I actually thought that 13/15 story was kinda sweet. I mean, yeah, stupid stupid kids and all, but for all their fuck ups, it seems like everyone involved is trying their hardest to make things work, even if not all the participants know what the hell they're doing just yet.
Yeah, its nice to see he has some sort of "I should be a good father" morals and a notion of what that means. I'm kinda scared reality and cynicism will hit him like ton of bricks tho.
I actually thought that 13/15 story was kinda sweet. I mean, yeah, stupid stupid kids and all, but for all their fuck ups, it seems like everyone involved is trying their hardest to make things work, even if not all the participants know what the hell they're doing just yet.
Yeah, its nice to see he has some sort of "I should be a good father" morals and a notion of what that means. I'm kinda scared reality and cynicism will hit him like ton of bricks tho.
I actually thought that 13/15 story was kinda sweet. I mean, yeah, stupid stupid kids and all, but for all their fuck ups, it seems like everyone involved is trying their hardest to make things work, even if not all the participants know what the hell they're doing just yet.
Yeah, its nice to see he has some sort of "I should be a good father" morals and a notion of what that means. I'm kinda scared reality and cynicism will hit him like ton of bricks tho.
Having tons of offspring is predominantly a strategy that is chosen when the environment is unstable/poor. When people are better off, they voluntarily choose to have less kids. The reason they choose to (unconsciously) is because it gives them the best odds. The welfare queen is going to start getting genetically outcompeted by people who are actually taking care of fewer kids.
Though just handing out welfare money the way we do isnt a very good or progressive system as far as raising the standard of living.
That makes no sense. Producing tons of doomed offspring wastes a lot of energy and nutrients. It's much better to make them count when resources are scarce, and to pump 'em out when you can eat your fill.
We've already dealt with this guy's lack of biological understanding back on page 8/9, I believe. Anyway something along these lines was commonly taught for a fair while in response to some demographic shifts observable with improved standards of living, but the model has started to break down since then - birth rates are dropping all over with not much connection to standard of living metrics, or even BC access metrics. Its kind of weird, actually. There was something in the Economist about it in a recent issue, IIRC.
Globalization maybe? I don't know - it occurs to me that people these days, wherever they are, are awareof and maybe even desire the world outside their own.
That's kind of what they were talking about - couples having less children because that's what their friends were doing, and family size tracking across social networks. I suspect you still need a certain amount of access to BC for this pattern to become apparent, though.
The Cat on
0
Options
Dr Mario KartGames DealerAustin, TXRegistered Userregular
edited February 2009
Simple experiment:
You have aquatic life in containment. Pour something toxic in there. Birth rates spike.
Is anyone going to dispute that human teenagers from broken homes tend to become more promiscuous?
I dont necessarily have to invoke r & K selection directly. I can frame variability of within-species behavior in the context of evolutionarily stable strategies, which is what evolutionary psychology often is in the business of doing. Perhaps bringing up the turtle was a bad idea.
Just for the record, my background is B.S. Psychology from the University of Texas (2003), leaning towards biological/evolutionary. I'm also a fan of the Dawkin's school of selection not acting on the individual, but on the genetic material themselves. I'll admit that I dont know much about Europe though. I only hear things about it.
Right...(purported) promiscuity in working-class, 'broken' homes has nothing to do with education, culture, access to good information about birth control, access to birth control itself, life expectations/goals which are hindered by having children, having the means to attain these goals, etc...
It's all about passing on them damn genes because they subconsciously realise that, by being in an environment less affluent or stable than the middle-class western world, they realise they need to PASS ON GENES NOW and fuck like rabbits sans protection.
Gotcha.
Duffel on
0
Options
AegisFear My DanceOvershot Toronto, Landed in OttawaRegistered Userregular
edited February 2009
Dr Mario Kart, I don't think you can credibly draw a correlation between studies done on animals with respect to a social behaviour (sex) and extrapolate this to being how humans operate.
