[DefiledEngine]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')What you describe is the "struggle for survival". Darwin's "Survival of the fittest" has nothing to do with choice. It is about random genetic mutation. If you are born with mutated genes that tend to promote your survival and reproduction, then they will be passed on.

Being "successful" has nothing to do with choice, it is a random possibility that causes evolution.

[dinopello]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Wildwell', '.')..letting the ‘throw away’, automobile culture to get out of hand. Public planning is very important in this, people use whatever is convenient for them, and locating shopping malls, miles away from anywhere where you can only get to by car, means more car traffic. Letting industry locate all over the place and relying on trucks, rather than encouraging it to use less damaging forms of transport is also a matter for government.

[foodnotlawns]

I think married people who have children should have to either pay a fine or accept lashes ala Singapore criminal justice system, before being allowed to get divorced.

I am a child of divorce, and if neither spouse is criminal and/or abusive, a married couple should be strongly discouraged from getting divorced.

I knew a couple with children who said, "We are getting divorced" and I bashed them so hard that the woman will never speak to me again. the divorced husband/tossed out father still talks to me. But I tried real hard to prevent that breakup. I called them shitbag losers and told them they are going to hell for what they are doing to their children.

If you have kids and you plan to deprive them of a home with both mom and dad, you are a piece of garbage and I'd like to inflict corporal punishment on you, for the sake of your children, you bastard pieces of shit. Fuck you Shannymara. How dare you do this to your children. Think about it before you do this. He doesn't beat you or drink up your paychecks or molest the children, does he? Then how dare you break up the family, you swine.

Ban me if you like. I would be all in favor of public corporal punishment of frivolous divorcers.

[EnergyUnlimited]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('foodnotlawns', 'I') think married people who have children should have to either pay a fine or accept lashes ala Singapore criminal justice system, before being allowed to get divorced.

I am a child of divorce, and if neither spouse is criminal and/or abusive, a married couple should be strongly discouraged from getting divorced.

I knew a couple with children who said, "We are getting divorced" and I bashed them so hard that the woman will never speak to me again. the divorced husband/tossed out father still talks to me. But I tried real hard to prevent that breakup. I called them shitbag losers and told them they are going to hell for what they are doing to their children.

If you have kids and you plan to deprive them of a home with both mom and dad, you are a piece of garbage and I'd like to inflict corporal punishment on you, for the sake of your children, you bastard pieces of shit. Fuck you Shannymara. How dare you do this to your children. Think about it before you do this. He doesn't beat you or drink up your paychecks or molest the children, does he? Then how dare you break up the family, you swine.

Ban me if you like. I would be all in favor of public corporal punishment of frivolous divorcers.

[Graeme]

Aaron started a really funny thread, which is quite rare here. I had quite a chuckle at the beginning. For goodness sake, lighten up. This was supposed to be tongue-in-cheek. Right, Aaron?

[Graeme]

On a slightly more serious note, I just found this:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'N')ew Zealand was the only country in a study which included the United States, Canada, Britain and Australia where more women than men were classed as very sexually active, The Independent newspaper in Britain reports.

The report did not say how many women in New Zealand were sexually active, compared with men.

The study, in the Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, of 6000 people aged 40 to 80 – in Britain, the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand – showed the number of sexually active women in Britain was below 60 per cent.

In the US, Australia and Canada, 80 per cent of men were reported as sexually active, which was defined as having sex at least once in the previous year.

In Britain, only 70 per cent of men in Britain had sex in the past year and British men have the worst sex lives, while Canadians had the best.

According to the research, 41 per cent of British men and 33 per cent of women were very sexually active – having had sex at least once in the previous week.

[EnergySpin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MacG', 'I') learned that even left greenies love affluence when it comes to "the real deal".

[Raxozanne]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('DefiledEngine', ' ')Is doesn't? I thought that natural selection/survival of the fittest is all about the males/females who can make the females/males choose them and thus are succesful, and can pass on their genes.

