7/10/02 

Men Often Bear a Striking

Rresemblance to Slugs.

You will probably need to have read AH's piece Steven Jones - A Parasite? in order to understand the comments that follow the article immediately below.

Boys will be girls 

Brad Evenson

National Post

The future of males isn't looking bright. In fact, the once mighty Y chromosome could one day just disappear, scientists say.

It is fair to say that men often bear a striking resemblance to slugs. We spend long periods of time inert. We think slowly and often leave a trail of sticky substances in our path. But few men would see slugs as our evolutionary role models.

British geneticist Steve Jones has something to say about that.

Jones has been studying common slugs, which once were male and female but now are hermaphrodite -- possessing both male and female sex organs -- and could some day become entirely female. Again and again, it seems, the evolutionary lineages of species go from having males and females in the direction of all-female. Some reptiles and fish have given up on males altogether, reproducing by parthogenesis. Last week, staff at a U.S. aquarium were shocked when a tiny shark gave birth; it had not been near a male in years.

Someday, boys will be girls.

It never goes the other way. An all-male species would die, of course. The future of males, Dr. Jones believes, is not bright. Someday, boys will be girls.

"The Y chromosome, after all, is a mere remnant of a once mighty structure, which might in a few million years disappear," predicts Dr. Jones, in his latest book The Descent of Men.

The world's library shelves are already sagging with books devoted to the spiritual and functional downfall of man. They range from Iron John, Robert Bly's tiresome ode to our "warrior spirit," to such tomes on our redundancy as Why Cucumbers are Better Than Men.

Men, they suggest, no are no longer required to ensure survival of the species by fighting off sabre tooth tigers. In fact, as Dolly the cloned sheep illustrates, we are no longer required to ensure the survival of the species, period.

Men copulate an estimated 50 billion times a year

This is a pity. Men are geared from conception to do our sexual duty. A month after fertilization, the SRY gene on the tip of the Y chromosome that defines maleness has clicked on and begun to construct the masculine plumbing. A month before birth, most boys sprout an erection for about 60 minutes a day. This state of sexual arousal peaks at three hours a day for a 20-year-old male (although mostly as he sleeps). Men copulate an estimated 50 billion times a year, producing 1 million litres of sperm a day, a rate of production roughly equal to the maple syrup flow of Quebec on a spring morning. A single ejaculation is adequate to fertilize all the women of Europe.

It sounds like we've got things perfected.

And yet, Dr. Jones writes, the male is in a state of decline. The central reason for this disgraceful state has nothing to do with gender politics, Oprah, or the lack of sabre tooth tigers. It's genetic.

The Y chromosome itself is crumbling, Dr. Jones laments.

Some basic genetics: In addition to the 22 chromosomes shared by both sexes, females have two large X chromosomes. Males have a solitary Y. However, the Human Genome Project has shown us that much of the Y is junk DNA that once served a function but now does nothing. It began with over 1,500 genes; now it has faded to 40. Most chromosomes come in double copy, but not the Y. So whatever genetic mutations find their way into males -- colour-blindness is 100 times more common in boys than girls -- cannot be weeded out. The Y is fading. It's got another 5 million years, tops.

"The chromosome unique to men is a microscopic metaphor for those who bear it," Jones concludes.

"For it is the most decayed, redundant and parasitic of the lot. ... From sperm count to social status, and from fertilization to death, as civilization advances those who bear Y chromosomes are in relative decline."

Jones, a professor of genetics at University College in London, takes as his starting point Charles Darwin's The Descent of Man. The book, published in 1871, was the first study of the evolution of mankind -- men and women. Styling himself as "Darwin's ghostwriter," Dr. Jones turns his attention to the evolution of men alone.

Life went on nicely without males for billions of years in primordial swamps full of protozoans. But in that ancient Eden, a gene mutation led members of some species to fuse cells, rather than continue dividing on their own. Sex had arrived. Large cells are rich with genetic material, slow to grow and good at dividing, while smaller cells multiply quickly. Evolution drove the two together. "The tension between sperm and egg and between those who make them has gone on for at least two billion years," notes Dr. Jones.

After a bright evolutionary start, however, the state of maleness has begun to look gloomy indeed. Not only are our genes failing us, social and economic pressures are driving us down.

Consider the fate of bulls. Now that dairy farmers can sort bull sperm, they can eliminate the cells bearing a Y chromosome, ensuring their cows give birth only to productive females. Before sperm selection, over 500,000 unwanted bull calves were born in Britain. The economics of milk production has wiped them out, yet dairy cows will continue as a species.

The cow technology is now being used to balance families. The MicroSoft Company helps parents select the sex of their offspring by sperm sorting. And with the rise of cloning technology, the need for sperm may soon be dispensed with altogether. Not only is science taking all the love out of sex, it is taking the sex out of it.

