Serious how did our incel genes survive this long

[solcel]

I think most of us are suffering an artificial inceldom. How did our faulty genetics make it this long in 200,000 + years of evolution. It makes no sense. Through natural selection we should have all been bredeed out.

 

[Deleted member 12256]

Ugliness will never dissaper , it will be a thing forever to make good looking people feel better for themselfs.

 

[Iamthesui]

I think most of us are suffering an artificial inceldom. How did our faulty genetics make it this long in 200,000 + years of evolution. It makes no sense. Through natural selection we should have all been bredeed out.

It's a luck of the draw. Some dads can be normies or even Chad's but what you get is mostly luck

 

[Life Wasted]

Probly just luck, also they never had to deal with the forces of feminism and hypergamy on the scale we have today.

 

[Jockcel]

Ugliness will never dissaper , it will be a thing forever to make good looking people feel better for themselfs.

The final blackpill.

 

[Deleted member 11159]

Women. Ugly women still get to breed.

 

[metal]

before the sexual revolution look did not matter

 

[Incellectual]

Beauty standards change with time. Even if foids tend to think the same shit is hot, men seem to change their taste based on the era. Back in the medieval era big forheads were hot so if you are a 5headcel you probably just had some shit ancestor who got his dick hard for megamind bitches lmao. Also you inherit your moms shit genes.

 

[Albero]

The modern welfare state allowed women to go for thuggery and every other subhumanish kind who can relate to their inferior interests.
This societal makeup sexually favours the inferior.

 

[SchrodingersDick]

everyone got to fuck thanks to civilized society with 1:1 mate pairs. it made a civil world possible, at the expense of foids getting to pick who fucks them. now its backwards and we're back to natural selection, except this time there's more incels around.. nature wasn't weeding us out for the last couple thousand years..

 

[Asianmanletcel]

It's a joke of nature

 

[MaxZM98]

we no longer have the patriarchy. men, even ugly ones, used to have sex because men were seen as superior to women, who were second class citizens (as they should be). we will probably die out now that society has become fucked up like this.

Women. Ugly women still get to breed.

that is another very good point.

 

[GeneticDysfunction]

Genetic recombination did some of you idiots even graduate high school

 

[solcel]

Genetic recombination did some of you idiots even graduate high school

lol

 

[CaptainRussia]

ugly foids can reproduce.

 

[Fontaine]

Religion

 

[Opus132]

Evolution is a lie. Ugliness exists because the universe is just cosmic possibilities unfolding. There will always be ugliness, and there will always be incels. It is a metaphysically necessary that it is so.

 

[YungCell]

Well maybe 3k-5k years ago we would be considered chad but then modern Chad's started to exist and we survived due to arranged marriages.

 

[SpartanGasp]

Ugliness will never dissaper , it will be a thing forever to make good looking people feel better for themselfs.

It's over.

 

[Zesto]

This wouldn't be a problem if we didn't have a 95, 5 rule going on in the west.

 

[lastchancel]

hypergamy wasn't a problem

 

[maynarde]

Ugliness will never dissaper , it will be a thing forever to make good looking people feel better for themselfs.

Being good looking is a rare exception

 

[i_a_m_i]

I used google:

Why Doesn't Evolution Get Rid of Ugly People?

Why isn’t everyone beautiful, smart and healthy? Or, in a less-polite formulation, why haven’t ugly, stupid, unhealthy people been bred out of the population—ugly people because no one will have them as mates, meaning they don’t get the chance to pass their ugliness to the next generation; stupid people because they’re outgunned in the race to financial success (that is, acquiring resources needed to survive and reproduce); unhealthy people because they die before they get a chance to reproduce?

Evolutionary theory predicts that the unfeeling hand of natural selection would lead to a culling of disadvantageous traits—or, as biologists more delicately phrase it, “depletion of genetic variation in natural populations as a result of the effects of selection.”

But look around, and you’ll see that that has not happened—not in people, and not in wild animals where homely and infirm offspring are born all the time.

Evolutionary geneticists try to explain this paradox by positing that mutations for disadvantageous traits keep popping up no matter how hard natural selection attempts to wipe them out, but in their more honest moments the scientists admit that in real life undesirable traits are way more common than this mechanism would account for; “ugly” mutations just don’t occur that often. In a groundbreaking study, biologists at the University of Edinburgh in Scotland have figured out why, at least in one species: genes that are good for males are bad for females and, perhaps, vice versa.