[Graeme]

Sorry Raxozanne, I didn't mean to cause any offense to you or any other lady. Perhaps you would like to read the following article about women and peak oil. This has been posted elsewhere but I think now that it is appropriate here:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '�')��Perhaps women and ethnic minorities are already very busy with urgent concerns, such as health care, unequal educational opportunities, urban violence, single parenting, etc.,” she noted. “Educational opportunities still favor Caucasian males, and especially in the sciences,” Weller added. She felt that “the dryness of the topic is not appealing to many women.” Weller lamented that “we seem to have made oil and money our God.” She advocated a different style of discussion within Peak Oil circles that would honor “the values of nurturing, creating relationship, and visions for our grandchildren.”

When the masculine and the feminine work well together, they can get more accomplished then when they are apart, separate, and isolated from each other, or competitive and hostile to each other. Plus that, it can be more fun, especially if we are facing what James Howard Kunstler describes in his book as “The Long Emergency.” Working on potentially disastrous realities, such as Peak Oil and Climate Change, can be serious and lead to burn out. We could benefit from more Peak Oil/Climate Change humor.

[Lighthouse]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Graeme', 'O')n a slightly more serious note, I just found this:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '.')..

The Independent newspaper in Britain reports.

...

were reported as sexually active, which was defined as having sex at least once in the previous year. ...

[killJOY]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') think married people who have children should have to either pay a fine or accept lashes ala Singapore criminal justice system, before being allowed to get divorced.

I am a child of divorce, and if neither spouse is criminal and/or abusive, a married couple should be strongly discouraged from getting divorced.

I knew a couple with children who said, "We are getting divorced" and I bashed them so hard that the woman will never speak to me again. the divorced husband/tossed out father still talks to me. But I tried real hard to prevent that breakup. I called them shitbag losers and told them they are going to hell for what they are doing to their children.

If you have kids and you plan to deprive them of a home with both mom and dad, you are a piece of garbage and I'd like to inflict corporal punishment on you, for the sake of your children, you bastard pieces of shit.

[EnergySpin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('killJOY', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') think married people who have children should have to either pay a fine or accept lashes ala Singapore criminal justice system, before being allowed to get divorced.

I am a child of divorce, and if neither spouse is criminal and/or abusive, a married couple should be strongly discouraged from getting divorced.

I knew a couple with children who said, "We are getting divorced" and I bashed them so hard that the woman will never speak to me again. the divorced husband/tossed out father still talks to me. But I tried real hard to prevent that breakup. I called them shitbag losers and told them they are going to hell for what they are doing to their children.

If you have kids and you plan to deprive them of a home with both mom and dad, you are a piece of garbage and I'd like to inflict corporal punishment on you, for the sake of your children, you bastard pieces of shit.

[killJOY]

Read the book.

She answers EVERYTHING YOU JUST MENTIONED. (for example, "nurture" is not the same as "environment." the biggest environmental influence on children is peers.)

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'h')e is also right in demanding a legal/social framework that protects the constitution of marriage over the income of divorce lawyers.

[EnergySpin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('killJOY', 'R')ead the book.

She answers EVERYTHING YOU JUST MENTIONED. (for example, "nurture" is not the same as "environment." the biggest environmental influence on children is peers.)

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'h')e is also right in demanding a legal/social framework that protects the constitution of marriage over the income of divorce lawyers.

[foodnotlawns]

Growing up, I saw it clear as day; the kids who lived in an un-mutilated household with their original mom and original dad were happier, healthier, and got into less trouble -- they did better overall. The kids from destroyed families were a wreck.

I have one child and I will do anything to make sure she gets to adulthood with a whole, undestroyed family.

I suppose if Shannymara is going to have some arrangement where both parents are staying put in the house with the kids, that's fine, I guess.