Men are also changing due to modernity. Choirboys who sang performances of Bach in Leipzig, Germany could hit the high notes until 17 years of age. The voices of modern choristers lose their treble by 13 years as maturity sets in sooner. The end of boyhood is set roughly at 55 kilograms, at which time their voice falls, facial hair appears and they are on the fateful path to manhood. Since Bach's time, boys eat better, so nowadays they mature earlier.

sperm counts are plummeting

This exposes us to large doses of the hormone testosterone for longer periods, which can be harmful. Curiously, despite this trend to earlier sexual maturity, sperm counts are plummeting; we are only half the men our grandfathers were. Nobody knows why, but some scientists suspect the feminizing presence of the hormone estrogen in the water supply, milk and food packaging.

Of course, no book about man's evolution would be quite complete without a discussion of the manly apparatus. Many people will be surprised to learn that nitric oxide, a gas used in the production of the explosive nitroglycerin, is essential to the formation of an erection. So are testosterone, happy dreams and healthy blood pressure. "An erection is a subtle thing, with several different lines of command, not all of which are associated with sex," he says. "There is, it seems, more than one path from the brain to the phallus."

At least a penis of ordinary proportions is no longer considered a sign of low morality. To emphasize the moral status of their subjects, sculptors of the earliest Greek statues reduced the penis size. Thus, Michaelangelo's David has outsize hands but a tiny organ. A copy of the classic statue at Caesar's Palace in Las Vegas has a less abridged version. (Neither saw fit to circumsize David, a Jew.)

men are less successful as a biological entity

Finally, men are less successful as a biological entity. We don't live nearly as long as women. Testosterone, which defines us, also damages our hearts and feed prostate tumours. And in case Mother Nature is not doing a good enough job, self-destructive habits such as smoking, boozing and overeating are reducing our lifespan.

Up to age 50, the proportion of men and women is about equal, but at 80, only a third of the population is male.

"The Queen sends nine times as many congratulatory telegrams to her lady centenarians than to those of the opposite sex," notes Dr. Jones.

"From middle age onwards it is a woman's world."

Whether men can escape the fate coded in the Y chromosome is impossible to predict. Perhaps, one future sunny day, women will tell their daughters about this strange, hairy, warlike beast, and thank the stars above that He is gone.

Oh, Ha Ha, indeed!

"Consider the fate of bulls. Now that dairy farmers can sort bull sperm, they can eliminate the cells bearing a Y chromosome, ensuring their cows give birth only to productive females."

So, Steve Jones and I both appear to believe that there will exist far more women than men in the future - e.g. see AH's Men have bred dogs and cattle. Why not Women?

But just imagine two tribes with very different gender proportions. They could be real tribes - e.g. in the sense that they reside in two different countries - or they could be, say, 'psychological' ones - e.g. perhaps the members follow different religions but live in the same region.

Whatever.

Here is a simple scenario of the kind of thing that is likely to happen.

The tribe on the left will, say, have 70% women and 30% men.

The tribe on the right will, say, have 90% women and only 10% men.

And so the tribe on the left will 'win'!

And it will 'win' for two main reasons.

1. It has more men. 

And, if you take the trouble to read AH's We're going to become extinct, like the dinosaurs, you will quickly catch my drift as to why a tribe with more men in it is likely to win the day. Basically, the article says that the more Aggressive of two tribes will eventually win.

Against the Aggressive Tribe, the Peace Tribe has no hope!

2. The surplus women in the tribe on the right will say, "Sod this, I need me a man. I'm off to join the tribe on the left."

This will tend to make the gender ratios between the two tribes the same - no matter how they started off.

Furthermore, the tribe on the right will know all this - so it will start to breed more men - which will result in the same effect.

Eventually both tribes will come up with a similar ratio of men to women. And they will be balanced according to the psychology of the day.

And so Steve Jones' notion that the 'future is female' in the sense that human males will become extinct - or are purposefully extinguished - seems somewhat fanciful, to say the least.

And it is hardly a 'scientific' or 'biological' notion - particularly since choosing the gender of any human offspring in the future is going to be more affected by Man's psychology than his biology.

Indeed, God help the human race if all its future members were 'female' in the sense that they are today.

Who would mine the resources, build the roads, repair the roofs?

Who would build the houses, run the railways, write the computer programs? Who would mine the resources, build the roads, repair the roofs? Who would create the technology, discover the processes, research the chemistry, cure the diseases? Who would build and maintain the cars, the bridges and the factories?

Females?

The females of today!?

Give us a break!

The whole human race would collapse into chaos and decay.

No.

If there is to be a successful future at all for our species, it could definitely not be created or maintained by a single 'female' gender that is anything like today's prototype.

We'd all be dead within a month.

Yes. Perhaps one day we will have indeed transmogrified ourselves into one single gender, but 'female', most certainly, it will not be. And so the idea that men and boys will be eradicated by women or by unavoidable circumstances leaving the planet populated exclusively by females is nothing but a load of misandric hokum.