Simple experiment:
You have aquatic life in containment. Pour something toxic in there. Birth rates spike.
If you're a bug, laying loads of eggs in hard times is a great strategy. Especially since you probably only live one year (or less) and only have one shot at this "get your genetic material out there" thing. If you're a species like human, whale, or elephant, it's a crappy strategy. A female sperm whale suckles her offspring for up to 13 years. If she has a calf during hard times (lots of predators, little food, or both), the calf has a higher chance of dying AND she has a better chance of dying (since part of her nutrients are going to the calf, plus she has to defend it.) And if she dies before raising a calf to maturity, she has failed, in evolutionary terms. If she has two or three calves during hard times . . . that's even worse because now she has to provide three times as much food, plus while she's defending Calf #1 from a shark or whatnot, something could be eating Calf #3. A K-selected species is more likely to have a relatively long life and can afford to wait for better times before reproducing.
Even a lot of R-selected species will increase reproduction when offered abundant food. There was one study on whitetail deer where they kept them in a penned lot and gave them all the food they wanted. The does got pregnant creepily early (before they were a year old, IIRC ) and a ton of them had twins.
Human reproduction is hard to compare to animal reproduction, though, since we're a very intellectual species and we have cultural elements/pressures that animals do not.
Alfie Patten is "distraught and devastated" by claims that he is not the father of baby Maisie, after two other teenagers claimed they had a relationship with his girlfriend.
It's lucky DNA testing is an option these days - otherwise this situation would be like trying to work out which baked bean from the tin made you fart.
I have to say some of these guys must be standup dudes (or maybe just dumb) - not a lot of people would be willing to admit a possibility of culpability for a baby when somebody else was already claiming to be the father.
Then again, the "father" looks like he's in preschool, so it would be pretty...unmanly not to say anything, but that wouldn't stop a lot of people.
Alfie Patten is "distraught and devastated" by claims that he is not the father of baby Maisie, after two other teenagers claimed they had a relationship with his girlfriend.
Alfie Patten is "distraught and devastated" by claims that he is not the father of baby Maisie, after two other teenagers claimed they had a relationship with his girlfriend.
Alfie Patten is "distraught and devastated" by claims that he is not the father of baby Maisie, after two other teenagers claimed they had a relationship with his girlfriend.
Alfie Patten is "distraught and devastated" by claims that he is not the father of baby Maisie, after two other teenagers claimed they had a relationship with his girlfriend.
Why the fuck are they vying to be the father? Really, any sane person should find it a huge relief some other schmuck got tagged with it.
Isn't there an apartment and money from the government in it for them?
It's not much, but it's perhaps more than their current opportunities might afford them.
Except that taking care of a kid costs $Texas and if you're scraping by on the minimum amount it'll suck rather hard. Of course, they probably don't realize that...
Alfie Patten is "distraught and devastated" by claims that he is not the father of baby Maisie, after two other teenagers claimed they had a relationship with his girlfriend.
Why the fuck are they vying to be the father? Really, any sane person should find it a huge relief some other schmuck got tagged with it.
Isn't there an apartment and money from the government in it for them?
It's not much, but it's perhaps more than their current opportunities might afford them.
Plus a possible appearance on daytime TV.
Hell, just make the whole shooting match into a reality game show:
Who's the Daddy?
Eight mouthbreathing teens compete to be the babydaddy of Chantelle, with the chance to win a shitty council flat in a fucked-up neighbourhood and eighteen years of responsibility. Each week, the contestants participate in a series of challenges that will face the eventual winner, such as queueing for benefits, sitting around all day while the television blares constant noise to drown out the kid's cries, and justifying their behaviour to Jeremy Kyle. Week by week, the boys eliminate themselves, as they realise that having a kid solves nothing, despite how shitty their life is, until one is left, stuck with the baby and its butt-ugly teen mother who's even more of a bucket-crotch than she was nine months ago.
And the season finale twist is that the baby is actually Chantelle's creepy-ass uncle's, and this whole thing was a cover-up.
