The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
The Inevitability of Infertility Eugenics
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

As we all know, eugenics is the worst thing imaginable. Yet, over a million Americans alive today are the result of sperm and/or egg donations. In those cases, somebody had to choose for some reason which sperm or eggs to use (except, arguably, in the rare cases where a system to insure randomness was devised). So, the issues raised by infertility treatments are extremely interesting, as commenter noyb points out:

A few years ago, I attended a number of informational meetings for people considering using egg or sperm donors. The format was always the same. Some doctors and lawyers would talk about the medical and legal issues. Then there would be a panel of 3 to 5 couples or single parents who had used donors. They would talk about their experience and answer questions from the audience. One of the questions was always how they had chosen their donor. All but one (more about this odd couple later) described spending days or weeks poring over catalogs of donors. As Chase says, the catalogs contained detailed family histories and information about health, education and athletic achievements for each donor, a picture of the donor and, always for egg donors and usually for sperm donors, an essay by the donor about herself or himself.

Of the parents who used egg donors, all but one (the odd couple) said that they would not consider any donor who did not show proven exceptional intelligence. They focused on IQ’s, SAT scores, GPA’s (all must be very high), schools attended (only the most selective colleges) and academic majors (a preference for hard majors where a high GPA really means something, rather than soft majors where everybody receives high grades). Parents who used sperm donors were less likely to say intelligence was their top consideration. Many were more concerned about the subjective factors revealed in the personal essays. Artistic talent and athletic ability were the most sought after, but there were also a lot of parents who said that they had chosen a sperm donor whose essay seemed to indicate that he was a happy person. Not surprisingly, lesbians often focused on idiosyncratic factors. Many excluded men who sounded dominant or athletic. I remember one lesbian couple in particular who said that they had excluded all men who reported having body hair. A few lesbians, though, said that they had specifically selected dominant, athletic donors.

I assume the difference between egg and sperm donees reflected the fact that using an egg donor is a very expensive process that costs $80,000 to $100,000 and sometimes much more. The parents who used egg donors were therefore all rich professionals who thought intelligence was the most important thing in the world. Using a sperm donor is a much cheaper process, costing only a few hundred dollars (and costing nothing for those who use the turkey baster method with a male friend as donor), so parents using sperm donors had a much broader range of incomes and were much more likely not to worship intelligence above all else. You also can’t ignore the fact that professionally accomplished fathers tend to be very competitive and usually seem to take the lead role in choosing egg donors, while mothers tend to be much less competitive and take the lead in choosing sperm donors.

One thing that both groups cared a lot about was appearance. They wanted good-looking donors. Most also wanted a donor who looked like the infertile parent, so that the child would look like the genetic offspring of both members of the couple. This was even true of gay and lesbian couples — one member of the couple would provide the sperm or womb and the donor would look like the other parent — despite the fact that, of course, everybody would know that it was physically impossible for the child to be genetically related to both parents.

The odd couple took a different approach. They pointed out that regression to the mean created a large chance that even the smartest egg donor would not produce an exceptionally smart child. They said they suspected that parents who selected for intelligence (or beauty or athletic ability, etc.) and whose child turned out to be average or less would feel as if they had not gotten their money’s worth. (This seems pretty likely to me, considering who the parents were.) The odd couple hadn’t wanted to take the chance of feeling that way about their own child. Reasoning that all of the donors had been screened for good health, they had just opened the catalog and chosen the donor who appeared on the first page they saw. I had to respect them for that, although I wouldn’t have the strength of character to do the same myself.

As an aside, the reason why using an egg donor is so expensive is that, in most states where the use of surrogate mothers is legal, the law allows her to change her mind and keep the child if it is genetically hers but not if it isn’t. As a result, the almost universal practice is to use both an egg donor and a surrogate (the “carrier”) who is not genetically related to the donor. Both the donor and the carrier receive large fees (donation involves a month of taking a bunch of different hormones and drugs several times a day on a rigid schedule). Then, expensive medical professionals fertilize the egg and implant it in the surrogate. There is a very high failure rate, so the process often must be repeated several times, sometimes involving more than one donor or surrogate, all at additional high cost. Also, implantation of multiple fertilized eggs results in a very high incidence of twins and triplets, which involves the expense of raising more than one child for those parents (they looked like a majority to me) who were unwilling to abort (or “reduce,” as the euphemism goes) the extras.

A few times, prospective parents in the audience announced that they were going to avoid this expense and use just one woman, a surrogate who would both conceive and carry the child. The lawyers always warned them not to do that. One lawyer said, “If you go ahead with this idea, the surrogate can keep the child and in my experience they will do that 100% of the time.”

I suspect cognitive dissonance / buyer’s regret might be a very real issue in this kind of selection process where prospective parents pick from a catalog but then, due to regression toward the mean and other vagaries, don’t get what they expected to get. The last thing you want to hear as a kid when you bring home a bad report card is, “I told you we should have picked Donor 54575, but no, you had to have Donor 24019! And now our kid is a dud, just like I warned you.”

I wonder if for something this important, a husband and wife might not want to create an elaborate system for selection.

The Republic of Venice had very complicated rules for picking its rulers, even ones mandating a certain level of randomness. And they seemed to work pretty well, considering how long Venice prospered in a tough neighborhood.

I could imagine an infertile husband and wife doing something like the following to select a sperm donor to minimize feelings of regret that your child isn’t what you thought you were buying.

– Look through old catalogs to get a sense of what traits are available.

– Draw up a list of priorities

– Choose the wisest relative from each side of the family, probably an aunt or an uncle of each spouse rather than a mother-in-law, to do the actual selection from the catalog. (My wife and I probably would have spent about 60 seconds reaching an agreement to ask her Aunt Ellen and my Aunt Fran. In contrast, if you can’t come to an agreement on something that ought to be pretty easy to achieve a consensus upon, maybe you should rethink the whole baby thing.)

– Have the two wise elders get together and go through the latest catalog using the couples’ priority lists. They should pick, say, the three best candidates, then choose randomly among the three.

– The elders should be reticent: “We couldn’t find any donor who quite matched all your priorities, but we did our best and we are sure you’ll love your child.”

 
Hide 97 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. “One lawyer said, “If you go ahead with this idea, the surrogate can keep the child and in my experience they will do that 100% of the time.””

    Maybe because he is a lawyer and only steps in when the cases go bad?

    I can’t really believe that this happens 100% of the time. Are there any stats on this anywhere?

    I’m also kind of curious about how many people in that sperm donor book have blond hair and blue eyes. For some reason people who talk about genetic engineering and eugenics frequently bring up “blond hair and blue eyes” as being the devil; since something, something Hitler.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    "I’m also kind of curious about how many people in that sperm donor book have blond hair and blue eyes."

    Denmark is the frozen sperm export capital of the world.

    , @Tenet
    "Maybe because he is a lawyer and only steps in when the cases go bad?"

    You think he would have given that warning in that case? You don't think he would know himself that he is called in only when cases go bad, so that the cases he knew of weren't representative?

    No, there is a lawyer present when the contract is written and signed in each of these surrogate cases, and the lawyer stays with the case until the child is born and handed over.

    As for blond hair and blue eyes, of course they are the most aesthetically pleasing trait no matter what people in the media say. This is known by billions of people all over the world. And as luck would have it, Danish sperm donors are in very high demand in the U.S. Denmark has a law that guarantees that donors can remain anonymous. Sweden doesn't have that law (since you can't let an evil MAN have a right at the expense of a poor little child), thus no U.S. demand for donors from Sweden, and there are also much fewer donors for the same reason.
  2. I remember one lesbian couple in particular who said that they had excluded all men who reported having body hair.

    So no mammals then? Check.

  3. The odd couple took a different approach. They pointed out that regression to the mean created a large chance that even the smartest egg donor would not produce an exceptionally smart child.

    Some of this could be avoided by learning something about the family background of the donor. Children regress to their family’s mean, not the mean of then whole population (though, of course, the mean all families is that of the group). The parents of the donor will typically suffice. 🙂

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Regression to the donor's family background:

    For example, Obama's white grandparents weren't very academic -- both stopped at high school, stopping their education for war work and the military. But they were kind of the impulsive outliers in serious families. His grandfather's brother got a Ph.D. as did his grandmother's sister.
    , @viking
    can you elaborate I have noticed my family is pretty consistently high like 130 over at least four generations are you saying this is usual
  4. Using a sperm donor is a much cheaper process, costing only a few hundred dollars (and costing nothing for those who use the turkey baster method with a male friend as donor)

    Well a cheaper process for them…..just wait till Ellen and Portia split and one of them starts hounding you, the donor, for child support!

    Then who wishes he wasn’t such a nice guy.

    • Replies: @Big Bill

    ... just wait until Ellen and Portia split and one of them starts hounding you, the donor, for child support.
     
    The problem typically arises when the kid need some kind of money (medical care, welfare, etc.) and the state will give her the money in exchange for coughing up the father's identity. Then the state comes collecting from YOU.

    Typically, the weepy woman will say, "they MADE me tell them!" and will even profess that she thinks, "The donor shouldn't have to pay! That's not what we agreed to!" Which, of course, lets her seem pure as the driven snow, forced by circumstances into relying on the state and compelled by the evil state to cough up your name.

    Never, ever, ever donate sperm to any woman who knows enough to track you down. Even if you never met her, never had sex, don't know her or where she lives and sent the sperm on ice to a PO Box on the other side of the world, it makes no difference.
    , @AnotherDad
    I think the core problem with the much more reliable method of known donors, is that courts involved in family law simply do not honor contracts of any kind. They'll go after the donor dad for support, even though there is simple, clear, black in on paper stating that dad is off the hook.

    It used to be there was just one contract--marriage. There was real community\social pressure for the woman to abide by the contract, and if she left the dad actually had some rights--father custody. Now there is no social pressure\stigma on a woman, dumping her hubby and the guy has no rights.

    If courts simply honored contracts, we would quickly see pre-nups--no alimony, shared custody, no child support--that would end divorce rape, correct the balance and make marriage a safe and attractive option for men again.

    Couple that with the law actually taking "women in charge of their own bodies" seriously--men only being responsible for a women's kids if they are married or she has a another piece of paper where he agrees to support her kid--and a lot of our problems around illegitimacy and single parenthood would start to wane.

    It's actually not very hard to concoct laws\contracts that incentivise good behavior--in this case traditional high-investment parenting. The problem is that we have lots of rent-seeking scum--lawyers, counselors, advocates, judges (and other parasites) in the divorce industry; feminists; bureaucrats, social workers and of course "big government" proponents generally whose interest is precisely in *not* having people behave responsibly and take care of themselves.
  5. Body hair goes with high IQ. EG Ron Jeremy (father physicist mother cryptanalyst ) Lack of body hair goes with being muscular and athletic. There is a Doctor Alias who writes about that.

    Erik Holland says homosexuals tend to be hairy.

    The record sperm donor was reported to be a New York banker, 15 years ago or so, had an IQ of 180 and fathered several hundred children if I remember rightly.

    • Replies: @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    Uh, you might want to rethink that. Steve mentioned the case of Roger Fedderer and while he's somewhat muscular and certainly athletic, he does have quite the preponderance of body hair. In the old days, the pre-Beckham/90s, tons of muscular athletes tended to have tons of bodyhair. Hello, 1970s?

