/pol/ - An idea that i notice to be popular with modern day eugenecists is - women should not be controlled for any criteria and serve as a bottleneck for a population.This is absolute cope, dysgenic women is a real thing, which is obvious to anyone with triple

Name
Email
Subject
Comment
Verification	Please type the name of the object/variant:
Flag
File
Embed
Voice
Poll
Password	(For file deletion.)

Chud XZ4la^pa [VPN] 07/16/26 (Thu) 17:13:07 №3757200 [Quote]

An idea that i notice to be popular with modern day eugenecists is - women should not be controlled for any criteria and serve as a bottleneck for a population.
This is absolute cope, dysgenic women is a real thing, which is obvious to anyone with triple digit iq.
Usually, this cope stems from "eugenic men can produce as many children as they want, which is not the case for women" i can understand this standpoint, but you have to look at this realisticaly. As the population will grow higher in iq, people will have less and less children (direct corelation), to the point where any child has to be a step up from their parents.
Dysgenic women in this case will likely ruin the offspring, leading to a problem that simply doesn't have to exist.
You can select male spermcells which differ in genetic makeup, but cannot with women. Her bad genes will ruin the child.
Anyone thinking that a 4'11 becky below 100iq having children with 6'4 cl above average iq is a good thing is completely retarded and is participating in dysgenic practices.

Prince_Narcissist!!dXaqigavtk TJayf4!c 07/16/26 (Thu) 17:21:45 №3757222 [Quote]

Papua new guineanmaxxing this summr

Scob NIPkxD4A 07/16/26 (Thu) 17:24:06 №3757227 [Quote]

File: 1783954076446n.png 📥︎ (129.08 KB, 480x360) ImgOps

So dating short women should be completely prohibited?

Scob 1x^p^LrO [VPN] 07/16/26 (Thu) 17:25:23 №3757229 [Quote]

>>3757200 (OP)
On their way to the ~~petrol~~ perfume station where they can enjoy the aroma of modernity

Prince_Narcissist!!dXaqigavtk TJayf4!c 07/16/26 (Thu) 17:26:50 №3757233 [Quote]

>>3757229
Shivers…

Scob o55d2Ym! [VPN] 07/16/26 (Thu) 17:29:41 №3757242 [Quote]

>>3757227
In a perfect world - yes, but it is unrealistic and rooted in autism.
You cannot stop people from having children if they have an option to do so, which is why i suggest the popularising of modern technologies of genom selection, which are already availible, just very unpopular

Chud NIPkxD4A 07/16/26 (Thu) 17:32:26 №3757249 [Quote]

File: 1781573289738r.jpg 📥︎ (35.96 KB, 554x554) ImgOps

>>3757242
Unrealistic scenarios arent really autistic,we're just discussing what could be done and how that would affect people,I agree thoughever the average for women (if we're trying to engineer tall people) should be min 175 and for men 180

Scob XZ4la^pa [VPN] 07/16/26 (Thu) 17:37:39 №3757265 [Quote]

>>3757249
Taller for men, just add average difference in height between men and women.
Also, by autistic i mean in the same way as ancap for example. This retarded belief that people are interested in doing good even if it doesn't benefit them (which is genetic denialism, so not only autistic, but against what im talking about here)