Why is self pollination in plants considered good but incest in humans considered bad? Why do scientists give their thumbs up when a plant is full of recessive genes but they frown when they hear I had sex with my sister?
>>16782175OP is always either a fruit or a vegetable so go ahead and fuck yourself.
>>16782175Medical care too good.Social obligation to support nonfunctional offspring, ie refusing to let them die.Disgust stemming from such.Do you enjoy the idea of culling yourself if you are unfit?
>>16782175I'm not an expert on this topic but I can make a guess. Plants produce lots of seeds, even within the same fruit, and these seeds get to spread and compete far and wide. The parent plant doesn't have to invest anything in its children beside producing the initial flowers, seeds and fruit. This leads to a landscape where it's efficient for a plant to fuck itself, produce many different gene combinations, and let those combinations compete to figure out which is best.Sexual reproduction tries to minimize the impact of recessive genes, while this kind of hermaphroditism can select for beneficial recessive genes to be spread more easily
>>16782175because you only listed the positive effects.and plants are different from humans.as long as they can grow their edible parts well then humans will take care of their every other need.
>>16782181(addendum)If this hypothesis is solid, then I would expect plants that produce one seed per fruit, and whose seeds are particularly big (costly) to prefer sexual reproduction, e.g. the avocado. Inversely, plants that produce many small seeds per fruit, like pomegranates, would be more likely to self-fertilize. I don't know if this is the case but if anyone has sources to confirm or deny this I'l love to hear it
>>16782180No, but I would cull my children>>16782181So you're saying I need to have way more sex to justify it. That won't be a problem, I'm very horny
>>16782187It would be a lot more efficient if you had, say, 20 sisters, all of them in a perpetual cycle of pregnancies. With very early genetic traits to abort clearly bad fetuses, and frequent fitness testing to reject poor offspring early. Also you would need to be stupidly rich to afford all that food, care and genetic testing. And if you don't have any good recessive genes in the first place it's all a moot exercise I'd stick to outbreeding if I were you. Maybe you and your sister can adopt
>>16782175>Why is self pollination in plants considered good but incest in humans considered bad? Because what we find beneficial in plants is them being good eating, not them being healthy and viable for independent survival and activity. If we were breeding OPs like cattle to slaughter for meat, you bet your ass we'd inbreed them AF for optimal goycattle traits without giving much of a fuck about how retarded and sickly they get, as long as they grow fat marbled rumps and bellies.
>>16782175plants evolved to have sex with themselveshumans are supposed to seek out genetic variation, otherwise they get kicked out of society
>>16782175Just use a condom or other scientific form of birth control when you sex you sister. Post observations!
>>16782345using condom is fakelove. if you loved her you'd want to raise kids with her
>>16782175Would fucking yourself be masturbation or incest?
>>16782605masturbation if you only do it for pleasure and super incest, or selfcest, if you impregnate yourself
>>16782334so you're saying that inbreeding works as the bad genes concentrate and get purged?
>>16782175Incest would be good if you too could make thousand young a season and then make them compete in horrific blood sports on who is the fittest
>>16782628>be me, plant an apple tree>one year passes, but I still don't have a thousand new apple trees that were born from the one I plantedyou're full of shit. trees don't have that many descendants
>>16782634plant one seed, 20 years later (much less with the right manipulation) it dumps a ton of fruit each with 5 or 6 seeds,
>>16782636yeah, but those seeds won't grow into a new tree as the fruits will not end up buried under the earth
>>16782634There are literally millions possibly billions of clones of apple varieties like Gala across the world.At that scale they actually develop entire variant lines from mutant sports.
>>16782634>you're full of shit. trees don't have that many descendantsThat should tell you something about just how many seeds never made it and just how brutal the selection is year after year.
>>16782672you can't know if a dna is fit to survive before you even plant the seed
>>16782634A typical apple has maybe 10 seeds, mature trees easily produce 500 apples a year, that's 5000 offspring that get to compete on which one gets to germinate.
Nobody cares if a plant comes out retarded. You'll eat it or smoke it anyway.
>>16782175Incest is only prohibited because the ruling class does it. Whether it's just conspicuous consumption or actually good, i.e. the retention of genetic wealth analogous with the retention of material wealth, is beside the point. At the very least it is demonstrable that the polar opposite of incest is a catastrophe.
>>16783373>it is demonstrable that the polar opposite of Antarctica is very cold and unlivable>therefore Antarctica is good
>>16783384you must be fun at parties
>>16783384Do you not find it curious how the fitness gap between the ruling class and the plebeians always correlates with incest and its prohibition, respectively? I wonder if Historical "plagues" are not metonymized accounts of mass miscegenation, and if war, likewise, was not reviled mostly, possibly solely, on account of miscegenation?
Einstein married his cousin and he was the smartest man alive. Being anti incest outs you as a dummy
>>16783432>n the ruling classThe ruling class are a genetic dead end. Nothing is more dangerous for themselves than their antics to gain and retain power. Their DNA doesnt care if they get to enjoy some money before they are assasinated.
>>16782175r/k strategies. Also, first cousin was pretty common in most societies until recently. 2nd cousin is generally not prohibited anywhere.
Thinking about this at a fundamental level if you have a fertile female in the form of a sister at home what incentives actually exists to find any other mate given the potential risks involved in finding a mate and the genetic advantage of investing in more genes so close to your own?
>>16784892Why did the catholic church prohibit everything up to 6th degree?
why non complex cells being incest good and complex genome cells being incest bad huh ? riddle me this
>>16782334The whole reason to inbreed is literally because it exposes defective genes, you keep only the fittest offspring, this was socially more valid when everyone was having say twelve kids since you could readily dispose of the worst 10 through normal infant mortality and deaths in war or work.Since smaller families are now desired the cost of a dud is proportionately higher, so the safer option of outbreeding is initially more advantageous because it leads to a lower chance of two deleterious recessives combining. The downside is that these deleterious genes are sloowly increasing within the population as mutational load and gene complimentay gene complexes are being broken down. The inevitable consequences of these are loss of fitness and many future deaths when nature is able to reimpose herself.
>>16784920>given the potential risks involved in finding a mate????Dude just ask a girl out. There aren't any risks. She isn't gonna chop your arm off.
>>16784957It seems the thrust of the question went over your head.
>>16784920Why bother with sex at all just clone yourself?