    Ron Jeremy is also a Sherman, so that's the main reason his mom wasn't a crack whore and his father a pimp. Unless you're trying to say that most Shermans tend to be hairier than most humans, well, there's no real data to support that per se.

    Also Ron Jeremy has a Master's Degree in....something. A legitimate degree in secondary education or something before he decided on the career switch and apply his natural giftedness to the small screen and then later the DVD/internet markets.

    , @e
    "Erik Holland says homosexuals tend to be hairy."
    _____________________________________

    I remember reading Holland's website some years ago. I think I was reading Gene Expression and a poster linked to it. If memory serves, he is someone who was simply interested in the topic and had read a lot of papers but was/is not a researcher himself, right?

    Anyway, my point is this: since this is Steve's blog and we are reminded all the time in reading his stuff that it's never a bad thing to give credence to your powers of observation, (assuming, of course, that one IS observant), think of all the gay men you know. If you don't know that many, well, okay; then think of places you've visited where there's a very large homosexual population--San Fran, Seattle, West Hollywood, any live theater, stores that sell interior furnishings. Or, think of the actors you know who are gay.

    Does it stick out like a sore thumb in such places that the men around you seem inordinately hirsute? Are gay actors, the ones we know, at least, likely to have hairier arms, chests, backs, legs, whatever? Has that jumped off the screen?


    Nah.

  6. Owing to the reality that modern civilization is not synchronized with the human biological clock and to the geopolitical and economic consequences of low fertility rates to national governments it is only a matter of time before some nation ( my guess would be Singapore, Japan or South Korea) undertakes a national program of egg implantation into older women’s wombs. I’ve seen women over 60 having this done and it, arguably, makes sense though over 60 maybe pushing it.

    First of all not having children until later in life allows a couple to devote their time and energy into acquiring the resources to raise successful children. It would also allow the children to inherit the parents assets when they are young and in need of just such assets for their own family formation. It also would mean the parent/s would have teenagers or young adults living at home just as they enter their old age. Handy for an elderly mom or dad to have someone around who can do the heavy lifting.

    • Replies: @Don't look at me
    Taking care of children IS heavy lifting.

    My wife and I both had our kids later in life than most people. I'm 50 and my youngest is seven. Taking care of kids is a lot of physical labor at times. Of course, I like to play with them but it gets harder and harder to do as I get older.

    We evolved to have kids in our late teens and twenties.
    , @Anonymous
    Teenagers handy to have around? Have you ever met a teenager? ?
  7. Priss Factor [AKA "pizza with hot pepper"] says:

    Isn’t transhumanism ‘racist’?

    ‘Anti-racism’ says that all races are the same, and there’s hardly been any evolutionary change among mankind in the past 10,000 yrs. So, no matter how much a race may hope and pretend to be different from all the other races, it is like any other race. That is just how it is, and so, every race should just accept the iron law of human immutability.
    We are all alike, and even 10,000 yrs of evolution failed to make the human races different from one another in any meaningful or essential way.
    And ‘anti-racists’ have been hailing this as a good thing, i.e. we should give up on insisting on group differences since all human groups/races are essentially alike, must be essentially alike, and have no choice but to be essentially alike since evolution just stopped happening since 10,000 yrs ago.

    If such a view is ideal, then how is transhumanism a good thing? If we cut through the bull, it promises the creation of new super-races. If a transhuman community wants to create a new kind of people who are taller, stronger, smarter, sexier, longer-lived, and etc, etc., and if it obtains the biotechnological means to do so, it will indeed do so.
    But in doing so…

    1. it will have demonstrated that humans are not immutable. They can be genetically and fundamentally changed, altered, modified, and boosted in all sorts of new/different ways.

    2. it will have demonstrated that it’s a good idea to create a new group/community–a new race–of people who are far superior to the already existing races of people. Transhumans will not call the new kind of humans a ‘new race’, but that’s exactly what it can become.

    If indeed transhumans find a way to create a new bunch of people who are very strong and very intelligent–like the giant albino in the beginning of PROMETHEUS–, and if such people choose to mate one another and form their own separate community, how is that not a creation of a new race?

    And since that race would be demonstrably superior to other races in many abilities, it will mean that reality of racial differences will be stronger than ever before.

    It’s like Martine Rosenblatt parades around as a victim—Jewish, fruiter, married to Negress, lesbian, tranny, etc(wow, that’s a lot for one person)—, but his/her real ambition is to be superior to everyone else and have power/control over them.

  8. @Nathan Wartooth
    "One lawyer said, “If you go ahead with this idea, the surrogate can keep the child and in my experience they will do that 100% of the time.”"

    Maybe because he is a lawyer and only steps in when the cases go bad?

    I can't really believe that this happens 100% of the time. Are there any stats on this anywhere?

    I'm also kind of curious about how many people in that sperm donor book have blond hair and blue eyes. For some reason people who talk about genetic engineering and eugenics frequently bring up "blond hair and blue eyes" as being the devil; since something, something Hitler.

    “I’m also kind of curious about how many people in that sperm donor book have blond hair and blue eyes.”

    Denmark is the frozen sperm export capital of the world.

  9. So…eugenics is good in the service of keeping the elite class elite. But…eugenics is bad in the service of keeping the underclass from producing more underclasslings?

    I’m very confused.

    • Replies: @grey enlightenment
    I and probably many others would rather have more high-quality people than lower quality ones.
  10. A little eugenics, a little veganism. If the light rail runs on time

  11. @Sean
    Body hair goes with high IQ. EG Ron Jeremy (father physicist mother cryptanalyst ) Lack of body hair goes with being muscular and athletic. There is a Doctor Alias who writes about that.

    Erik Holland says homosexuals tend to be hairy.

    The record sperm donor was reported to be a New York banker, 15 years ago or so, had an IQ of 180 and fathered several hundred children if I remember rightly.

    Uh, you might want to rethink that. Steve mentioned the case of Roger Fedderer and while he’s somewhat muscular and certainly athletic, he does have quite the preponderance of body hair. In the old days, the pre-Beckham/90s, tons of muscular athletes tended to have tons of bodyhair. Hello, 1970s?

    Ron Jeremy is also a Sherman, so that’s the main reason his mom wasn’t a crack whore and his father a pimp. Unless you’re trying to say that most Shermans tend to be hairier than most humans, well, there’s no real data to support that per se.

    Also Ron Jeremy has a Master’s Degree in….something. A legitimate degree in secondary education or something before he decided on the career switch and apply his natural giftedness to the small screen and then later the DVD/internet markets.

    • Replies: @Sunbeam
    "Ron Jeremy is also a Sherman, so that’s the main reason his mom wasn’t a crack whore and his father a pimp. Unless you’re trying to say that most Shermans tend to be hairier than most humans, well, there’s no real data to support that per se. "

    I have no earthly idea what this paragraph means.
    , @Sean
    Ferderer is skillful but by my way of thinking he is relatively skinny (look at his arms). Some chemically augmented Chinese athetes were getting round drug testing by using DHT, it does have an effect on the nervous system.

    Anyway, the average woman likes cut muscles, they do not like a lot of body hair or the bald heads that often go with it. Bald men are perceived as not very masculine.
  12. Also, sperm donation provides a wonderful counterpoint to all those on the HBD-sphere who take the biological definition of success to be THE definition of success. You don’t feel that successful after donating sperm a bunch of times. You feel like you’ve jerked off into a cup.

    • Replies: @Kentuckian
    Its not about feeling successful, but about being reproductively successful of course.

    As for the selection caused by sperm donors.....it could select for, a willingness to donate sperm? Will, a hundred generations from now, infertility eugenics create an entire race of men who have more desire to jerk off into cups then to actually have sex with women? Perhaps, there could be a lottery run by a cyborg world dictator Martine Rothblatt that gives hope to men the world over that their sperm may be chosen for the next generation.

    Until the protagonist realizes that in fact the lottery is a sham, and all sperm is created randomly by a sperm creating hyper intellegint A.I. robot to save costs. In his journey to stop Martine and her robot, he meets a dazzling renegade girl-power computer scientist and becomes the 1st man in a century to learn there can be more to love than hope in a lottery and a small dixie cup.

    Sounds like a Philip K Dick novel just waiting to happen I'll tell you what.
    , @grey enlightenment
    but high quality donors can command a lot of $ and a good feeling of knowing that they contributed to the improvement of society
  13. anon • Disclaimer says:

    How do homosexuals decide who provides the sperm?

    “(and costing nothing for those who use the turkey baster method with a male friend as donor)”

    Whoever volunteers to be the male friend in this situation is insane.

    Also, in the case of the surrogate and the donor being one woman, aren’t we getting perilously close to child-selling?

  14. The odd couple took a different approach. They pointed out that regression to the mean created a large chance that even the smartest egg donor would not produce an exceptionally smart child. They said they suspected that parents who selected for intelligence (or beauty or athletic ability, etc.) and whose child turned out to be average or less would feel as if they had not gotten their money’s worth. (This seems pretty likely to me, considering who the parents were.) The odd couple hadn’t wanted to take the chance of feeling that way about their own child. Reasoning that all of the donors had been screened for good health, they had just opened the catalog and chosen the donor who appeared on the first page they saw. I had to respect them for that, although I wouldn’t have the strength of character to do the same myself.

    What? That’s completely selfish, if not evil. Because of an idiosyncratic guess about how they would feel in the future, they created a baby that would likely be uglier, stupider, and less healthy. Thankfully such terrible people in a minority.

    • Replies: @anon
    Eh, I doubt it made much of a difference. Sperm banks usually weed out the unintelligent and those with a family history of medical issues.
  15. @JayMan

    The odd couple took a different approach. They pointed out that regression to the mean created a large chance that even the smartest egg donor would not produce an exceptionally smart child.
     
    Some of this could be avoided by learning something about the family background of the donor. Children regress to their family's mean, not the mean of then whole population (though, of course, the mean all families is that of the group). The parents of the donor will typically suffice. :)

    Regression to the donor’s family background:

    For example, Obama’s white grandparents weren’t very academic — both stopped at high school, stopping their education for war work and the military. But they were kind of the impulsive outliers in serious families. His grandfather’s brother got a Ph.D. as did his grandmother’s sister.

  16. @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    Uh, you might want to rethink that. Steve mentioned the case of Roger Fedderer and while he's somewhat muscular and certainly athletic, he does have quite the preponderance of body hair. In the old days, the pre-Beckham/90s, tons of muscular athletes tended to have tons of bodyhair. Hello, 1970s?

    Ron Jeremy is also a Sherman, so that's the main reason his mom wasn't a crack whore and his father a pimp. Unless you're trying to say that most Shermans tend to be hairier than most humans, well, there's no real data to support that per se.

    Also Ron Jeremy has a Master's Degree in....something. A legitimate degree in secondary education or something before he decided on the career switch and apply his natural giftedness to the small screen and then later the DVD/internet markets.

    “Ron Jeremy is also a Sherman, so that’s the main reason his mom wasn’t a crack whore and his father a pimp. Unless you’re trying to say that most Shermans tend to be hairier than most humans, well, there’s no real data to support that per se. ”

    I have no earthly idea what this paragraph means.