Besides which, normal human males and females are too bound up with each other to let each other go.

Nevertheless, if Steve Jones is successful in increasing the amount of male hatred - of which there is already a great deal - by claiming that men are parasites, I can assure him that the likelihood of women being bred like cattle and treated as such will also increase somewhat significantly.

By widening the gender divide that already exists, Steve Jones is simply adding to the mass of problems that are being caused by the alienation of men, and he is certainly not helping women. And by doing this he is also likely to bring a considerable amount of discredit to others in his profession. After all, who is going to trust the motives of biologists who claim that various genetic tinkerings are worthy of investigation when Steve Jones is saying that he regards men as parasites?

Biologists will love this man when their research grants start drying up.

Oh yes. Biologists will love this man when their research grants start drying up.

His proclamations are as destructive to the study of Biology as would be those of physicists who said, "Oh yes, we will soon be able to wipe out all those parasitic Jews and Arabs in the Middle East with a neutron bomb or two."

"The chromosome unique to men is a microscopic metaphor for those who bear it," Jones concludes. "For it is the most decayed, redundant and parasitic of the lot."

It is worth reading the above quote again, and making sure that you understand it. 

There you are guys. Not only is your Y chromosome decayed, redundant and parasitic, the same applies to you as human beings.

But, of far greater importance, does anyone think that the BBC or any university would allow themselves to be used to promote the view that women are parasites?

Of course they wouldn't allow such a thing.

But engendering hatred towards men and boys is not only permissible today, it is condoned and actively promoted by many people.

It is not only Steve Jones who is promoting the view that men are parasites. His publishers, his university, the BBC's production team, together constitute a large number of individuals. And they are all playing their part in disseminating Jones' malicious propaganda. Heaping hatred upon men doesn't seem to trouble these people in the slightest. Indeed, there is a huge industry that makes its living out of demonising men, and Steve Jones has simply become a part of it.

However, there is the most enormous price being paid by western societies for the continuing demonisation and alienation of men. The cost of crime, violence, drug abuse, loss of education, corruption, vandalism, lost opportunities, broken homes etc are absolutely enormous, as are the emotional costs - and the associated costs (e.g. anti-depressants, days off work) of trying to deal with them.

I shall think of Steve Jones the next time that a boy commits suicide

I shall think of Steve Jones the next time that a boy commits suicide, or an ostracised father kills his family, or when I see the next round of statistics concerning violent crime. And I shall wonder what part he played in these things.

And, believe it or not, I am not just saying this for dramatic effect.

I really will be thinking about Steve Jones' contribution to family breakdowns and such - and also about the attitude of the BBC - as his malicious propaganda begins to be absorbed by millions and it takes its effect.

We have people in the government, the media, the justice system and a host of others supporting policies and ideologies specifically designed to alienate and demonise men and boys, and these very same people then blame both these groups for their responses to them.

Look at how just like animals they are.

Parasites.

In my view, if one is going to talk about human beings as parasites, then one must surely assess them on the basis of how much harm they have caused to other humans in comparison to how much good they have done for them. In Steve Jones' case, the harm that he will do to others is going to be positively huge. I therefore have no hesitation in calling this man a parasite because this is what he has become.

 In the future there will probably be far more women on the planet than men.

Steve Jones is right. In the future there will probably be far more women on the planet than men. But it will be thanks to genetic engineering rather than to any decaying chromosomes - just as is now the case when it comes to cows and bulls. 

But he is remarkably naive if he believes that it is the cows who will be calling the shots.

14/10/02

The First Cloned Human Baby

UK THE first cloned human baby will be born next year, says a top fertility specialist. And it could make men redundant, according to American specialist Dr Panayiotis Zavos. 

Cloning could make men redundant, eh?

After all, no sperm is needed.

Well, don't worry too much Boys.

When it comes to breeding horses and cows, the sperm of men is also pretty redundant.

But it doesn't stop men from riding them or eating them!

So, don't waste your time worrying about such trivialities.

Let them clone as many women as they want.

A million. A zillion. 

There is always room for more!

 let this news of cloning put a smile upon your lips

So, sleep well my friends, and let this news of cloning put a smile upon your lips as your dreams carry you off cosily to the furniture store to consider the design and decor of your future harem. 

"Beat us mercilessly should we ever bore you," your concubines will plead as they sponge you up and down in the bathroom just before bedtime. 

"If we fail to cater for your every whim and fancy then throw us to the dogs and replace us with more worthy clones," they shall urge as they present you with an array of exotic dishes from which you might partake of a nibble or two.

"How can we please our Master for every second of every day?" they shall beg to know as they slowly wave peacock feathers at you lest your body grows too hot without a gentle breeze.

Ah yes. The future is definitely female, all right.

But only in terms of number.

Just like the cows.

Also see, ...

Men have Bred Dogs and Cattle.

More Women Than Men Required - Polygamy is the Future