I thought it was pretty obvious that they know they're not the father and just want their 15 minutes of marginal notoriety.
Also, forgive me if this has been addressed, but I posted this on my blog yesterday and didn't see it mentioned within the past 5 pages.
The doctor that shoved all those fertilized eggs into the octopod, he's struck again:
The fertility doctor who helped Nadya Suleman become pregnant with octuplets is now at the center of another controversy.
The Los Angeles Times is reporting that Dr. Michael Kamrava treated another patient at his Beverly Hills clinic, and she is pregnant with quadruplets.
Kamrava reportedly transferred at least seven embryos, made from donor eggs, into the unnamed 49-year-old woman.
She already has three adult children from a previous marriage and reportedly wanted one more child with her second husband, who is in his 30s.
The woman is currently five months pregnant and is hospitalized at the Los Angeles County-USC Medical Center, according to the report.
She originally arrived at Good Samaritan Hospital in Los Angeles for unspecified treatment but was transferred last week to the county medical center because she is uninsured, the Times reported.
The Times said Kamrava could not be reached for comment.
- source
Dunno about labeling that as "he struck again". Dude works in a fertility clinic. It's his job to knock women up. We know that these processes can lead to multiple births.
Dunno about labeling that as "he struck again". Dude works in a fertility clinic. It's his job to knock women up. We know that these processes can lead to multiple births.
Can't see what's out of the ordinary there.
I know it's his job, but he's dumping eggs into these women with a technique that nearly guarantees multiples births and these women obviously can't afford these children. Whether it's Nadya whatshername being on food stamps or this woman who, apparently, can't afford health insurance. If this 49-year old woman can't afford health insurance, how in the hell is she going to be able to afford 4 kids? Even more so, why is he doing this procedure on a 49-year old woman? That should be criminally negligent! It's endangering her life and the fetuses.
Again, I know it's his job, but he should have told her, "no, it's too risky at your age and I won't do it." This guy is totally going to get reamed by the ethics board.
Just like a good plastic surgeon will refuse to do a procedure if they feel the person has "had enough" or just won't risk another surgery.
I would think it would be perfectly acceptable for a doctor to look at a near fifty year old woman who can't have kids on her own and say to her, "At your age and condition I can't endorse your choice in this procedure."
Just like a good plastic surgeon will refuse to do a procedure if they feel the person has "had enough" or just won't risk another surgery.
I would think it would be perfectly acceptable for a doctor to look at a near fifty year old woman who can't have kids on her own and say to her, "At your age and condition I can't endorse your choice in this procedure."
To say nothing of implanting 7 embryos, which drastically increases the chances of a large multiple birth. Something that's not healthy for the fetus OR the mother even at a young age. At hers? Ug.
I thought it was pretty obvious that they know they're not the father and just want their 15 minutes of marginal notoriety.
Also, forgive me if this has been addressed, but I posted this on my blog yesterday and didn't see it mentioned within the past 5 pages.
The doctor that shoved all those fertilized eggs into the octopod, he's struck again:
The fertility doctor who helped Nadya Suleman become pregnant with octuplets is now at the center of another controversy.
The Los Angeles Times is reporting that Dr. Michael Kamrava treated another patient at his Beverly Hills clinic, and she is pregnant with quadruplets.
Kamrava reportedly transferred at least seven embryos, made from donor eggs, into the unnamed 49-year-old woman.
She already has three adult children from a previous marriage and reportedly wanted one more child with her second husband, who is in his 30s.
The woman is currently five months pregnant and is hospitalized at the Los Angeles County-USC Medical Center, according to the report.
She originally arrived at Good Samaritan Hospital in Los Angeles for unspecified treatment but was transferred last week to the county medical center because she is uninsured, the Times reported.
The Times said Kamrava could not be reached for comment.
- source
We will find out later this guy replaces donor sperm with his own in an attempt to break the record number of children with the same father. I seriously have to question WTF he's thinking at this point. Are loons just thronging to his door with buckets of money or what?