    • Replies: @I, Libertine
    Me, neither. In street lingo, a "Sherman" is a cigar (short for "a Nat Sherman"). There is an obvious reason for associating a cigar with Jeremy, but that doesn't explain what he meant.
  17. The record sperm donor was reported to be a New York banker, 15 years ago or so, had an IQ of 180 and fathered several hundred children if I remember rightly.

    Of all the things that bother me about artificially creating humans in a lab, this is near the top of the list. When these children become adults, do their parents tell them where they came from, and more importantly, do they have the sense to have their partners genetically tested for relatedness before getting engaged and/or having children? We know that absent the Westermarck Effect, close relatives often find each other very attractive.

    Granted, you technically have the same problem with children of adoption, but the nature of biology is that almost no man, no matter how randy and successful with women, is going to leave behind hundreds and hundreds of bastards, unless he conquered half of Asia. If one man has 700 kids, though, what are the the odds of at least a little accidental incest?

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Since I'm adopted and was born in the San Fernando Valley, I will occasionally look up on Wikipedia guys in the movies who look kind of like me to see where they were born to see if I can rule out the remote possibility that we might be related. For example, Judge Reinhold (Fast Times at Ridgemont High, Beverly Hills Cop, The Santa Clause) is close to my height and has similar mannerisms and looks (movie star version), but he's from a Delaware society family, so it seems highly unlikely.

    But I don't recall ever bothering to look up any actress who looked like she might be related to me. It's just not something my brain is inclined to do.

    As the commenter said, with adoption the odds of half-sibling marriages are vanishingly small because of the small numbers involved. But with some sperm bank donors fathering hundreds of children, the odds are starting to get worrisome. And I don't expect a guy to notice that the pretty girl who likes some of the same things he does looks surprisingly like him. (The girl might notice, however.)

    , @anon
    The accidental incest scenario is an issue that many are aware of. The Internet seems to have really facilitated organization and community building amongst the half-sibs.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/06/health/06donor.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
  18. One thing that both groups cared a lot about was appearance. They wanted good-looking donors. Most also wanted a donor who looked like the infertile parent, so that the child would look like the genetic offspring of both members of the couple. This was even true of gay and lesbian couples — one member of the couple would provide the sperm or womb and the donor would look like the other parent — despite the fact that, of course, everybody would know that it was physically impossible for the child to be genetically related to both parents.

    Not if the donor is a sibling of the infertile parent.

    • Replies: @Don't look at me
    The problem with that technique is the biological father is always around. Eventually the kid will find out and might want to hang out with his real father. There is also the chance that the real father will become too attached and seek a more fatherly relationship than and unclely one. All of this is bad news for the legal father.
  19. @Hepp

    The odd couple took a different approach. They pointed out that regression to the mean created a large chance that even the smartest egg donor would not produce an exceptionally smart child. They said they suspected that parents who selected for intelligence (or beauty or athletic ability, etc.) and whose child turned out to be average or less would feel as if they had not gotten their money’s worth. (This seems pretty likely to me, considering who the parents were.) The odd couple hadn’t wanted to take the chance of feeling that way about their own child. Reasoning that all of the donors had been screened for good health, they had just opened the catalog and chosen the donor who appeared on the first page they saw. I had to respect them for that, although I wouldn’t have the strength of character to do the same myself.
     
    What? That's completely selfish, if not evil. Because of an idiosyncratic guess about how they would feel in the future, they created a baby that would likely be uglier, stupider, and less healthy. Thankfully such terrible people in a minority.

    Eh, I doubt it made much of a difference. Sperm banks usually weed out the unintelligent and those with a family history of medical issues.

  20. @anon
    Also, sperm donation provides a wonderful counterpoint to all those on the HBD-sphere who take the biological definition of success to be THE definition of success. You don't feel that successful after donating sperm a bunch of times. You feel like you've jerked off into a cup.

    Its not about feeling successful, but about being reproductively successful of course.

    As for the selection caused by sperm donors…..it could select for, a willingness to donate sperm? Will, a hundred generations from now, infertility eugenics create an entire race of men who have more desire to jerk off into cups then to actually have sex with women? Perhaps, there could be a lottery run by a cyborg world dictator Martine Rothblatt that gives hope to men the world over that their sperm may be chosen for the next generation.

    Until the protagonist realizes that in fact the lottery is a sham, and all sperm is created randomly by a sperm creating hyper intellegint A.I. robot to save costs. In his journey to stop Martine and her robot, he meets a dazzling renegade girl-power computer scientist and becomes the 1st man in a century to learn there can be more to love than hope in a lottery and a small dixie cup.

    Sounds like a Philip K Dick novel just waiting to happen I’ll tell you what.

  21. @Inkraven
    So...eugenics is good in the service of keeping the elite class elite. But...eugenics is bad in the service of keeping the underclass from producing more underclasslings?

    I'm very confused.

    I and probably many others would rather have more high-quality people than lower quality ones.

  22. @fish
    Using a sperm donor is a much cheaper process, costing only a few hundred dollars (and costing nothing for those who use the turkey baster method with a male friend as donor)

    Well a cheaper process for them.....just wait till Ellen and Portia split and one of them starts hounding you, the donor, for child support!

    Then who wishes he wasn't such a nice guy.

    … just wait until Ellen and Portia split and one of them starts hounding you, the donor, for child support.

    The problem typically arises when the kid need some kind of money (medical care, welfare, etc.) and the state will give her the money in exchange for coughing up the father’s identity. Then the state comes collecting from YOU.

    Typically, the weepy woman will say, “they MADE me tell them!” and will even profess that she thinks, “The donor shouldn’t have to pay! That’s not what we agreed to!” Which, of course, lets her seem pure as the driven snow, forced by circumstances into relying on the state and compelled by the evil state to cough up your name.

    Never, ever, ever donate sperm to any woman who knows enough to track you down. Even if you never met her, never had sex, don’t know her or where she lives and sent the sperm on ice to a PO Box on the other side of the world, it makes no difference.

  23. LGBT will one day be seen as just part of a larger transhumanist/transnature movement.

    • Replies: @markflag
    Those are made up words and concept and therefore don't count.
  24. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    The record sperm donor was reported to be a New York banker, 15 years ago or so, had an IQ of 180 and fathered several hundred children if I remember rightly.

    Vince Vaughn [re-]made a great French movie about a guy who works in a fish market and fathered 400+ kids. The kids sue to discover his identity. Both the French and the American versions are delightful.

  25. @anon
    Also, sperm donation provides a wonderful counterpoint to all those on the HBD-sphere who take the biological definition of success to be THE definition of success. You don't feel that successful after donating sperm a bunch of times. You feel like you've jerked off into a cup.

    but high quality donors can command a lot of $ and a good feeling of knowing that they contributed to the improvement of society

  26. @yaqub the mad scientist
    LGBT will one day be seen as just part of a larger transhumanist/transnature movement.

    Those are made up words and concept and therefore don’t count.

  27. @Rapparee
    "The record sperm donor was reported to be a New York banker, 15 years ago or so, had an IQ of 180 and fathered several hundred children if I remember rightly."

    Of all the things that bother me about artificially creating humans in a lab, this is near the top of the list. When these children become adults, do their parents tell them where they came from, and more importantly, do they have the sense to have their partners genetically tested for relatedness before getting engaged and/or having children? We know that absent the Westermarck Effect, close relatives often find each other very attractive.

    Granted, you technically have the same problem with children of adoption, but the nature of biology is that almost no man, no matter how randy and successful with women, is going to leave behind hundreds and hundreds of bastards, unless he conquered half of Asia. If one man has 700 kids, though, what are the the odds of at least a little accidental incest?

    Since I’m adopted and was born in the San Fernando Valley, I will occasionally look up on Wikipedia guys in the movies who look kind of like me to see where they were born to see if I can rule out the remote possibility that we might be related. For example, Judge Reinhold (Fast Times at Ridgemont High, Beverly Hills Cop, The Santa Clause) is close to my height and has similar mannerisms and looks (movie star version), but he’s from a Delaware society family, so it seems highly unlikely.

    But I don’t recall ever bothering to look up any actress who looked like she might be related to me. It’s just not something my brain is inclined to do.

    As the commenter said, with adoption the odds of half-sibling marriages are vanishingly small because of the small numbers involved. But with some sperm bank donors fathering hundreds of children, the odds are starting to get worrisome. And I don’t expect a guy to notice that the pretty girl who likes some of the same things he does looks surprisingly like him. (The girl might notice, however.)

    • Replies: @Jean Cocteausten
    Steve, I assume you've done 23andme.
    , @Dahlia
    For some reason, I thought you were born in Chicago. Who knows? Maybe my flaky comment awhile back about your mother probably being a beautiful woman was accurate, LOL! On a serious note, I can't imagine that searching and wondering feeling.

    Razib's post awhile back about children not asking to be born was so strongly motivating that it propelled me to go ahead and buy a 23andme kit. Hey, my family isn't above sex scandals :) I figured it would be a Christmas gift, but a conversation with a family member about it turned so alarming, that I ordered it within hours of saying good-bye.
    Because of the idiocracy, that package, which I should have received a couple weeks ago, was delivered to the wrong address and I'm still in the middle of straightening that out, grrrr......
  28. @Sean
    Body hair goes with high IQ. EG Ron Jeremy (father physicist mother cryptanalyst ) Lack of body hair goes with being muscular and athletic. There is a Doctor Alias who writes about that.

    Erik Holland says homosexuals tend to be hairy.

    The record sperm donor was reported to be a New York banker, 15 years ago or so, had an IQ of 180 and fathered several hundred children if I remember rightly.

    “Erik Holland says homosexuals tend to be hairy.”
    _____________________________________

    I remember reading Holland’s website some years ago. I think I was reading Gene Expression and a poster linked to it. If memory serves, he is someone who was simply interested in the topic and had read a lot of papers but was/is not a researcher himself, right?

    Anyway, my point is this: since this is Steve’s blog and we are reminded all the time in reading his stuff that it’s never a bad thing to give credence to your powers of observation, (assuming, of course, that one IS observant), think of all the gay men you know. If you don’t know that many, well, okay; then think of places you’ve visited where there’s a very large homosexual population–San Fran, Seattle, West Hollywood, any live theater, stores that sell interior furnishings. Or, think of the actors you know who are gay.

    Does it stick out like a sore thumb in such places that the men around you seem inordinately hirsute? Are gay actors, the ones we know, at least, likely to have hairier arms, chests, backs, legs, whatever? Has that jumped off the screen?

    Nah.

  29. @Steve Sailer
    Since I'm adopted and was born in the San Fernando Valley, I will occasionally look up on Wikipedia guys in the movies who look kind of like me to see where they were born to see if I can rule out the remote possibility that we might be related. For example, Judge Reinhold (Fast Times at Ridgemont High, Beverly Hills Cop, The Santa Clause) is close to my height and has similar mannerisms and looks (movie star version), but he's from a Delaware society family, so it seems highly unlikely.

    But I don't recall ever bothering to look up any actress who looked like she might be related to me. It's just not something my brain is inclined to do.

    As the commenter said, with adoption the odds of half-sibling marriages are vanishingly small because of the small numbers involved. But with some sperm bank donors fathering hundreds of children, the odds are starting to get worrisome. And I don't expect a guy to notice that the pretty girl who likes some of the same things he does looks surprisingly like him. (The girl might notice, however.)