The scientists studied red deer, 3,559 of them from eight generations, living on Scotland’s Isle of Rum. They carefully noted each animal’s fitness, who mated with whom, how many offspring survived, which offspring mated and with what results. Bottom line: “male red deer with relatively high fitness fathered, on average, daughters with relatively low fitness,” Edinburgh’s Katharina Foerster and her colleagues conclude in tomorrow’s issue of the journal Nature. “Male red deer with a relatively high lifetime [fitness, which includes their reproductive success, the only thing evolution cares about] sired, on average, daughters with a relatively low [fitness].” The reverse also holds. Males that were relatively less successful in their reproductive success and fitness had daughters that were extra successful.

The reason is that any particular gene-based trait may have very different effects on males than in females. Extrapolating to humans (and oversimplifying, sorry) you might imagine that a particular shape of the nose or turn of the chin would look drop-dead hunky on a male, but horsey on a woman; dad got to mate because his looks attracted a female, but the result of their togetherness produced daughters whose pulchritude was less than obvious. Traits that evolutionary psychologists tell us make women unfit for mating (having the “wrong” shape) remain abundant in the human race because the DNA for the traits, when inherited by sons, confers a selective advantage; when those sons have daughters, presto—more females with less-than-hourglass shapes. Or as the Edinburgh biologists put it, “optimal genotypes differ between male and female red deer, because a genotype that produces a male phenotype with relatively high fitness will, on average, produce a phenotype with lower fitness when expressed in a female.”

This discovery reminds me of other seminal studies that contribute to our understanding of why “bad” genes persist. The best know is the gene for sickle-cell disease, which is prevalent through the Mediterranean region and much of Africa. Why wouldn’t natural selection get rid of it? Because, it turns out, carrying one copy of the gene increases your resistance to malaria (this is explained well here), which is prevalent—surprise!—in the exact same regions.

Much of the theorizing about fitness in human biology has been undermined by empirical studies (see, for instance, “Adapting Minds” by David Buller). The study of red deer provides one more cautionary tale for those who would be tempted to weed out “undesirable” traits in the human population. On a less lofty note, it should make us think twice before we reject as a mate someone who does not conform to the “fitness” stereotype promulgated by evolutionary psychologists (such as a waist-to-hip ratio of 0.7 for women, and alpha-male behavior for men). You may think, subconsciously, that you’re choosing someone who will transmit “good genes” to your kids, but just ask yourself how that perky little nose will look on your son or those rippling pecs on your daughter

Why do harmful versions of some genes persist generation after generation instead of being weeded out by natural selection?

For deleterious genes with major effects, the main reason is they are recessive in nature. Recessive genes can persist for a long time because the strength of selection decreases drastically as the allele frequencies reach the tails (this can be easily demonstrated with minor extensions to Hardy-Weinberg). You have to remember how young humans are as a species. We’re also outcrossers, so these alleles remain masked.

For genes of small effect: they can’t overcome the effects of drift, and genetic hitchhiking, which appears as pseudooverdominance. In plainer terms, where the big letter represents the dominant normal-type allele, you only observe Ab and aB haplotypes in nature because they are tightly linked. Once gain, humans are a young species with a small population, and these linkages haven’t been broken.

Epistasis probably also contributes, which is another way an allele can be “conditionally” beneficial.

Other answers are overstating the beneficial effects. There are very few examples of true heterozygote advantage (overdominance).

http://www.sharonlbegley.com/why-doesn-t-evolution-get-rid-of-ugly-people
https://www.quora.com/Why-do-harmfu...tead-of-being-weeded-out-by-natural-selection

 

[ElliotLookAlike]

marrying and giving birth for other reasons.

 

[this is hell]

Genetic recombination did some of you idiots even graduate high school

nope. im a high school dropout

 

[Inbuddhist]

This is the conclusive answer : https://incels.is/threads/attractiv...s-only-to-daughters-according-to-study.72760/

Even attractive parents can have an ugly son, so how do you want the incels to disappear ?

Not only that, but hypergamy + sexual liberation will always lead to a situation where some guys have nothing, even if there is no sub 5 male, 7 will just be the new normal.

 

[GetFucked]

I'm surprised social retards haven't been excised from the gene pool. It seems like being socially competent is the most important trait now. I guess you could just hermit or shaman it up in the wilderness back then and avoid all the insufferable cunts.

 

[incel4life]

Incels are people who evolved to survive in religious societies. In secular/promiscuous societies, incels get bred out.