I don't care about so-called "sexual morality" until it affects the life of a child. If you don't have kids, do as you please. The only point of sexual morality is when there are children who would be adversely affected, and/or a community/tribe that would be affected. Modern society is hardly a community or a tribe, it's more like a "free market" of atomized human beings, a cold cold place, which is why the family is so important for children.

[Raxozanne]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Graeme', 'S')orry Raxozanne, I didn't mean to cause any offense to you or any other lady. Perhaps you would like to read the following article about women and peak oil. This has been posted elsewhere but I think now that it is appropriate here:

[killJOY]

Aaron, I apologize for hijacking this, just one last word.

E-spin, you're intelligent and I enjoy your posts. I'm sure you'll understand this:

The environment VERSUS genes debate is a false debate, a red herring. Books like Harris', Pinker's, and whoever wrote "Nurture Via Nature" have completely changed my thinking.

My new working hypothesis: Genes and environment are not even separate, antagonistic, identifiable categories!!

Because: what is a gene and where did it come from?

Why, a gene is a compilation of ancestral environments! No selection, no gene.

And (for humans especially), what does the environment consist of?

Why, other genetic beings: parents, siblings, relatives, friends, enemies, cornucopians....

There's no longer a "war" in my head between "which is environmental and which is genetic?" They're expressions of the same thing

Harris takes great pains to inform us that "nurture"--that is, parental influence--makes up a tiny percent of a child's "environmental" influence.

Think about it: "environment" consists of:
--the womb in which the child develops
--the time period into which the child is born
--the culture into which the child is born
--the physical surroundings, including landscape and climate
--the particular society
--the groups of peers and antagonists
--siblings, relatives (and even ancestors)


--and, oh, yes, parents. What is their job? Well, evolution has made damn sure (via ancestral environments encoded in their genes) that they do it, or we wouldn't be here: feed, clothe, shelter.

dude above said:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'G')rowing up, I saw it clear as day; the kids who lived in an un-mutilated household with their original mom and original dad were happier, healthier, and got into less trouble -- they did better overall. The kids from destroyed families were a wreck.

[EnergySpin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('killJOY', '
')
My new working hypothesis: Genes and environment are not even separate, antagonistic, identifiable categories!!

[Aaron]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'H')arris takes great pains to inform us that "nurture"--that is, parental influence--makes up a tiny percent of a child's "environmental" influence.

[kochevnik]

Ha !

Parents don't matter ? Only because of the fucked up culture we have developed thanks to a sea of cheap energy. Put your kid in a box for five years and see what comes out the other end - a blob, unable to speak, walk, or crawl. Or ask my young son who just made the mistake of pulling the plug out of the back of my computer after his father had spent 20+ minutes writing a much longer version of this post. I guarantee you that his father has changed his behavior in that particular area for good.

It's true that kids nowadays are more influenced by their peers, (their culture), and others besides their parents. That is exactly why millions of parents have commenced homeshooling and pulling their kids out of the clutches of miinimum wage slave day care workers. Spend some time around home-schooled kids and you will see what an amazing difference PARENTS can make in a kids life.

The problem of PO is that we have developed a wide range of CULTURAL MALADAPTATIONS which seem to work quite well in an an age of cheap oil, but which, in the future, will result in their most stringent adherents joining their heavily influenced peers at the bottom of a mass grave. I've dated women from around the world and I think in terms of behaviors that are anti-survival in nature, USA women are far and away the worst of the lot (and no, female poster here don't count - Shanny and the rest are literally one in a million women - you should be quite proud).

To be attractive to a 'typical' USA woman you need to be a shallow, materialistic, androgynous, anal-retentive, primping, whining pretty boy. You primary skills need to include the ability and willingness to steal, lie, cheat, backstab and suck dick all the way to the top of the corporate pyramid. In a post-peak world, the first one of these weasels I deal with will definitely have their life expectancy shortened considerably. How's that for 'survival of the fittest'

The cause of PO is that we, as a society, have travelled very, very far from what constitutes good, decent human beings. All of us are to blame for that - but don't worry, the situation is very shorty about to be rectified.