    Steve, I assume you’ve done 23andme.

  30. …and costing nothing for those who use the turkey baster method with a male friend as donor

    When I was about 30 y/o, I had a couple of dates with a very attractive (former Home Shopping Network model) White Jamaican woman. She was 30 y/o and childless. She asked me to be her “artificial” sperm donor, no strings attached. When I declined, she upped the offer by saying we could do it the “fun” way.

  31. There’s always the ‘Big Chill’ method…

  32. Dahlia says:
    @Steve Sailer
    Since I'm adopted and was born in the San Fernando Valley, I will occasionally look up on Wikipedia guys in the movies who look kind of like me to see where they were born to see if I can rule out the remote possibility that we might be related. For example, Judge Reinhold (Fast Times at Ridgemont High, Beverly Hills Cop, The Santa Clause) is close to my height and has similar mannerisms and looks (movie star version), but he's from a Delaware society family, so it seems highly unlikely.

    But I don't recall ever bothering to look up any actress who looked like she might be related to me. It's just not something my brain is inclined to do.

    As the commenter said, with adoption the odds of half-sibling marriages are vanishingly small because of the small numbers involved. But with some sperm bank donors fathering hundreds of children, the odds are starting to get worrisome. And I don't expect a guy to notice that the pretty girl who likes some of the same things he does looks surprisingly like him. (The girl might notice, however.)

    For some reason, I thought you were born in Chicago. Who knows? Maybe my flaky comment awhile back about your mother probably being a beautiful woman was accurate, LOL! On a serious note, I can’t imagine that searching and wondering feeling.

    Razib’s post awhile back about children not asking to be born was so strongly motivating that it propelled me to go ahead and buy a 23andme kit. Hey, my family isn’t above sex scandals 🙂 I figured it would be a Christmas gift, but a conversation with a family member about it turned so alarming, that I ordered it within hours of saying good-bye.
    Because of the idiocracy, that package, which I should have received a couple weeks ago, was delivered to the wrong address and I’m still in the middle of straightening that out, grrrr……

  33. “If indeed transhumans find a way to create a new bunch of people who are very strong and very intelligent–like the giant albino in the beginning of PROMETHEUS–, and if such people choose to mate one another and form their own separate community, how is that not a creation of a new race?”

    If in the future Transhumans all resemble Albinos, than that will make them even more extremely racist than regular White people. Being an Albino is like White privilege on steroids.

    According to the anti-racist movement, the ideal Human skin color in the world should be like that of Alek Wek for example. The Blacker the berry, the sweeter the juice. The darker the flesh and the deeper the roots.

  34. @Rapparee
    "The record sperm donor was reported to be a New York banker, 15 years ago or so, had an IQ of 180 and fathered several hundred children if I remember rightly."

    Of all the things that bother me about artificially creating humans in a lab, this is near the top of the list. When these children become adults, do their parents tell them where they came from, and more importantly, do they have the sense to have their partners genetically tested for relatedness before getting engaged and/or having children? We know that absent the Westermarck Effect, close relatives often find each other very attractive.

    Granted, you technically have the same problem with children of adoption, but the nature of biology is that almost no man, no matter how randy and successful with women, is going to leave behind hundreds and hundreds of bastards, unless he conquered half of Asia. If one man has 700 kids, though, what are the the odds of at least a little accidental incest?

    The accidental incest scenario is an issue that many are aware of. The Internet seems to have really facilitated organization and community building amongst the half-sibs.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/06/health/06donor.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

    • Replies: @meep
    I'm a donor sperm baby and this used to worry me. Then I married interracially, so I guess that's not a problem.

    The more I read about ART, the more I feel like the Catholics have it right with their Theology of the Body.
  35. Honest to God, one of you i-Steve readers needs to turn this world into a novel or a script. This could be Pulitzer prize material here.

  36. @ Hepp

    >>What? That’s completely selfish, if not evil. Because of an idiosyncratic guess about how they would feel in the future, they created a baby that would likely be uglier, stupider, and less healthy. Thankfully such terrible people in a minority<<

    Are you being ironic here?

    • Replies: @Hepp
    Of course not. Because of their future feelings, they are choosing to create an unhappier life over a happier one. Any criteria, whether IQ, happiness, beauty or what, is better than picking at random (I guess relying on negative criteria would be worse than random, but besides that).
  37. @Daniel H
    @ Hepp

    >>What? That’s completely selfish, if not evil. Because of an idiosyncratic guess about how they would feel in the future, they created a baby that would likely be uglier, stupider, and less healthy. Thankfully such terrible people in a minority<<

    Are you being ironic here?

    Of course not. Because of their future feelings, they are choosing to create an unhappier life over a happier one. Any criteria, whether IQ, happiness, beauty or what, is better than picking at random (I guess relying on negative criteria would be worse than random, but besides that).

  38. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    They focused on IQ’s, SAT scores, GPA’s (all must be very high), schools attended (only the most selective colleges) and academic majors (a preference for hard majors where a high GPA really means something, rather than soft majors where everybody receives high grades).

    Of course, I mean, what parent doesn’t want a calculator humanoid?

    Mega-billionaires like Larry Ellison and Mark Cuban need not apply. One a 2nd-tier state college dropout the other a 2nd-tier state college grad in business administration. Forget the Reed College dropout after one semester of calligraphy class. Or the C student from Ball State University, Dave Letterman. Or the speech therapy grad from Emerson College, Jay Leno. Or the communications major who transferred to Queens College CCNY from SUNY Oswego, Jerry Seinfeld. Or the journalism graduate from Point Park College in Pittsburgh, PA, Dennis Miller. Et al.

    Meanwhile all the Stanford and MIT grads work their 70-hour per week Boston Consulting Group jobs and in their free time look forward to going to the Celtics game and get emotional about Rajon Rondo’s injury.

    • Replies: @AnotherDad

    Of course, I mean, what parent doesn’t want a calculator humanoid?

    Mega-billionaires like Larry Ellison and Mark Cuban need not apply ....

    Meanwhile all the Stanford and MIT grads work their 70-hour per week Boston Consulting Group jobs and in their free time look forward to going to the Celtics game and get emotional about Rajon Rondo’s injury.
     
    Larry Ellison is an a*hole. I could live without Mark Cuban too.

    The fact, that TPTB have torqued the US economy into a giant casino\shakedown, and we have lots of smart kids who turn their talents to WaWa (Wall Street-Washington) parasitism, is sickening. But those kids still have genetic traits that in a better world, instead of writing program trading for derivatives could be working on better battery technology or breeder reactor design, or instead of K-street lobbying could be helping manage an auto-company or a home-builder.

    I've been around smart kids and dumb ones. The smart kids aren't "human calculators". There are some weird aspergery exceptions, but in general they are far more interesting, more aware of their surroundings both local and the culture, the world they live in, more "alive" ... just more "human" than the not-so-brights.
  39. I and probably many others would rather have more high-quality people than lower quality ones.

    Peoples conceptions of what constitutes “high quality people” and “low quality people” varies widely. For instance, some people might consider economist Julian Simon to have been a “high quality person” while others (myself among them) would consider him to be of low quality.

    • Replies: @Formerly CARealist
    you speak complete truth, Sebastian. How high quality is Bill de Blasio, Hillary Clinton, Jerry Brown, or even THE ONE himself? God have mercy if I had a kid turn out like any of these.

    I really liked making kids the old-fashioned way, personally.
  40. Oprah did a show where 17 women had the same sperm donor and they chose him because he was Germanic looking. Waaaaaaaaaacist

  41. This stuff should all be banned. If God wanted you to have kids, he’d make you straight and fertile.

  42. @Greenstalk
    I and probably many others would rather have more high-quality people than lower quality ones.

    Peoples conceptions of what constitutes "high quality people" and "low quality people" varies widely. For instance, some people might consider economist Julian Simon to have been a "high quality person" while others (myself among them) would consider him to be of low quality.

    you speak complete truth, Sebastian. How high quality is Bill de Blasio, Hillary Clinton, Jerry Brown, or even THE ONE himself? God have mercy if I had a kid turn out like any of these.

    I really liked making kids the old-fashioned way, personally.

  43. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    In 30 Rock, a white gay character and his black boyfriend decide to have children. So they mix their sperm together to be sure they will never know who’s the biological father of their child… Oh, and they have triplet. All black. And the black boyfriend dumps the babies on the white guy… Brilliant.

    • Replies: @noyb
    Actually, at least one of the gay couples at the seminars had done exactly this. They were both white, though.
  44. @Unit472
    Owing to the reality that modern civilization is not synchronized with the human biological clock and to the geopolitical and economic consequences of low fertility rates to national governments it is only a matter of time before some nation ( my guess would be Singapore, Japan or South Korea) undertakes a national program of egg implantation into older women's wombs. I've seen women over 60 having this done and it, arguably, makes sense though over 60 maybe pushing it.

    First of all not having children until later in life allows a couple to devote their time and energy into acquiring the resources to raise successful children. It would also allow the children to inherit the parents assets when they are young and in need of just such assets for their own family formation. It also would mean the parent/s would have teenagers or young adults living at home just as they enter their old age. Handy for an elderly mom or dad to have someone around who can do the heavy lifting.

    Taking care of children IS heavy lifting.

    My wife and I both had our kids later in life than most people. I’m 50 and my youngest is seven. Taking care of kids is a lot of physical labor at times. Of course, I like to play with them but it gets harder and harder to do as I get older.

    We evolved to have kids in our late teens and twenties.

  45. @anon
    The accidental incest scenario is an issue that many are aware of. The Internet seems to have really facilitated organization and community building amongst the half-sibs.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/06/health/06donor.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

    I’m a donor sperm baby and this used to worry me. Then I married interracially, so I guess that’s not a problem.

    The more I read about ART, the more I feel like the Catholics have it right with their Theology of the Body.

  46. @Dave Pinsen

    One thing that both groups cared a lot about was appearance. They wanted good-looking donors. Most also wanted a donor who looked like the infertile parent, so that the child would look like the genetic offspring of both members of the couple. This was even true of gay and lesbian couples — one member of the couple would provide the sperm or womb and the donor would look like the other parent — despite the fact that, of course, everybody would know that it was physically impossible for the child to be genetically related to both parents.
     
    Not if the donor is a sibling of the infertile parent.

    The problem with that technique is the biological father is always around. Eventually the kid will find out and might want to hang out with his real father. There is also the chance that the real father will become too attached and seek a more fatherly relationship than and unclely one. All of this is bad news for the legal father.

  47. Queen Victoria and Prince Albert were first cousins and it didn’t seem to do the Windsors any great harm. The Darwins too.

  48. @Unit472
    Owing to the reality that modern civilization is not synchronized with the human biological clock and to the geopolitical and economic consequences of low fertility rates to national governments it is only a matter of time before some nation ( my guess would be Singapore, Japan or South Korea) undertakes a national program of egg implantation into older women's wombs. I've seen women over 60 having this done and it, arguably, makes sense though over 60 maybe pushing it.

    First of all not having children until later in life allows a couple to devote their time and energy into acquiring the resources to raise successful children. It would also allow the children to inherit the parents assets when they are young and in need of just such assets for their own family formation. It also would mean the parent/s would have teenagers or young adults living at home just as they enter their old age. Handy for an elderly mom or dad to have someone around who can do the heavy lifting.