 

[Of Manlets and Men]

Women. Ugly women still get to breed.

This. Unattractive women who would be incel if male can crank out babies even with chad. And 50% of chad/uggo femoid offspring will get the ugly genes.

 

[Frottbott]

Why does gayness still exist? Genetic mutations take thousands of years. Are you telling me gayness happens because your ball juice gets sun exposure? (literal scientific theory for why it happens). Why are people from Scandinavia more likely to have seasonal depression (including if you take equatorial ethnics and put them in cold climates)? Because it's cold there and there's less sunlight? WELL MY FRIEND, AFTER 40,000 YEARS IT WOULD HAVE WEEDED THEM OUT MAKING THEM LESS LIKELY TO HAVE IT! Evolution is a total fucking hoax. Erasmus Darwin is a Freemason on his fucking Wikipedia page, and he invented evolution. His grandson Charles was almost certainly a Mason as it's patrilineally passed on and he was successful. The Big Bang was created by a Jesuit. In other words, these big scientific theories are all created by members of secret societies known for scamming the entire world. JFL!

Let me prove that all successful people in history were Masons.

 

[Berserker123]

Ugly wahmen still breed and spawn ugly incels.
Also, the jews are pushing race mixing. Have you ever seen a black/asian mixed person. They are ungodly looking. Both the men and women are hideous looking.

 

[solcel]

Why does gayness still exist? Genetic mutations take thousands of years. Are you telling me gayness happens because your ball juice gets sun exposure? (literal scientific theory for why it happens). Why are people from Scandinavia more likely to have seasonal depression (including if you take equatorial ethnics and put them in cold climates)? Because it's cold there and there's less sunlight? WELL MY FRIEND, AFTER 40,000 YEARS IT WOULD HAVE WEEDED THEM OUT MAKING THEM LESS LIKELY TO HAVE IT! Evolution is a total fucking hoax. Erasmus Darwin is a Freemason on his fucking Wikipedia page, and he invented evolution. His grandson Charles was almost certainly a Mason as it's patrilineally passed on and he was successful. The Big Bang was created by a Jesuit. In other words, these big scientific theories are all created by members of secret societies known for scamming the entire world. JFL!

Let me prove that all successful people in history were Masons.

more than worth a thread

 

[Redpill Robert]

1.) Male standards have shot up through the roof in the past 50 years

2.) Some of it is just sheer luck; I've known plenty of incels with Chad fathers and vice versa

 

[NoMoreSlaving]

Because females can always get sex no matter how ugly

 

[Frottbott]

more than worth a thread

I did a while ago. Nobody cared.

 

[solcel]

I did a while ago. Nobody cared.

I cared.

 

[Frottbott]

I cared.

Lol, thanks. I keep talking about it here and there in case, but in general, the community was not interested.

 

[Hunter]

because back then pre marital sex was taboo and foids had to marry and settle down before being able to have sex so they werent able to cycle between chads or get chad since chad would go for his looksmatch. generally everyone went for their looksmatch due to the way things were and inceldom was practically non existant. everyone was happy. then the sexual revolution made everything go downhill which led to the new incel minority (as foids could cycle between men above their looksmatch rather than needing to marry first). the incel rate was very small though around 5%. then thanks to social media and websites such as facebook, instagram,tinder etc being popularised in the late 00s/10s, most foids could get access to chads with male competition now expanded to their city rather than social circle. the male rate soared even higher and now its around 15-20%.

 

[Deleted member 250]

Genetic Recombination

 

[BrendioEEE]

before the sexual revolution look did not matter

High IQ, as cultures evolved over thousands of years they developed a system of monogamy, because it turns out the warrior class, the chads, are not the only thing needed to progress society forward. The Geniuses, Intellectuals, Innovators, and The Thinkers are, and they tend to be of what we'd call the Incel cast today. They don't tend to be 6'4, they don't tend to be supermodels, or chads. Nikola Tesla died a virgin, but it's these people who need partners and to spread their genes even more than the Chads, because these cast of people are what allow society to progress and grow.

 

[AsiaCel]

The liberation of female sexuality, which brings out their hypergamy, with the addition of online dating sites like tinder which makes the sub 6s have to compete against chads across the planet.

Back then you might only had to compete against your workplace which is arguably easier than nowadays.

In short, thousands of years of anticompetiton measures were undone.
We're bringing back the caveman 17-1 ratio....