graduate to committing reall crimes.  Better to [[[pree-emptive strike avoid, sidestep, surpass__]]] all that mess,,, save taxpayer dollars having to be wasted on jail, prison, etc.
----[[[itthe creature]]] would be a waste of space and public school efforts trying to civilize it.
,,,before then itwillnprobabl get to age fifteen and create even moreee future juvenile delinquents.  Which in turn would create more once they reach physical maturity.  and perpetuate a cycle that is nothing more than a [[[[vicious circle]]].

this is the MAy-johr indicator.,, the |oiece de resistance**
[[**remember that intelligence is far better indicator of evolutionary superiority than any biological imperative.]]
precisely the reasons that an organism would choose NOTttt to reproduce -- are the exact selfsame reasons that it actually would be a good parent.
--it knows that it does not yet quite have the emotional maturity to raise offspring, nnn guide them and be a parent
--it wants to plan better financially and career-wise so that it has stability and security, and would be able to support offspring.

on the other half of the same coin, we see that the people least-suited to become parents, are becoming parents are greater rates.  the characteristics that make them ill-equipped to be parents, are the exact selfsame characteristics that [[[contribute]] to it reproducing.
(ill-fitted)
..are unfortunately the same characteristics that contribute to tits greater[[risk,]] increased chances of reproducing.
--stronger urges-- primitive biological
--lack of foresight
    would not think ahead to be on birth control
    would not think ahead to how in the world it would support its offspring.
--poor impulse control-- would succumb to primitive biological urges
    would have sexual intercourse without thought to risk of pregnancy
=> ergo, the **less** evolved members of the human race are *more* likely to reproduce.  are going to produce greater numbers of offspring.
=> and ergo, the **more** evolved members of the human race are *less* likely to reproduce.  they are going to___

also another reason-- age of onset of reproduction-- ;;  generally the more primitive and less-evolved the individual, the younger that it commences reproduction.

the less evolved ones are beating out the more evolved ones in sheer numbers alone.


I [[thought about, pondered, (considered)) adding the [[trait, societal stnthin or others]]] about medical advancements.  but then I realized that, it is not entirely relevant to genuine evolution if medical advancements allow prolonged life expectancies of physically weaker individuals.  the physically weaker individuals' less-than-exemplary, less-than-stellar, less-than-perfect medical condition does not automatically render them as being less evolved.

Let me reiterate and emphasize this point:  evolution is not about physical traits.  Evolution is about intelligence and behavior.
--plenty of intelligent, moral people have high blood pressure, asthma, diabetes, food allergies.

for my treatise on how BOTH males as well as females desire physically attractive sexually desirable mates
**put this in my essay of how 2 factors determine a male's reproductive fitness
-looking hot
-procuring stuff, resources, food, shelter, hunt a wildebeest and bring it home

in Neanderthal times, these two factors were caused by one and the same characteristics.  physical prowess directly [[influenced]] the ability to provide for offspring.  in lower primates, lower mammals, many other animal species, the same law prevails.  physical capability, and hence physical appearance of secondary sexual characteristics, determined a male's reproductive potential.

you wanted evolutionary psychology?  you got it.

[[paraphrase below works sources.]]
the answer is simple.  it is because we as a species and as a society are regressing.  we are devolving.  instead of choosing both male as well as female mates for their mental [[advantages, traits __, acumen]]], we are choosing them for very primitive, biologically-driven reasons.  these are reasons that are ingrained in our long-lost ancestry and which we still see today manifesting in primitive animals.

animals do not consider wealth and social status as being separately packaged from physical ability, in the manner that homo sapiens supposedly do consider them separate entities.  to primitive animals, social status and physical prowess are one and the same.  I will explain.  how does an animal gain social status?  by being more physically able than the rest of the pack.  how does an animal gain wealth?  animals do not exchange actual currency, so their status of wealth is determined by ability to procure food.  an animal gets food by being physically strong and fast enough to hunt down a gazelle.  a physically able animal is able to obtain more food by hunting than a less physically able animal of the same species.

how does physical power over a weaker competitor correlate to shelter?  a physically stronger one will overpower a physically weaker one and can take hold of its shelter.  the stronger can kick the weaker out of its own cave.