    Teenagers handy to have around? Have you ever met a teenager? ?

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Anthropologist Sarah Blaffer Hrdy, who runs an orchard or a farm as well as teaches at UC Davis, has a riff on how much more household chores work you can get out of an 11 year old girl than a 15 year old girl.
  49. @Anonymous
    Teenagers handy to have around? Have you ever met a teenager? ?

    Anthropologist Sarah Blaffer Hrdy, who runs an orchard or a farm as well as teaches at UC Davis, has a riff on how much more household chores work you can get out of an 11 year old girl than a 15 year old girl.

  50. considering how long Venice prospered in a tough neighborhood.

    Well Venice was pretty tough, too. Read up on Zara and the 4th Crusade among other stuff.

  51. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Not quite on topic but interesting genetic-related news, widely reported. (I suppose the particular paper could be a spoof or hoax, but the overall research area seems legit.):

    “Semen secrets: How a previous sexual partner can influence another male’s offspring”, October 1, 2014, University of New South Wales, in ScienceDaily:

    “…offspring can resemble a mother’s previous sexual partner — in flies at least.”

    The catch is that this might not be some sort of stored sperm phenomena, but might be genetic, perhaps non-fertile female eggs altered in some way by sperm.

    “…size of the young was determined by the size of the first male the mother mated with, rather than the second male that sired the offspring. … complicates our entire view of how variation is transmitted across generations, but also opens up exciting new possibilities…

    …propose that the effect is due to molecules in the seminal fluid of the first mate being absorbed by the female’s immature eggs and then influencing the growth of offspring of a subsequent mate.”

    Another:

    “DNA From Sperm Of Ex Partners Lingers In Female Flies And Influences The Genetics Of Her Offspring”, Dana Dovey, Oct 1, 2014, in Medical Daily:

    “The idea of telegony, or previous mates influencing a woman’s offspring, has been around for centuries. It was first proposed by the Greek philosopher Aristotle and was accepted as science until the early 1900s…

    To answer the question that I’m sure is on every one of your minds, no the researchers are not yet sure whether this phenomenon exists in any other species, but testimony of many experienced breeders suggests it may be. As for humans, I don’t even want to begin opening that can of worms.”

    For her “testimony of many experienced breeders suggests it may be…” she links to
    “Telegony, the sire effect and non-mendelian inheritance mediated by spermatozoa: a historical overview and modern mechanistic speculations”, Reprod Domest Anim. 2011 Apr;46(2):338-43, by Liu YS. Abstract extract:

    “Telegony is the belief that the sire first mated to a female will have an influence upon some of that female’s later offspring by another male. …the reality of telegony was acknowledged by… Darwin, Spencer, Romanes and many experienced breeders, it has been met with scepticism… In this article, alleged cases of telegony are provided. A search of the literature of cell biology and biochemistry reveals several plausible mechanisms that may form the basis… involve the penetration of spermatozoa into the somatic tissues of the female… incorporation of the DNA released… into maternal somatic cells, the presence of foetal DNA in maternal blood, as well as sperm RNA-mediated non-Mendelian inheritance of epigenetic changes.”

    The actual article:

    “Revisiting telegony: offspring inherit an acquired characteristic of their mother’s previous mate”, Angela J. Crean, Anna M. Kopps, Russell Bonduriansky, Ecology Letters (2014).

    “Newly discovered non-genetic mechanisms break the link between genes and inheritance… raising the possibility that previous mating partners could influence traits in offspring sired by subsequent males that mate with the same female (‘telegony’). In the fly Telostylinus angusticollis, males transmit their environmentally acquired condition via paternal effects on offspring body size. We manipulated male condition, and mated females to two males in high or low condition in a fully crossed design. Although the second male sired a large majority of offspring, offspring body size was influenced by the condition of the first male. This effect was not observed when females were exposed to the first male without mating, implicating semen-mediated effects rather than female differential allocation based on pre-mating assessment of male quality. Our results reveal a novel type of transgenerational effect with potential implications for the evolution of reproductive strategies.”

    As in, another reason why virginity is prized.

    The wikipeida article on Telegony

    • Replies: @Sunbeam
    Interesting.

    "…propose that the effect is due to molecules in the seminal fluid of the first mate being absorbed by the female’s immature eggs and then influencing the growth of offspring of a subsequent mate.”

    So while I expect this sort of thing to play out over a number of years, being investigated and argued, just for the heck of it let's assume it is true.

    Know all those "primitive" cultures with wacky ideas about desiring virgins to marry, and having repressive social structures to ensure it?

    It wasn't just plain superstitious bs, it served a purpose.

    I don't have any particular desire to follow this story, or even ponder the ramifications of this directly.

    But if there is a kernel of truth applicable to humans....

    Why the f*#& should I believe a single thing I've been taught by society for the past 100 years?

    Seems to me that you could learn most things by walking into a bar circa 1900 and pumping any yahoo for the way things actually work.

    As opposed to just about anyone who has come along in the past 100 years or so.
  52. @anonymous
    Not quite on topic but interesting genetic-related news, widely reported. (I suppose the particular paper could be a spoof or hoax, but the overall research area seems legit.):

    "Semen secrets: How a previous sexual partner can influence another male's offspring", October 1, 2014, University of New South Wales, in ScienceDaily:

    "...offspring can resemble a mother's previous sexual partner -- in flies at least."

    The catch is that this might not be some sort of stored sperm phenomena, but might be genetic, perhaps non-fertile female eggs altered in some way by sperm.

    "...size of the young was determined by the size of the first male the mother mated with, rather than the second male that sired the offspring. ... complicates our entire view of how variation is transmitted across generations, but also opens up exciting new possibilities...

    ...propose that the effect is due to molecules in the seminal fluid of the first mate being absorbed by the female's immature eggs and then influencing the growth of offspring of a subsequent mate."


    Another:

    "DNA From Sperm Of Ex Partners Lingers In Female Flies And Influences The Genetics Of Her Offspring", Dana Dovey, Oct 1, 2014, in Medical Daily:

    "The idea of telegony, or previous mates influencing a woman’s offspring, has been around for centuries. It was first proposed by the Greek philosopher Aristotle and was accepted as science until the early 1900s...

    To answer the question that I’m sure is on every one of your minds, no the researchers are not yet sure whether this phenomenon exists in any other species, but testimony of many experienced breeders suggests it may be. As for humans, I don’t even want to begin opening that can of worms."



    For her "testimony of many experienced breeders suggests it may be..." she links to
    "Telegony, the sire effect and non-mendelian inheritance mediated by spermatozoa: a historical overview and modern mechanistic speculations", Reprod Domest Anim. 2011 Apr;46(2):338-43, by Liu YS. Abstract extract:

    "Telegony is the belief that the sire first mated to a female will have an influence upon some of that female's later offspring by another male. ...the reality of telegony was acknowledged by... Darwin, Spencer, Romanes and many experienced breeders, it has been met with scepticism... In this article, alleged cases of telegony are provided. A search of the literature of cell biology and biochemistry reveals several plausible mechanisms that may form the basis... involve the penetration of spermatozoa into the somatic tissues of the female... incorporation of the DNA released... into maternal somatic cells, the presence of foetal DNA in maternal blood, as well as sperm RNA-mediated non-Mendelian inheritance of epigenetic changes."


    The actual article:

    "Revisiting telegony: offspring inherit an acquired characteristic of their mother's previous mate", Angela J. Crean, Anna M. Kopps, Russell Bonduriansky, Ecology Letters (2014).

    "Newly discovered non-genetic mechanisms break the link between genes and inheritance... raising the possibility that previous mating partners could influence traits in offspring sired by subsequent males that mate with the same female (‘telegony’). In the fly Telostylinus angusticollis, males transmit their environmentally acquired condition via paternal effects on offspring body size. We manipulated male condition, and mated females to two males in high or low condition in a fully crossed design. Although the second male sired a large majority of offspring, offspring body size was influenced by the condition of the first male. This effect was not observed when females were exposed to the first male without mating, implicating semen-mediated effects rather than female differential allocation based on pre-mating assessment of male quality. Our results reveal a novel type of transgenerational effect with potential implications for the evolution of reproductive strategies."


    As in, another reason why virginity is prized.


    The wikipeida article on Telegony

    Interesting.

    “…propose that the effect is due to molecules in the seminal fluid of the first mate being absorbed by the female’s immature eggs and then influencing the growth of offspring of a subsequent mate.”

    So while I expect this sort of thing to play out over a number of years, being investigated and argued, just for the heck of it let’s assume it is true.

    Know all those “primitive” cultures with wacky ideas about desiring virgins to marry, and having repressive social structures to ensure it?

    It wasn’t just plain superstitious bs, it served a purpose.

    I don’t have any particular desire to follow this story, or even ponder the ramifications of this directly.

    But if there is a kernel of truth applicable to humans….

    Why the f*#& should I believe a single thing I’ve been taught by society for the past 100 years?

    Seems to me that you could learn most things by walking into a bar circa 1900 and pumping any yahoo for the way things actually work.

    As opposed to just about anyone who has come along in the past 100 years or so.

  53. @Anonymous
    In 30 Rock, a white gay character and his black boyfriend decide to have children. So they mix their sperm together to be sure they will never know who's the biological father of their child... Oh, and they have triplet. All black. And the black boyfriend dumps the babies on the white guy... Brilliant.

    Actually, at least one of the gay couples at the seminars had done exactly this. They were both white, though.

  54. I would like to think that Aunt Fran and Aunt Ellen would be sensible enough, wise enough, to say, “Don’t do it!”

    When you attempt to inject ethics into any area that is fundamentally unethical, hilarity ensues. Or, rather, tragicomedy.

    Say, did you know that Machiavelli– yes, Machiavelli— wrote a play revolving around sperm donation? It’s called The Mandrake, and it was Tom Hanks’s only Broadway appearance.

  55. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Steve, since you’ve revealed here that you are adopted, I’m sure that you don’t need me to remind you that 23andme is an excellent resource for the adopted trying to find their roots. At the very least, you will find the ethnicity of your parents accurately, also, it is more than likely that 2nd or 3rd cousins will be matched to you, but alas, if they accept contact is another matter.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    One set of parents seems like about the right number.
  56. @Nathan Wartooth
    "One lawyer said, “If you go ahead with this idea, the surrogate can keep the child and in my experience they will do that 100% of the time.”"

    Maybe because he is a lawyer and only steps in when the cases go bad?

    I can't really believe that this happens 100% of the time. Are there any stats on this anywhere?

    I'm also kind of curious about how many people in that sperm donor book have blond hair and blue eyes. For some reason people who talk about genetic engineering and eugenics frequently bring up "blond hair and blue eyes" as being the devil; since something, something Hitler.

    “Maybe because he is a lawyer and only steps in when the cases go bad?”

    You think he would have given that warning in that case? You don’t think he would know himself that he is called in only when cases go bad, so that the cases he knew of weren’t representative?

    No, there is a lawyer present when the contract is written and signed in each of these surrogate cases, and the lawyer stays with the case until the child is born and handed over.

    As for blond hair and blue eyes, of course they are the most aesthetically pleasing trait no matter what people in the media say. This is known by billions of people all over the world. And as luck would have it, Danish sperm donors are in very high demand in the U.S. Denmark has a law that guarantees that donors can remain anonymous. Sweden doesn’t have that law (since you can’t let an evil MAN have a right at the expense of a poor little child), thus no U.S. demand for donors from Sweden, and there are also much fewer donors for the same reason.

