Wednesday, June 26, 2013

THE WORTHLESSNESS OF BEING MALE...

     I'm pretty sure genetic diversity is the only reason males exist. The mixing of alleles appears to be our only real function. Like the Vice President who has but two functions, waiting on hand should the President die and breaking a tie in the Senate (seriously, look it up), men appear to only exist for the purpose of insemination. Sure, like the Vice President, we can find other things to do in the meantime but otherwise men are useless.

     Insects like ants and bees take this to the extreme. Males are born only to mate with the queen. That lucky guy then immediately dies and the remainder of his cohorts hang around doing no work and consuming hive/colony resources until they are kicked out by the workers later in the season to starve.

     I guess the reason there's so many of us is because the female does not control the sex of our species but rather the male and his reproductive system does not favor Xs over Ys giving males a 50/50 shot at being born. But it's obvious to me that women are the half of our species that is important. They're the ones who actively engage in reproduction. A man's role ends (evolutionarily speaking) at ejaculation. That is the only point in the reproductive cycle a male need participate in. It is the only time a male is definitely needed. At every other point in any human's given life, a woman can do the rest of the work. For only those few minutes does the male shine. The rest of a male's life is spent trying to impress a female enough to be given those few minutes and trying to determine if a female is susceptible to/suitable for such impression.

      Recent scientific speculation suggests that the evolution of sexual reproduction was mainly to keep one or two steps ahead of the viruses, bacteria, mold, and parasites ever nipping at our species' heels. Sexual reproduction exists also to produce random favorable combinations to help deal with random environmental effects like drought, famine, prolonged cold, etc.

      I hear of some species like deer and sea lions in which there will be a dominant male who has a harem of females. Many males of these species are born but never mate because they cannot compete with the alpha...that is, until the alpha dies. Then it's war for a new alpha. But still, it shows even for them, the relative uselessness of males. It makes me wonder how many of us would ever be born if women were in control of sex determination. What ratio of males to females would be necessary to retain sufficient genetic diversity to ward off the threats mentioned earlier?

     Or has the evolution of selfishness ensured that males would continue exist in great numbers even with such an ability on the female's part because females would rather have a male of their own than share one amongst many?

No comments:

Post a Comment