(((the ""taking pity talking point:::""  or mebe nott;; this might be a third little point addressed after the other two major ones))))
they have more babies than they can reasonably support.
-what is more [[telling,eviedent,astonishingly__]]] is the fact that they seem unable** to determine whether they could support all these offspring -- before deciding whether or not to produce them.
here is another thing.
**they are not consciously making the decision to reproduce and bear offspring.
they are simply giving in to their primitive urges to have sxx, with little to no thought that there are consequences of this basal, instinctual behavior.

in this society we are essentially **rewarding** them for being illogical and unreasonable.  for not planning for the future.  for not doing a risk assessment or ____
instead of [[[[letting them [[[___die out because they were too stupid to plan ahead,]]]] we coddle them.  we reward them with food stamps.  we reward them with government housing paid for by other people's hard-earned money.
-rather than leaving them to their own devices [[and eke out a living for themselves however best they can... we do not allow them to suffer any natural ramifications [[repercussions]]] for their [[monumentally]]poor judgment.
-rather than let them suffer the natural consequences of such woefully bad judgment and primitive behavior,,, [[[the natural progression of the law of [[foreachandeveryactionthereisanoppositeandequalreaction,, nonono,,,, what is it??]]]

back then, the people that stockpiled food for the uncertain future were more likely to to survive.

now, it is a given that many, many, many people in a society do not *consciously** choose to reproduce.
--however, the ones that do not consciously choose to reproduce and yet still come out okay on the other side, are usually in a sustained, monogamous, long-term relationship.  ergo, if they do happen to find that
_they are much better-positioned to be able to absorb the shock, as it were, to their requirements of additional food and additional [[[home,living,abode,_shelter_]]] and other resources.
--wait a minute, what about birth control,,,


**unfortunately, we already bear witness to this in the Indian subcontinent.  thanks to the caste system, there has been little [[[opp of lateral, vertical??]]] [[movin on up, movement,,progress???]]]] of individuals from within one social caste to a different social caste.
Allow me to back up for a minute so I can address the fact that the [[establishers,proponents,implementros,]]] of the social caste system were very [[aware, conscious of intelligence and social differences between the social castes.  The different layers of the social strata exhibited distinct marked differences in behavior -- violent criminal tendencies, sexual tendencies, family planning,___ empathy, compassion,
Also intelligence --pursual of secondary grade-school education,

so there was little chance of genetics mixing.  There was little chance of heritable traits of intelligence and IQ being passed from a higher social caste and infused into a lower social caste.
[littel chance that a higher-order individual's ability for future planning would [[permeate, impermeate]]] the lower social castes and maybe infect them with some intelligence.]]]

the population numbers of the lower castes exploded-- they grew exponetntially,
while the higher-echelon caste members held their numbers more or less steady.  their numbers were not "steady" as in unchanging.  but as in, they were more or less what one would expect if studying a family genealogy tree.

-- whe weree on the subjec,, why do people whi are nittt capablenof raisin a chid--- still reprofice?
-- they kniw rhat they are not capble of raising that kd.  Well, at leats evyine wlse knows this.  It seems this is a stunning revelation that they have not arried at yet.  [[[this stunnig __epiphnY__ has not been revealed to thme yet.  This gospel, this message from the heavens____
--- how stupid are they rhta they wojld risk havin a kid whent they are nowhere near emotionally osychooogzall capable of raising said kid.?
--- it's like they gave no thiuht to it whatsover.  They did not thinkahead to the cinsequces of their actions.  They vuess what-- xessa leads to possible oregn.  This is even tbiug these are very rwal, very ___, very tangible sinsequnces that manifest here in the real physical universe.  This is not just wondering [[[__fancy imaginisnga__ ]] running away with soemknes's imahination.  This takes place in the physical realm.
-- this is all evidence, thise are all facts.

Also discuss this list extnsvelt in my ""devolving essay"".
--why do people in third world countes around the world reproduce??   -when the ludicrously obvious fact is that they will bot be ablee to raise that kid??  Will not be able to support that kid??
--eaisjg ks takes money....
-- it is because they do not possess the capacity to thnk ahead to the consequences of their actions.  -of their behavior.