  57. @Anonymous
    Steve, since you've revealed here that you are adopted, I'm sure that you don't need me to remind you that 23andme is an excellent resource for the adopted trying to find their roots. At the very least, you will find the ethnicity of your parents accurately, also, it is more than likely that 2nd or 3rd cousins will be matched to you, but alas, if they accept contact is another matter.

    One set of parents seems like about the right number.

  58. @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    Uh, you might want to rethink that. Steve mentioned the case of Roger Fedderer and while he's somewhat muscular and certainly athletic, he does have quite the preponderance of body hair. In the old days, the pre-Beckham/90s, tons of muscular athletes tended to have tons of bodyhair. Hello, 1970s?

    Ron Jeremy is also a Sherman, so that's the main reason his mom wasn't a crack whore and his father a pimp. Unless you're trying to say that most Shermans tend to be hairier than most humans, well, there's no real data to support that per se.

    Also Ron Jeremy has a Master's Degree in....something. A legitimate degree in secondary education or something before he decided on the career switch and apply his natural giftedness to the small screen and then later the DVD/internet markets.

    Ferderer is skillful but by my way of thinking he is relatively skinny (look at his arms). Some chemically augmented Chinese athetes were getting round drug testing by using DHT, it does have an effect on the nervous system.

    Anyway, the average woman likes cut muscles, they do not like a lot of body hair or the bald heads that often go with it. Bald men are perceived as not very masculine.

  59. Of course, I mean, what parent doesn’t want a calculator humanoid?

    Mega-billionaires like Larry Ellison and Mark Cuban need not apply. One a 2nd-tier state college dropout the other a 2nd-tier state college grad in business administration. Forget the Reed College dropout after one semester of calligraphy class. Or the C student from Ball State University, Dave Letterman. Or the speech therapy grad from Emerson College, Jay Leno. Or the communications major who transferred to Queens College CCNY from SUNY Oswego, Jerry Seinfeld. Or the journalism graduate from Point Park College in Pittsburgh, PA, Dennis Miller. Et al.

    Or the never went to college highly verbal Rush Limbaugh, the 1 year at Harvard Bill Gates, the barely made it out of high school comedic geniuses Norm MacDonald, Adam Carolla or Gilbert Gottfried.

  60. In Search of Eggcellence.

  61. “A few times, prospective parents in the audience announced that they were going to avoid this expense and use just one woman, a surrogate who would both conceive and carry the child. The lawyers always warned them not to do that. ”
    The “Baby M” case, a Long Island dispute some years ago, involved just this kind of arrangement , and Newsday, the local left-wing newspaper, always described the mother as a “surrogate”, which annoyed me.
    In what way is a woman who conceives and bears a child a “surrogate”? A surrogate for what? She is just selling her rights to the child , pure and simple. The lawyer is correct, however, that the mother, as in Baby M case, will generally renage on the contract of sale. Whether is a result of new-found maternal feelings or just an attempt to squeeze more money out of the baby purchasers will vary case-to-case, I suppose.

  62. Germans, the Master Race; Americans, the Masturbator Race.

  63. Dahlia says:

    Danish sperm donors are in very high demand in the U.S. Denmark has a law that guarantees that donors can remain anonymous. Sweden doesn’t have that law (since you can’t let an evil MAN have a right at the expense of a poor little child), thus no U.S. demand for donors from Sweden, and there are also much fewer donors for the same reason.
    Anonymity is very quickly becoming a thing of the past with so many people having their DNA revealed. One person reveals a lot of family. And that number seeking testing will only go up.
    My relative declined getting tested by 23 and me when I started talking about adoptees finding their biological parents, muttering about some things better left unknown. What he didn’t realize is that, if he is being sought, distant cousins’ DNA helps find him, anything closer and he’s found.
    One should read the stories of adoptees finding their parents through DNA; they run the gamut. A common theme is the shock of many birth parents being found out due to a technology that none of their ancestors had nor could imagine: it wasn’t supposed to be this way! Especially likely felt if the adoption was in the pre-Roe hedonistic era.

  64. @Sunbeam
    "Ron Jeremy is also a Sherman, so that’s the main reason his mom wasn’t a crack whore and his father a pimp. Unless you’re trying to say that most Shermans tend to be hairier than most humans, well, there’s no real data to support that per se. "

    I have no earthly idea what this paragraph means.

    Me, neither. In street lingo, a “Sherman” is a cigar (short for “a Nat Sherman”). There is an obvious reason for associating a cigar with Jeremy, but that doesn’t explain what he meant.

    • Replies: @HA
    Sunbeam: "I have no earthly idea what this paragraph means."

    I think he is referring to the fact that Sherman is typically a Jewish surname. Swap out "Sherman" with "Jew" and see if that makes sense.

    (Then again, whenever there is any question about what a comment on this blog is actually referencing, the answer is likely to be Jewish something or other. Maybe I'm jumping to conclusions.)

  65. >>> my guess would be Singapore

    Apparently you’ve never even bothered clicking on http://www.straitstimes.com

    it’s ==halfway== understandable that folks who are too lazy to bother reading the Hebrew newspapers, still present themselves as knowledge-able about the Israel scene….

    ….but too lazy to read the english-language Singaporean newspapers?!?

    Singapore, until recently, had has MASSIVE per-capita guestWorker & immigration. The Patriarchy still runs a benign (deFacto) “Royal Family” which, being Han-Chinese, is smart enough to pay CLOSE attention to the election returns. For example, it is no longer possible to buy (under any “investment” guise), Permanent Residency. That got cut off completely a coupla years ago when the RoyalFamily noticed the rising level of complaints in the newspapers, and the speeches of the Opposition.

  66. Anyway, the average woman likes cut muscles, they do not like a lot of body hair or the bald heads that often go with it. Bald men are perceived as not very masculine.

    I feel as if I’ve learned a lot about Sean. He’s got rippled abs and pecs, a full head of hair, no body hair and women adore him. But I’m not sure I’ve learned much about women and their preferences. I would caution him against generalizing from his own experience. When beautiful women lean against him and murmur, “Oh Sean, I love your hairless chest, which is as smooth and soft as a baby’s bottom,” they are worshiping Sean’s specific body and personality, not necessarily expressing a preference for lesser smooth men or a distaste for all hairy men. Hairy chests on men like Clark Gable, Cary Grant, Gary Cooper, Errol Flynn, Sean Connery, Tom Jones and Hugh Jackman seem to be attractive to women, while smooth chests on men like Chris Christie seem to have little appeal.

    I will say, though, that the taste for chest hair seems to go in cycles. Back in the 70’s, when Burt Reynolds was the biggest star in America, his hairiness was a big part of his shtick. He’d come on the Tonight Show, and he and Johnny Carson would riff on his chest hair while the women in the audience shrieked. These days, things have changed. In the 70’s and 80’s, when a macho man took off his shirt, women were more likely to say, “Yuck, a tattoo,” but “I love your hairy chest.” Nowadays, they’re more likely to love the tattoo and say yuck to the hair. Another sign of the degeneracy of our times.

  67. […] Steve Sailer The Inevitability of Infertility Eugenics […]

  68. The odd couple took a different approach. They pointed out that regression to the mean created a large chance that even the smartest egg donor would not produce an exceptionally smart child. They said they suspected that parents who selected for intelligence (or beauty or athletic ability, etc.) and whose child turned out to be average or less would feel as if they had not gotten their money’s worth. (This seems pretty likely to me, considering who the parents were.) The odd couple hadn’t wanted to take the chance of feeling that way about their own child. Reasoning that all of the donors had been screened for good health, they had just opened the catalog and chosen the donor who appeared on the first page they saw. I had to respect them for that, although I wouldn’t have the strength of character to do the same myself.

    This is one of the dumbest things i’ve ever heard. (It can’t be the dumbest only because Bryan Caplan is alive and writing.)

    Think of all the drama associated with finding a “suitable” mate. (Before we got stupid, at least, people understood that in the context of having children with this person.) Jane Austen’s entire oeuvre out the window.

    Heck, the core principle that underlies the nature of female sexuality–that frustrates so many a high school lad–*choosiness*. No desire to mate freely, but rather a strong desire to mate only with the a high quality (essentially the *best possible*) male.

    Heck that seems to extend to female sexuality of most species. The rams have to butt heads, then the ewe is open to being mounted by … the winner!

    Heck, the core basis for evolution–why we even exist instead of just a planet of primordial ooze–is *selection*.

    Tools. Complete tools.

  69. Sean, real men have hair on their chests, and women know that.

  70. @Anonymous

    They focused on IQ’s, SAT scores, GPA’s (all must be very high), schools attended (only the most selective colleges) and academic majors (a preference for hard majors where a high GPA really means something, rather than soft majors where everybody receives high grades).
     
    Of course, I mean, what parent doesn't want a calculator humanoid?

    Mega-billionaires like Larry Ellison and Mark Cuban need not apply. One a 2nd-tier state college dropout the other a 2nd-tier state college grad in business administration. Forget the Reed College dropout after one semester of calligraphy class. Or the C student from Ball State University, Dave Letterman. Or the speech therapy grad from Emerson College, Jay Leno. Or the communications major who transferred to Queens College CCNY from SUNY Oswego, Jerry Seinfeld. Or the journalism graduate from Point Park College in Pittsburgh, PA, Dennis Miller. Et al.

    Meanwhile all the Stanford and MIT grads work their 70-hour per week Boston Consulting Group jobs and in their free time look forward to going to the Celtics game and get emotional about Rajon Rondo's injury.

    Of course, I mean, what parent doesn’t want a calculator humanoid?

    Mega-billionaires like Larry Ellison and Mark Cuban need not apply ….

    Meanwhile all the Stanford and MIT grads work their 70-hour per week Boston Consulting Group jobs and in their free time look forward to going to the Celtics game and get emotional about Rajon Rondo’s injury.

    Larry Ellison is an a*hole. I could live without Mark Cuban too.

    The fact, that TPTB have torqued the US economy into a giant casino\shakedown, and we have lots of smart kids who turn their talents to WaWa (Wall Street-Washington) parasitism, is sickening. But those kids still have genetic traits that in a better world, instead of writing program trading for derivatives could be working on better battery technology or breeder reactor design, or instead of K-street lobbying could be helping manage an auto-company or a home-builder.

    I’ve been around smart kids and dumb ones. The smart kids aren’t “human calculators”. There are some weird aspergery exceptions, but in general they are far more interesting, more aware of their surroundings both local and the culture, the world they live in, more “alive” … just more “human” than the not-so-brights.

  71. @fish
    Using a sperm donor is a much cheaper process, costing only a few hundred dollars (and costing nothing for those who use the turkey baster method with a male friend as donor)

    Well a cheaper process for them.....just wait till Ellen and Portia split and one of them starts hounding you, the donor, for child support!

    Then who wishes he wasn't such a nice guy.

    I think the core problem with the much more reliable method of known donors, is that courts involved in family law simply do not honor contracts of any kind. They’ll go after the donor dad for support, even though there is simple, clear, black in on paper stating that dad is off the hook.