Dman on
0
Options
MrMonroepassed outon the floor nowRegistered Userregular
edited February 2009
How the fuck did she pay for the fertilization if she's uninsured?
These kids were also born something like 2 months premature. The human body simply is not equipped to carry eight children to term. So in addition to forcing taxpayers to pay for everything in a pathetic attempt to get rich "selling the story", she inflicted a potential lifetime of chronic illness and suffering on these children. Well, those that survive anyway.
I think what she did was sick, crass, and inhumane.
Posts
Nuke it from fucking orbit.
Steam Profile | Signature art by Alexandra 'Lexxy' Douglass
DAMMIT, WORLD, THIS STORY STARTED OUT WEIRD ENOUGH
WHY IS IT JUST GETTING WEIRDER
Steam ID XBL: JohnnyChopsocky PSN:Stud_Beefpile WiiU:JohnnyChopsocky
A New Challenger Appears!
You have aquatic life in containment. Pour something toxic in there. Birth rates spike.
Is anyone going to dispute that human teenagers from broken homes tend to become more promiscuous?
I dont necessarily have to invoke r & K selection directly. I can frame variability of within-species behavior in the context of evolutionarily stable strategies, which is what evolutionary psychology often is in the business of doing. Perhaps bringing up the turtle was a bad idea.
Just for the record, my background is B.S. Psychology from the University of Texas (2003), leaning towards biological/evolutionary. I'm also a fan of the Dawkin's school of selection not acting on the individual, but on the genetic material themselves. I'll admit that I dont know much about Europe though. I only hear things about it.
It's all about passing on them damn genes because they subconsciously realise that, by being in an environment less affluent or stable than the middle-class western world, they realise they need to PASS ON GENES NOW and fuck like rabbits sans protection.
Gotcha.
Currently DMing: None
Characters
[5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
If you're a bug, laying loads of eggs in hard times is a great strategy. Especially since you probably only live one year (or less) and only have one shot at this "get your genetic material out there" thing. If you're a species like human, whale, or elephant, it's a crappy strategy. A female sperm whale suckles her offspring for up to 13 years. If she has a calf during hard times (lots of predators, little food, or both), the calf has a higher chance of dying AND she has a better chance of dying (since part of her nutrients are going to the calf, plus she has to defend it.) And if she dies before raising a calf to maturity, she has failed, in evolutionary terms. If she has two or three calves during hard times . . . that's even worse because now she has to provide three times as much food, plus while she's defending Calf #1 from a shark or whatnot, something could be eating Calf #3. A K-selected species is more likely to have a relatively long life and can afford to wait for better times before reproducing.
Even a lot of R-selected species will increase reproduction when offered abundant food. There was one study on whitetail deer where they kept them in a penned lot and gave them all the food they wanted. The does got pregnant creepily early (before they were a year old, IIRC
Human reproduction is hard to compare to animal reproduction, though, since we're a very intellectual species and we have cultural elements/pressures that animals do not.
http://i.gizmodo.com/5154420/the-definition-of-multitasking
At least little harry potter and the beast with a billion backs can get their ps3 on!
Librarians harbor a terrible secret. Find it.
And they're playing Saints Row 2
Alfie Patten is "distraught and devastated" by claims that he is not the father of baby Maisie, after two other teenagers claimed they had a relationship with his girlfriend.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/4637339/Schoolboy-father-Alfie-Patten-distraught-at-claims-Maisie-not-his.html
Then again, the "father" looks like he's in preschool, so it would be pretty...unmanly not to say anything, but that wouldn't stop a lot of people.
Good job, parents.
Steam Profile | Signature art by Alexandra 'Lexxy' Douglass
Why the fuck are they vying to be the father? Really, any sane person should find it a huge relief some other schmuck got tagged with it.
They aren't necessarily the sharpest tools in the shed.
Isn't there an apartment and money from the government in it for them?