->>> recvle:::  I have long extolled the thesis that this is bc women are not seen as equal himan beings.

women are the bereers of life, __but this fact is being [[[helf hostage,,_exploited]]] against them. [[[but they are not given any choice in what to do with thier own bodies, they do not possess the power and authority in the marriage to refuse sx..  they do not have acces to birth contorl.__]]]
so they reproduce at uncontrolled rates b/c they do not repsect owmen. buttt...
WHYYY do they think so horribly of women?__
agian, this is due to low evoltuion.
see how once agian, repects and ___ for women is an indicator of evolutioanry profgresss.

all of this further proves what I have been saying for years.
(((this all, again, proves what I have been saying for years.)))
it is **psychological** indicators that are the greatest [[indicator,being able to teell if]]] contributors/factors of an organism or species' evolutionary fitness.
this is because we are humans, we are higher animals.  we have evolved so much that we can consciously decide if biological evolutionary <history>

You know, I was really hoping we could get away from all this primitivity crap and could evolve together into a truly progressive (and I don't mean that as a euphemism for "liberal") future, but I guess not.

"Cheaters" Movie w Jeff Daniels c.2000

I finally got a chance to watch this movie recently.  The "Cheaters" movie about the teacher who helps his students cheat at a regional academic decathlon is based on a true story, like many of the inspirational teacher films.  I won’t tell you where on the internets I found it, because invariably some corporate suck-up is going to cry “ohnoes copyright infringement teh poor megacorporations!”

First of all, I absolutely love this movie.  I love everything about it, from the conflict that the kids faced in the beginning, to the insurmountable obstacles they had to put up with, to the teacher's dilemma, the teacher's decision to do what he had to do to help those kids.  And I can tell you that if I were that teacher, I probably would have done the exact same thing.

But I think we could stand a more thorough analysis of the movie.  It needs to be pointed out that this was a very subtle demonstration of determinism, and this needs to be acknowledged.  This film was not quite as egalitarian, level the playing field, give-them-a-fair-shake as it made itself out to be.

Study the academic team more carefully.  All you have to do is look at them.  And then pan out and study the demographics of that high school as a whole.  What do you see?  Did no one else notice that the high school was predominantly poor and black, and yet the academic team was all poor and white?

In the beginning of the film, the Jeff Daniels' teacher character was saying that they should pare through the entire high school and find the select group of kids that have the highest IQs.  Or highest SAT scores, something like that.  They decided that they should, you know, pick the ones that actually stood a fighting chance to win any kind of academic competition.  And guess what-- they mostly turned out to be white.  I am assuming they did not have a whole lot of Asians at that school.

In a recruitment meeting that was held in the beginning of the movie, there were originally a few black kids that passed muster.  If they were invited to the meeting, that indicated they did in fact have higher IQs than the average student body, same as the white kids did.  However, as soon as Jeff Daniels uttered the phrase "hard work," they were out the door.

At some sort of school district conference in the movie, Jeff Daniels' character brought up some thought-provoking points.  There was a rival school that always participated in the academic competition every year.  Somehow they always managed to win, place, or show, and not by cheating.  Daniels remarked that that school was a private school that operated within the public school system.

Hmm...  That is an interesting way of putting it.  What does it mean?  The points made about safety and violence vis a vis public schools v. private schools are legitimate points.

I do remember that at the middle school I attended, the students were incredibly violent.  This was due to the particular neighborhoods in that school's zoning district.  We had fights break out almost every week, we had bomb threats every month.  This was ameliorated a bit once I got to high school.  The reason for this, and I stand by this firmly, was that the zoning guidelines were very different from those of middle school.  The zoning districts that the high school covered in the town simply did not overlap the poor neighborhoods as much.  (The poverty-stricken, crime-riddled, drug-infested, teen-pregnancy-and-other-illegitimate-pregnancies-with multiple-odd-combinations-of male-and-female-parent-addled.  Most of the high school kids from these types of environments were shunted off to the other high school in town.)  Yeah, the place was crawling with violent ghetto types.  But you know what?  I got over it, I am currently working on my Ph.D. in biochemistry, and those people that got into fights are probably all dead now, due to gang-related warfare or something.

My high school mostly served upper-middle class white families.  (There were very few Asians in the town I where I went to high school.  Otherwise, undoubtedly they too would have attended my high school.)  Remarkably, it seemed that the vast majority of fairly affluent parents simply sent their children to this high school in their district, rather than pay for private school.  Looking back on it now, I realize that this was a short [blunt] miracle that these parents sent their kids to this public school, which effectively elevated the educational standards for all involved.  These were the kids that, in any other town in the US, their parents surely would have sent them to private school and gladly paid the steep tuition.  Just somehow, in this particular town, there were a sizable number of upper-middle class families.  Enough so that if all of them sent their kids to public school, there would be a large enough upper-middle class population so that it would at its core, essentially turn the public school into a private school.

I've been saying this for a long time.  The school in and of itself does not matter nearly as much as the community as a whole.  The socioeconomic makeup of the entire community, i.e., school district, strongly influences the performance of the school.  For example, a school could set high academic standards.  But those standards will not counterbalance the negative effects if the majority of students come from drug-addled home life.  If a large percentage of students come from violent homes with no structure, let alone love, that creates a bad school district.  A bad school district has little to do with the school itself.  The community makes an impact.  If the community members have resources, then the school will receive resources.

So did the cheating help out the kids that entered the academic competition after all?  Yes.  It DID help them out, but only to the extent that they had actual potential and could help themselves out.

See this movie.  Rent it, look for it on the internets, borrow it from a friend, access this movie however you can.  And relish the experience.

Keeping up with the Ooga-Boogas- a shocking realization

So if you want to continue talking about this and to pretend that this downward spiral back down into primordial ooze is headed in the right direction, then I can continue on all day.  I will put you where you belong.  But if you would much rather admit that this is all detrimental to our species, then we can work.  If you would just realize that this is all very harmful, then we can cooperate and be a little smarter.  And we can be more evolved.

*I very recently had a shocking, very unpleasant semi-epiphany.

----------
First, a review from the early 2000s.

Remember the thing I was talking about earlier, several years ago.  Back then I simply interpreted it thusly.  I had mentioned that many females made stupid, irresponsible, unwise decisions in their youth.  These decisions and actions were regarding her own sexual and medical and psychological health.  Then there were numerous cases where the female, after embroiling herself in that for several years, finally wised up.  She finally sacked up, cleaned herself up, got her act together, and fixed her life.  she finally started to not be stupid nor careless nor irresponsible toward herself.  She finally grew some IQ points.  She finally started choosing men that were decent and clean and respectable.

I was immersed in my liberal ways of thinking back then, so I welcomed this change as a good thing.  Upon hearing another story such as this, I thought to myself, good, finally a female has finally seen the light of day and has decided to follow the straight and narrow path.  Even though she made a slew of life-demolishing decisions back then, perhaps we should do this.  We should all be glad that right here and now, where we stand, the female has taken a stand and has decided to do right and good things for herself.  Let us cast off the shackles of the past, or rather, let her cast off the shackles off her past and not let them chain her down to the gutter any more.  I encouraged myself to be this psychotically optimistic about humanity.

Now that I am inhabiting the pseudo-scientific discipline of evolutionary psychology, I have some unease-causing new interpretations of all this.  None of this is really a good thing.  You are foolhardy if you think that the female's sudden inspiration to turn over a new leaf magically wipes out and erases all of that female's past misdeeds.

---------------
Then, our recent studies and observations.

Look at my own interpretation of evolutionary psychology.  The males that she slept around with in her youth were the type that would have been considered "alpha male" fifty thousand years ago.  "Alpha males" characteristics would have secured a decent and safe lifestyle-- back in those caveman days.  Back when physical prowess and strength directly determined quality of life.  Males waaay back then had to be always very high-strung, on high alert.  They had to have lightning-quick reaction times, to be able to react immediately and with force, to any stimulus of danger.  in order to simply survive, males needed extreme emotional response, the ability to suddenly at a moment's notice react to any danger that will probably appear.

All these extreme, high-alert, fast-twitch responses to an immediate emergency situation type of personality traits went hand-in-hand with a strong, muscular, well-built male body.  A male that was at his physical peak could respond to a dangerous emergency situation most optimally.  It's all biochemistry and physiology, it all fits and gels together.  As we have established, a good-looking caveman male is someone that a cavewoman female would actively seek out to reproduce with, for the aforementioned reasons.

But see, the thing is, those selfsame "alpha male" type characteristics are NOT conducive to a reasonably prosperous, healthy, decent life in the modern day and age.  The caveman alpha traits really would have indicated survival back in caveman days; and they really truly do not work for a stable, successful life in this day n age.  Evolved modern characteristics really are the diametric opposite of that.

Those same qualities (which I have described in great detail in previous essays) are a liability in this day and age.  In this modern day and age, the stimulus of immediate physical dangers lurking everywhere, that threaten our very survival... simply do not exist.  We don't have to worry about huge mastodons or sabretooth tigers roaming the towns, or rival bands of marauding neanderthals ready to rampage a house or apartment and kill everyone in there.

Those types of quick, immediate, and extreme emergency response psychological traits are characteristics not needed in this day and age.  Nowadays, personality traits that are needed for safety and security are quite the opposite.

Nowadays,  the traits of intelligence, high IQ, patience, calm and even temperament, intelligence, ability to focus on seemingly mundane boring tasks for hours on end -- these are the traits that determine success, safety and security.

------------
Now, the very unpleasant epiphany.  Tying it all together.

Now, however, this hit me like a ton of light bulbs.  I suddenly see how shocking n depressing it is that females whored around in their youthful naive stupid days, then when they got older they decided to settle down with a nice guy that can provide her with a house and financial solvency.

In other words, they have a dried-out, sucked-all-the-juice-and-life-out-of-it, soggy sagging shriveled pruny nasty used-up vg.  They already whiled away their youthful, fertile years chasing after cavemen, males that veritably would have been useful alpha males five-hundred thousand years ago.  And now they want a nice guy gentleman to come pick up the shattered smashed deteriorated smithereens of their life.

Recall the social epidemic of the number of women that have a first child conceived, grown, and born out of wedlock.  To a so-called deadbeat male that has anger issues, temper, most likely violent, has a criminal record, and spends most of his time unemployed.  So these females made those really shtty decisions early in life when they were young.  Now they believe that they have learned the error of their ways, so the second time around they will pick a nice, safe, boring guy who is capable of monetarily supporting them.

My depressing realization.  Holy crap, it is essentially the same thing-- as the depressing, negative side of female evolution that wants to reproduce w a male that has the best physical traits and sexually successful traits.

Cavewoman was constantly on the lookout for more superior male.  She would definitely trade in the current one for a better more advanced model.

In this modern day, a female might want to settle down eventually w a modern-day male.  But her primitive cavewoman urges still cause her to desire and actively seek out a male with the traits that made males superior 500,000 years ago.

Back then in caveman days, stability meant being able to react aggressively and immediately to a very real threat. In order to maintain stability inside the cavehome, you had to constantly be on the alert, fend off persistent threats right outside the cavehome.  This required the caveman to have physical health, solid strong bone structure, height, solid strong musculature, broad shoulders, excellent eyesight, excellent respiratory and sinus health.

This required the caveman to have possibly violent and/or aggressive tendencies.  Because that's what being hyper-vigilant and high-strung means; in order to be able to react to an emergency situation at any given moment, he had to be on emergency alert, hyper-aggressive mode all the time.

Not so much ability to be employed in comfortable air-conditioned office setting, expertise with Microsoft Office Suite, or solid accounting practices.

In order to make the very large distinction of what traits/characteristics are possessed by more evolved humans. •aha yes, thank gud that luckily, I already have numerous material essays upon essays outlining in great detail, what makes a creature more evolved.  Thank God I realized this while I was rereading, so that I would not have to create all this from scratch. bc at first I was very worried terrified that I would have to slog thru my memory n try to rack up decent material as best I can.

In the early 2000s, I had the, 'good at least they are finally turning themselves around.'  In 2005 I had the, 'hoes ruined their lives and I was wrong, they don’t deserve a second chance.'  Also upon reviewing I discovered re-reminded that I was making all sorts of arguments that turned typical evo logic on its head.

The monetary source — in this modern day and age, only comes from non-physically-alpha males.  Not from alpha males.  Since it is not alpha males, therefore the female thinks there is no compelling reason for the male to be around at all.  He's not hot n pretty to look at; so really, why would she need him to stick around at all?  One source of money is the same as another.

I need to really emphasize that this all disgusts me.

ohmigod.  This is the exact same thing that I noticed back in the very early 2000's.  But back then I foolishly thought this was a good thing.  I thought it was a good thing that these females saw the errors of their ways, turned themselves around, and decided to walk the straight and narrow path.

This is horrifying.  This is nauseating and disgusting and deafening.

When she was primitive, bad judgment, bad reasoning, no thought to consequences of her actions.  Not a single neuron function whatsoever dedicated towards what this would do to her children.  She did in fact impregnate herself by the types of males that would have been alpha back then but are society's dregs now.