    It used to be there was just one contract–marriage. There was real community\social pressure for the woman to abide by the contract, and if she left the dad actually had some rights–father custody. Now there is no social pressure\stigma on a woman, dumping her hubby and the guy has no rights.

    If courts simply honored contracts, we would quickly see pre-nups–no alimony, shared custody, no child support–that would end divorce rape, correct the balance and make marriage a safe and attractive option for men again.

    Couple that with the law actually taking “women in charge of their own bodies” seriously–men only being responsible for a women’s kids if they are married or she has a another piece of paper where he agrees to support her kid–and a lot of our problems around illegitimacy and single parenthood would start to wane.

    It’s actually not very hard to concoct laws\contracts that incentivise good behavior–in this case traditional high-investment parenting. The problem is that we have lots of rent-seeking scum–lawyers, counselors, advocates, judges (and other parasites) in the divorce industry; feminists; bureaucrats, social workers and of course “big government” proponents generally whose interest is precisely in *not* having people behave responsibly and take care of themselves.

  72. @I, Libertine
    Me, neither. In street lingo, a "Sherman" is a cigar (short for "a Nat Sherman"). There is an obvious reason for associating a cigar with Jeremy, but that doesn't explain what he meant.

    Sunbeam: “I have no earthly idea what this paragraph means.”

    I think he is referring to the fact that Sherman is typically a Jewish surname. Swap out “Sherman” with “Jew” and see if that makes sense.

    (Then again, whenever there is any question about what a comment on this blog is actually referencing, the answer is likely to be Jewish something or other. Maybe I’m jumping to conclusions.)

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Such as William Tecumseh Sherman, Bobby Sherman, Richard Sherman, and Sherman McCoy.
  73. the core principle that underlies the nature of female sexuality–that frustrates so many a high school lad–*choosiness*. No desire to mate freely, but rather a strong desire to mate only with the a high quality (essentially the *best possible*) male.

    You don’t know much about women as they actually are. But you have a fine grasp on women as they are imagined by a certain sector of the HBD and manosphere.

    that seems to extend to female sexuality of most species. The rams have to butt heads, then the ewe is open to being mounted by … the winner!

    It somehow escaped you that there is not much female *choosiness* going on there?

    • Replies: @AnotherDad

    You don’t know much about women as they actually are. But you have a fine grasp on women as they are imagined by a certain sector of the HBD and manosphere.

     

    That may be ;-) But i do enough experience to know that they are considerable more "choosy" than men.

    Now maybe young women have radically changed in the 30 odd years i've been "off the market", and now supply as much sex as the high school boys want to consume. I didn't see this as my kids trooped through HS. But maybe outside of my leafy suburb, the gals are good to go with any pimply faced boy who passes by. Somehow ... i doubt it. But you, great sage, can enlighten us as to how women "actually are".

    ~~~
    that seems to extend to female sexuality of most species. The rams have to butt heads, then the ewe is open to being mounted by … the winner!

    It somehow escaped you that there is not much female *choosiness* going on there?
     
    Geez ... i don't know what you want to call it. When an ewe runs away from a ram, then lets the winner of a head butting contest mount her ... pick you adjective. Or just call it "selection", which is, of course, the point of my post about these nimrods.

    ~~~
    Final point, while HBD was sort of inevitable given human expansion over the planet into wildly different environments, then creating even more different environments with the neolithic and then civilization ... my point about women, choosiness and selection has nothing specifically to do with HBD ... it's evolutionary biology 101.

    *Every species must be undergoing continuous selection simply to maintain its fitness to survive.*

    Ewe's exhibit "choosiness"--whether you want to call it that or not, doesn't change the fact of it--in mating, because ewes that did *not* exhibit such choosiness would have inferior offspring which would be killed by wolves, or hunters, or starve to death, or simply fail to leave any offspring because they were beaten in head butting contests by rams bred by ewes who were "choosy".

    Selection, selection, selection, selection. Always and everywhere. That's the norm.

    We just have *extremely* low selective pressure in the modern industrial welfare state west. Essentially every child surviving and (the females) reproducing surviving children at will. That's a bizarre state, unlikely--actually impossible--to last in its current form. And in no way mitigates this couple from being complete fools.
    , @dcite
    I'm more amazed by the bad choices made by women, especially teenagers. That said, what do boys that age choose, given their druthers? It's almost as if the least nice are the most desired. And when I say "nice", I am not just talking about sex.

    It's all a crap shoot. It's why most cultures, especially those that marry very young, had arranged marriages. Teens are lousy at any insight into others.

  74. The fact, that TPTB have torqued the US economy into a giant casino\shakedown, and we have lots of smart kids who turn their talents to WaWa (Wall Street-Washington) parasitism, is sickening. But those kids still have genetic traits that in a better world, instead of writing program trading for derivatives could be working on better battery technology or breeder reactor design, or instead of K-street lobbying could be helping manage an auto-company or a home-builder.

    So we have “TPTB” (boo!) and we have “smart kids” (yay!) and the former create the world in which the hapless latter must live and work? Given your description of the way the world works it’s very obvious that ‘TPTB” are quite a bit smarter than anyone else, including the “smart kids”. As a trait to value above all others, “smartness” is a terrible choice.

  75. “The lawyer is correct, however, that the mother, as in Baby M case, will generally renage on the contract of sale.”

    In my experience, women in general will renege on any commitment if (1) it’s in their perceived self-interest to do so; and (2) they think they can get away with it. Actually a lot of men are like that too but people with a strong sense of honor seem to be mostly men.

    There’s a reason people will sometimes say “he’s a man of his word,” but they pretty much never say “she’s a girl of her word.” Because such girls are practically non-existent.

  76. @HA
    Sunbeam: "I have no earthly idea what this paragraph means."

    I think he is referring to the fact that Sherman is typically a Jewish surname. Swap out "Sherman" with "Jew" and see if that makes sense.

    (Then again, whenever there is any question about what a comment on this blog is actually referencing, the answer is likely to be Jewish something or other. Maybe I'm jumping to conclusions.)

    Such as William Tecumseh Sherman, Bobby Sherman, Richard Sherman, and Sherman McCoy.

    • Replies: @HA
    True, and there's plenty of non-Jewish Zimmermans out there, too, as we've recently been told. And I suspect some parts of the country (e.g. New York) would regard Sherman as more Jewish than, say, parts of the deep South. But when discussing Ron Jeremy's background, that's what I figured he was getting at. If that is what was intended, I'm not saying I agree with him, but the statement sort of rhymes with some other things I've read around here, so at least it parses.
  77. Is the “odd couple” lying? I would guess “yes.” Based on my experience, when people make uncorroborated self-serving claims, they are usually lying.

    Also, when people describe their motivations for doing things, they almost inevitably choose the most flattering explanation for their conduct.

  78. @Greenstalk
    the core principle that underlies the nature of female sexuality–that frustrates so many a high school lad–*choosiness*. No desire to mate freely, but rather a strong desire to mate only with the a high quality (essentially the *best possible*) male.

    You don't know much about women as they actually are. But you have a fine grasp on women as they are imagined by a certain sector of the HBD and manosphere.

    that seems to extend to female sexuality of most species. The rams have to butt heads, then the ewe is open to being mounted by … the winner!

    It somehow escaped you that there is not much female *choosiness* going on there?

    You don’t know much about women as they actually are. But you have a fine grasp on women as they are imagined by a certain sector of the HBD and manosphere.

    That may be 😉 But i do enough experience to know that they are considerable more “choosy” than men.

    Now maybe young women have radically changed in the 30 odd years i’ve been “off the market”, and now supply as much sex as the high school boys want to consume. I didn’t see this as my kids trooped through HS. But maybe outside of my leafy suburb, the gals are good to go with any pimply faced boy who passes by. Somehow … i doubt it. But you, great sage, can enlighten us as to how women “actually are”.

    ~~~
    that seems to extend to female sexuality of most species. The rams have to butt heads, then the ewe is open to being mounted by … the winner!

    It somehow escaped you that there is not much female *choosiness* going on there?

    Geez … i don’t know what you want to call it. When an ewe runs away from a ram, then lets the winner of a head butting contest mount her … pick you adjective. Or just call it “selection”, which is, of course, the point of my post about these nimrods.

    ~~~
    Final point, while HBD was sort of inevitable given human expansion over the planet into wildly different environments, then creating even more different environments with the neolithic and then civilization … my point about women, choosiness and selection has nothing specifically to do with HBD … it’s evolutionary biology 101.

    *Every species must be undergoing continuous selection simply to maintain its fitness to survive.*

    Ewe’s exhibit “choosiness”–whether you want to call it that or not, doesn’t change the fact of it–in mating, because ewes that did *not* exhibit such choosiness would have inferior offspring which would be killed by wolves, or hunters, or starve to death, or simply fail to leave any offspring because they were beaten in head butting contests by rams bred by ewes who were “choosy”.

    Selection, selection, selection, selection. Always and everywhere. That’s the norm.

    We just have *extremely* low selective pressure in the modern industrial welfare state west. Essentially every child surviving and (the females) reproducing surviving children at will. That’s a bizarre state, unlikely–actually impossible–to last in its current form. And in no way mitigates this couple from being complete fools.

  79. @Steve Sailer
    Such as William Tecumseh Sherman, Bobby Sherman, Richard Sherman, and Sherman McCoy.

    True, and there’s plenty of non-Jewish Zimmermans out there, too, as we’ve recently been told. And I suspect some parts of the country (e.g. New York) would regard Sherman as more Jewish than, say, parts of the deep South. But when discussing Ron Jeremy’s background, that’s what I figured he was getting at. If that is what was intended, I’m not saying I agree with him, but the statement sort of rhymes with some other things I’ve read around here, so at least it parses.

  80. I’m also kind of curious about how many people in that sperm donor book have blond hair and blue eyes. For some reason people who talk about genetic engineering and eugenics frequently bring up “blond hair and blue eyes” as being the devil; since something, something Hitler.

    They’re like trained seals. Blond-blue bad, arf! Arf! Arf! Hoping for a fish.

    I suspect it’s mostly just envy, due to their homogeneity.

    The Jewish Kaganovich died in his bed in his 90s, if I recall correctly. Nobody ever went after the brown-haired, brown-eyed Jews over him.

    The Mongols were the most evil butchers in history. Just flat-out evil, as a race. Nobody ever worries about black hair and black eyes over them.

  81. “If courts simply honored contracts, we would quickly see pre-nups–no alimony, shared custody, no child support–that would end divorce rape, correct the balance and make marriage a safe and attractive option for men again. ”
    Ain’t gonna happen.
    The two constants that underlie the state laws dealing with kids and families generally (let’s just call it Family Law) are: (1) the state does not want to support the kid(s) if someone else is around to do it and (2) courts are supposed to make decisions about custody, support, etc., based what is best for the child (referred to as Best Interests of the Child, or BIC. The key to making almost any court decision involving kids is BIC). Not the parent.
    That is why, e.g., when an unmarried woman with children applies for welfare, the government (in my neck of the woods, NY, it would be the County welfare dept.) will always try to get her to give up the names of the Baby Daddies. They will then pursue them and try to squeeze money out of them.

    In a Family Law regime recognizing and honoring contracts, the state could not do this.