It's not much, but it's perhaps more than their current opportunities might afford them.
https://twitter.com/Hooraydiation
Except that taking care of a kid costs $Texas and if you're scraping by on the minimum amount it'll suck rather hard. Of course, they probably don't realize that...
https://twitter.com/Hooraydiation
I was cringing when I read the original kid's comments about not knowing how much it cost to raise a baby and not getting much "pocket money." Ohgod.
Stop thinking of underaged boy cock you sicko.
I deal with 7th graders and some of them are already sexually active in some form.
It's pretty horrifying.
Yes, I know that was terrible.
Steam Profile | Signature art by Alexandra 'Lexxy' Douglass
Plus a possible appearance on daytime TV.
Hell, just make the whole shooting match into a reality game show:
Who's the Daddy?
Eight mouthbreathing teens compete to be the babydaddy of Chantelle, with the chance to win a shitty council flat in a fucked-up neighbourhood and eighteen years of responsibility. Each week, the contestants participate in a series of challenges that will face the eventual winner, such as queueing for benefits, sitting around all day while the television blares constant noise to drown out the kid's cries, and justifying their behaviour to Jeremy Kyle. Week by week, the boys eliminate themselves, as they realise that having a kid solves nothing, despite how shitty their life is, until one is left, stuck with the baby and its butt-ugly teen mother who's even more of a bucket-crotch than she was nine months ago.
Ah I didn't mean it in a negative way. I actually really love my job and working with those kids.
*edit*
Oh, I get what you were hinting at.
Critical Failures - Havenhold Campaign • August St. Cloud (Human Ranger)
Also, forgive me if this has been addressed, but I posted this on my blog yesterday and didn't see it mentioned within the past 5 pages.
The doctor that shoved all those fertilized eggs into the octopod, he's struck again:
The Los Angeles Times is reporting that Dr. Michael Kamrava treated another patient at his Beverly Hills clinic, and she is pregnant with quadruplets.
Kamrava reportedly transferred at least seven embryos, made from donor eggs, into the unnamed 49-year-old woman.
She already has three adult children from a previous marriage and reportedly wanted one more child with her second husband, who is in his 30s.
The woman is currently five months pregnant and is hospitalized at the Los Angeles County-USC Medical Center, according to the report.
She originally arrived at Good Samaritan Hospital in Los Angeles for unspecified treatment but was transferred last week to the county medical center because she is uninsured, the Times reported.
The Times said Kamrava could not be reached for comment.
- source
Steam ID - BewilderedRonin
Can't see what's out of the ordinary there.
I know it's his job, but he's dumping eggs into these women with a technique that nearly guarantees multiples births and these women obviously can't afford these children. Whether it's Nadya whatshername being on food stamps or this woman who, apparently, can't afford health insurance. If this 49-year old woman can't afford health insurance, how in the hell is she going to be able to afford 4 kids? Even more so, why is he doing this procedure on a 49-year old woman? That should be criminally negligent! It's endangering her life and the fetuses.
Again, I know it's his job, but he should have told her, "no, it's too risky at your age and I won't do it." This guy is totally going to get reamed by the ethics board.
Steam ID - BewilderedRonin
I would think it would be perfectly acceptable for a doctor to look at a near fifty year old woman who can't have kids on her own and say to her, "At your age and condition I can't endorse your choice in this procedure."
Critical Failures - Havenhold Campaign • August St. Cloud (Human Ranger)
To say nothing of implanting 7 embryos, which drastically increases the chances of a large multiple birth. Something that's not healthy for the fetus OR the mother even at a young age. At hers? Ug.
We will find out later this guy replaces donor sperm with his own in an attempt to break the record number of children with the same father. I seriously have to question WTF he's thinking at this point. Are loons just thronging to his door with buckets of money or what?
Long story short, her emergency funding was not being regulated.
That is a damn good question.
Did she, like, use student loans?
I think what she did was sick, crass, and inhumane.