~ archived since 2018 ~

150 kids fathered by a single sperm donor

OverdoseOfRedPill · 2015-05-30T15:07:39+00:00

This might be the best way to propagate your genes for MGTOW without the hassle of family and relationships: One Sperm Donor, 150 Offspring. Thoughts?...

OverdoseOfRedPill

May 30, 2015

0 upvotes

/r/askTRP

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Post Information

Title	150 kids fathered by a single sperm donor
Author	OverdoseOfRedPill
Upvotes	0
Comments	35
Date	May 30, 2015 3:07 PM UTC (11 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/askTRP
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/asktrp/comments/37ulvn/150_kids_fathered_by_a_single_sperm_donor/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/askTRP/150-kids-fathered-by-a-single-sperm-donor.149520 https://theredarchive.com/post/149520

Comments

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]wickedwildewolf0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]karmasutur3 0 points0 points0 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago [recovered] (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]karmasutur3 1 points1 points1 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Allright, OverdoseofRedpill can't put together a logical statement to save his life, but clearly you can.

So here's what I would say to that.

We have clear scientific evidence that the father being present delivers a quantifiable across-the-board advantage to their offspring, and we have clear scientific evidence that being absent has the reverse effect.

His original posit was something like, 'Why not go MGTOW, and donate sperm, and hope, therefore eliminating any investment in relationships in order to further the genetic line?"

Well, for an average man, even an average RP man, it's unlikely that he'll be able to achieve significant numerical success.

In your example, yeah if you can impregnate 10k women, then sure, the statistical outliers of well adjusted men that result from single mother situations will clearly overwhelm whatever natural conceptions you can achieve from a normal coupling. Lets say 25% or 2500 of those men are well adjusted. Great!

But if you take that 25%, and you're only able to impregnate 4 women through sperm donation because random women select you, then only one child is going to succeed.

And a normal coupling with the 75% well adjusted rate will win out as 3 of the 4 children go on to propagate the line.

Since it's hard to quantify the exact success of the kids either way, but with reasonable certainty you can say you're going to need probably 10+ kids through artificial single mother sources to compete with a normal male led family, then we're back to a really really common red pill ideal, and something i think is critical to talk about here:

Hypergamy. Because the only way you are going to be successful in being selected by single women in a IVF clinic is by being the dominant high value male of the sperm donor population, right?

You're going to HAVE to be tall, sexy, rich, successful, and then the single wannabe moms will select you based off the demographics the clinic gives her.

In fact a less perfect man might have a better chance with a normal approach, rather than going MTGOW and then trying to be a sperm donor.

Which kinda defeats the purpose, being that most even RP men are NOT chad thundercock.

In addition: half of the genes being given to the child are hers! If she's a stupid hamplanet, then your line just took a hit: If you choose ,you can pick a female 'winner' so to speak.

[–]OverdoseOfRedPill[S] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago [recovered] (0 children) | Copy Link

[–] points points points 56 years ago | Copy Link

[–]OverdoseOfRedPill[S] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link

[–] points points points 56 years ago | Copy Link

You're looking at this the wrong way.

Yeah, keep it coming to the guy with the bio degree.

Insects, fish, mammals, all reproduce as much as possible.

There are many reproductive strategies in the animal kingdom, ours is a species that actually invests a ton in the quality of reproduction (even at the physical level) and not the quantity (which is common of complex higher order animals).

I mean I see that you listened to 5 minutes of high school bio but you have your wires crossed.

Homo sapiens sapiens have literally evolved in order to further 'the better eggs but less in the basket' approach.

Females push out babies which are still fetal, and not at all ready, just to invest more in that braincase of ours. So no, we're not mosquitoes pushing out fuckloads of children and just tossing them into the wind in the shotgun approach.

Just the existence of menopause argues against you here. The competition between the fetus and the human mother in gestation argues against you here.

[–]OverdoseOfRedPill[S] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago [recovered] [recovered] (5 children) | Copy Link

[–] points points points 56 years ago | Copy Link

[–]OverdoseOfRedPill[S] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link

[–] points points points 56 years ago | Copy Link

Genetics is science, not metaphysics.

YOu are right about that. Now show me dawkin's data.

OH WAIT. It was a metaphysics book, that's right. There wasn't any.

And guess what? The gene-centered view of evolution (that dawkins fostered) hinges significantly on the assumption that acquired characteristics aren't inheritied, and epigenetics is blowing that assumption out of the water.

The hard science of phosphorylate tagging of nucleotides and other emerging epigenetic evidence ruins this shit.

Now I'm not saying that Dawkins didn't contribute, what I am saying is that removing a strong male influence to your genetic offspring puts them at a significant disadvantage to continuing the long term survival of your genes especially when humanity lacks a strong outside evolutionary selective force (like a predator).

So until the viral apocalypse, or a meteor impact, since we're mostly limited by sexual selection and self destructive selective pressure, the best thing you can do to maintain your genetic lineage is to be there for your offspring, douchebag.

[–]OverdoseOfRedPill[S] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]OverdoseOfRedPill[S] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

[–] points points points 56 years ago | Copy Link

[–]OverdoseOfRedPill[S] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago [recovered] (19 children) | Copy Link

[–] points points points 56 years ago | Copy Link

[–]OverdoseOfRedPill[S] -2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago [recovered] (5 children) | Copy Link

[–] points points points 56 years ago | Copy Link

So you donate your sperm, and are not around as a father figure, to 5 women.

Of those 5 women, 1 guy is an incurable incel so never reproduces, one guy gets married, but since he's a beta he gets cucked and his kids arent his, one dies in a car accident, one of a drug overdose because dad wasn't around, and one gets married and has two daughters, but since he's weak, his wife and girls are dominant and super fat, and they never find husbands because they are hamplanets.

Due to natural and sexual selections, now your genetics are gone, in two generations.

No, lets same you have one son with one woman, and due to your redpill influence, he's not weak, and therefore gets an LTR at age 35 and has three more kids. One's a girl, two are boys, due to the father being around, again, 2/3 are strong, and so on and so forth.

100% of your genes won't disappear in just 2 generations. Infact you can probably trace your lineage back to Mohammad or Moses -- like the rest of us. Genes never disappear completely, they just mingle with others.

This is a strawman, amateur.

[–]OverdoseOfRedPill[S] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link

[–] points points points 56 years ago | Copy Link

[–]OverdoseOfRedPill[S] -2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Code_Bordeauxx-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Code_Bordeauxx-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

That's all well and good, but not the reason I wrote that comment down. Of course people should be free to defend their opinions. However, in my opinion -especially if you come here to ask a question- you can discuss in a mutual respectful manner or you can get the fuck out. Doesn't have to be all cuddly and friendly, but some basic codes of conduct apply.

To add to that, he is not so much asking a question as defending a statement disguised as a question. So not only is he behaving like an allround asshole, he is also wasting everyones time. If you guys are still going to debate, have at it. But I wasn't going to let this pass without commenting on it. On the main sub he'd be banned by now for breaking the code of conduct, you do know this right? From the guideline:

Abusive Behaviour towards Valuable Contributors by Non-contributors

Includes character assassination, insults, or accusations of personal wrongdoing.

[–]OverdoseOfRedPill[S] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]karmasutur3 0 points0 points0 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Code_Bordeauxx0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago [recovered] (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]OverdoseOfRedPill[S] -2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Code_Bordeauxx1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]OverdoseOfRedPill[S] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link