  82. @Greenstalk
    the core principle that underlies the nature of female sexuality–that frustrates so many a high school lad–*choosiness*. No desire to mate freely, but rather a strong desire to mate only with the a high quality (essentially the *best possible*) male.

    You don't know much about women as they actually are. But you have a fine grasp on women as they are imagined by a certain sector of the HBD and manosphere.

    that seems to extend to female sexuality of most species. The rams have to butt heads, then the ewe is open to being mounted by … the winner!

    It somehow escaped you that there is not much female *choosiness* going on there?

    I’m more amazed by the bad choices made by women, especially teenagers. That said, what do boys that age choose, given their druthers? It’s almost as if the least nice are the most desired. And when I say “nice”, I am not just talking about sex.

    It’s all a crap shoot. It’s why most cultures, especially those that marry very young, had arranged marriages. Teens are lousy at any insight into others.

  83. “There’s a reason people will sometimes say “he’s a man of his word,” but they pretty much never say “she’s a girl of her word.” Because such girls are practically non-existent.”

    Ah horsefeathers. Actually one does say “Woman of her word.” Somewhat historical, but still around. But no, not “girl of her world.” Now that does sound silly. Like “Boy of honor.” Stop throwing up those straw girls.

    I honor commitments, my female friends honor their commitments (at least those ones I know of) and no animal rescue squad, or volunteer organization in my area could do anything if it weren’t for women honoring their commitments.

    Sometimes catch- phrases exist to emphasize the surprise of the unusual, not the usual.

    But what would a thread be on this blog without at least one such comment.

  84. “Ah horsefeathers.”

    So your position is that among people who feel compelled to honor their commitments regardless of consequences or self-interest, it’s pretty much evenly divided between male and female?

    Based on my informal observations, I would definitely disagree. Women feel a stronger compulsion to honor what society expects of them; men feel a stronger compulsion to honor their own commitments.

    • Replies: @dcite
    "Based on my informal observations, I would definitely disagree. Women feel a stronger compulsion to honor what society expects of them; men feel a stronger compulsion to honor their own commitments."

    All I know is that "what society expects" is not in itself any criteria that means anything to me. Most of what the past 70 yrs calls "history" is lies perpetrated by a media controlled by a very few people. They control by ridicule and marginalization. When I look at most of society's "elite", all I see are hollow demons. I've seen people, both men & women, risk their jobs and reputations and families, in their commitment to just trying to get the truth out. How most of them handle their personal lives, I really don't know. I only know mine, and a few personal friends. I have been impressed by the male tendency to take financial responsibility--that does play out more.
    btw, it is rather well known that male prisoners tend to get frequent visits from various females in their lives, but women prisoners are rarely visited by any men that had been in their lives, even husbands. So is "commitment" the same as "loyalty"? (and no, I have no personal experience of prison, only hearsay.) So is this that women like bad boys and men don't like bad girls, or does it have to do with "commitment? " Head scratcher there.
  85. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    In other slightly off-topic but related news:

    “Spiders: Survival of the fittest group”, ScienceDaily, 1-Oct-2014:

    “Researchers have uncovered the first-ever field-based evidence for a biological mechanism called ‘group selection’ contributing to local adaptation in natural populations. Evolutionary theorists have been debating the existence and power of group selection for decades. Now two scientists have observed it in the wild.”

    “…Evolutionary theorists have been debating the existence and power of group selection for decades. Now Pruitt and Goodnight have observed it in the wild — as they report in the journal Nature.”

    “…field study shows natural selection working on a collective trait — the docile-to-aggressive ratio, known to pass down from generation to generation — that has led to an adaptation that determines whether whole colonies survive or die. In other words: group selection observed in the wild.”

    Here is the actual paper (Most of the content pay-walled):

    “Site-specific group selection drives locally adapted group compositions”, Jonathan N. Pruitt, Charles J. Goodnight, Nature, 1-Oct-2014. From the abstract:

    “Group selection may be defined as selection caused by the differential extinction or proliferation of groups…

    …Using experimentally constructed colonies of known composition, here we demonstrate that population-level divergence in docile:aggressive ratios is driven by site-specific selection at the group level—certain ratios yield high survivorship at some sites but not others. Our data also indicate that colonies responded to the risk of extinction: perturbed colonies tended to adjust their composition over two generations to match the ratio characteristic of their native site, thus promoting their long-term survival in their natal habitat. However, colonies of displaced individuals continued to shift their compositions towards mixtures that would have promoted their survival had they remained at their home sites, regardless of their contemporary environment. Thus, the regulatory mechanisms that colonies use to adjust their composition appear to be locally adapted. Our data provide experimental evidence of group selection driving collective traits in wild populations.

    (The possibility of group selection, as opposed to individual selection, is controversial in some quarters; it doesn’t sit well with PC. As the wikipeida article on group selection puts it:

    “…For several decades, however, critiques, particularly by George C. Williams, John Maynard Smith and C.M. Perrins (1964), historically cast serious doubt on group selection as a major mechanism of evolution. However, some scientists have pursued the idea over the last few decades, and group selection models have seen a resurgence since the mid-1990s with increasing popularity.”)

  86. @sabril
    "Ah horsefeathers."

    So your position is that among people who feel compelled to honor their commitments regardless of consequences or self-interest, it's pretty much evenly divided between male and female?

    Based on my informal observations, I would definitely disagree. Women feel a stronger compulsion to honor what society expects of them; men feel a stronger compulsion to honor their own commitments.

    “Based on my informal observations, I would definitely disagree. Women feel a stronger compulsion to honor what society expects of them; men feel a stronger compulsion to honor their own commitments.”

    All I know is that “what society expects” is not in itself any criteria that means anything to me. Most of what the past 70 yrs calls “history” is lies perpetrated by a media controlled by a very few people. They control by ridicule and marginalization. When I look at most of society’s “elite”, all I see are hollow demons. I’ve seen people, both men & women, risk their jobs and reputations and families, in their commitment to just trying to get the truth out. How most of them handle their personal lives, I really don’t know. I only know mine, and a few personal friends. I have been impressed by the male tendency to take financial responsibility–that does play out more.
    btw, it is rather well known that male prisoners tend to get frequent visits from various females in their lives, but women prisoners are rarely visited by any men that had been in their lives, even husbands. So is “commitment” the same as “loyalty”? (and no, I have no personal experience of prison, only hearsay.) So is this that women like bad boys and men don’t like bad girls, or does it have to do with “commitment? ” Head scratcher there.

    • Replies: @MaMu1977
    Any woman in the US of A who receives jail time has either committed a literally heinous crime (Catherine Kieu Becker) and/or is derived from the lowest of the low (recidivist drug dealers, baby smotherers, amateur euthanasia enthusiast nurses, etc.)

    A few years ago, I worked with a man who gained custody of his sons after their mother received her SECOND guilty verdict for allowing crystal meth suppliers to enjoy their "innocence". She received less time in jail than the local town drunk, despite having allowed a group of diseased addicts free access to the orifices to her own children.

    Women will stand by their incarcerated men if/when the benefits outweigh the disadvantages, men won't stand by their incarcerated women for the opposite reason (namely, the fact that a woman behind bars has no real advantages to give.)
  87. “All I know is that ‘what society expects’ is not in itself any criteria that means anything to me.”

    So lets see if I have this straight:

    1. You dispute that women tend to be more conformist than men.

    2. You dispute that men tend to feel (and act on) a stronger urge to honor their commitments than do women.

    Do I understand you correctly?

    • Replies: @dcite
    "Do I understand you correctly?"

    I don't know. Different priorities maybe. But hey, have a great life.

  88. @JayMan

    The odd couple took a different approach. They pointed out that regression to the mean created a large chance that even the smartest egg donor would not produce an exceptionally smart child.
     
    Some of this could be avoided by learning something about the family background of the donor. Children regress to their family's mean, not the mean of then whole population (though, of course, the mean all families is that of the group). The parents of the donor will typically suffice. :)

    can you elaborate I have noticed my family is pretty consistently high like 130 over at least four generations are you saying this is usual

  89. @sabril
    "All I know is that 'what society expects' is not in itself any criteria that means anything to me."

    So lets see if I have this straight:

    1. You dispute that women tend to be more conformist than men.

    2. You dispute that men tend to feel (and act on) a stronger urge to honor their commitments than do women.

    Do I understand you correctly?

    “Do I understand you correctly?”

    I don’t know. Different priorities maybe. But hey, have a great life.

    • Replies: @sabril
    "I don’t know. Different priorities maybe. "

    If you won't be clear about your own position; and you won't be clear about what exactly you disagree with in my position, there's not much to discuss.

    The fact is that women have a stronger tendency than men to conform to society's dictates; men have a stronger tendency than women to conform to their own commitments. This is so obvious from simple observation that there is no need for a scientific study.

    "But hey, have a great life."

    You too. But I have a feeling I haven't heard the last from you. Call it my masculine intuition.
  90. @dcite
    "Do I understand you correctly?"

    I don't know. Different priorities maybe. But hey, have a great life.

    “I don’t know. Different priorities maybe. ”

    If you won’t be clear about your own position; and you won’t be clear about what exactly you disagree with in my position, there’s not much to discuss.

    The fact is that women have a stronger tendency than men to conform to society’s dictates; men have a stronger tendency than women to conform to their own commitments. This is so obvious from simple observation that there is no need for a scientific study.

    “But hey, have a great life.”

    You too. But I have a feeling I haven’t heard the last from you. Call it my masculine intuition.

  91. […] 10/06/14: Steve Sailer, The Inevitability of Infertility Eugenics. […]

  92. @dcite
    "Based on my informal observations, I would definitely disagree. Women feel a stronger compulsion to honor what society expects of them; men feel a stronger compulsion to honor their own commitments."

    All I know is that "what society expects" is not in itself any criteria that means anything to me. Most of what the past 70 yrs calls "history" is lies perpetrated by a media controlled by a very few people. They control by ridicule and marginalization. When I look at most of society's "elite", all I see are hollow demons. I've seen people, both men & women, risk their jobs and reputations and families, in their commitment to just trying to get the truth out. How most of them handle their personal lives, I really don't know. I only know mine, and a few personal friends. I have been impressed by the male tendency to take financial responsibility--that does play out more.
    btw, it is rather well known that male prisoners tend to get frequent visits from various females in their lives, but women prisoners are rarely visited by any men that had been in their lives, even husbands. So is "commitment" the same as "loyalty"? (and no, I have no personal experience of prison, only hearsay.) So is this that women like bad boys and men don't like bad girls, or does it have to do with "commitment? " Head scratcher there.

    Any woman in the US of A who receives jail time has either committed a literally heinous crime (Catherine Kieu Becker) and/or is derived from the lowest of the low (recidivist drug dealers, baby smotherers, amateur euthanasia enthusiast nurses, etc.)

    A few years ago, I worked with a man who gained custody of his sons after their mother received her SECOND guilty verdict for allowing crystal meth suppliers to enjoy their “innocence”. She received less time in jail than the local town drunk, despite having allowed a group of diseased addicts free access to the orifices to her own children.

    Women will stand by their incarcerated men if/when the benefits outweigh the disadvantages, men won’t stand by their incarcerated women for the opposite reason (namely, the fact that a woman behind bars has no real advantages to give.)

  93. […] inevitability of infertility eugenics. Related: Lesbian eugenics. Related: Prog hypocrisy in one delicious […]

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS