Good genes hypothesis
The good genes hypothesis states that females pick males based on their breeding value for fitness. More vaguely, this is defined as "women pick men with 'good genes'". Many blackpillers promote this view of humans, usually by calling incels subhuman or genetically inferior because of being rejected by women, and then rejecting arguments to the contrary as cope. This is further evidenced by blackpiller advocation for suicide for incels, eugenics, or social Darwinism.
The theory is debated in academia. Usually between 'good geners' vs 'fisherians'. An alternative and sometimes overlapping belief in academia is called Fisherian selection. Fisherian selection states that females select for sexiness, which may diverge from breeding value for fitness, and create issues.
Incelosphere[edit | edit source]
Various forum users have different stances on the good genes hypothesis. Members of incels.co generally promote the theory, knowingly or unknowingly. Fschmidt's incel forums define themselves as against the hypothesis (eg r/nonmorons) and instead lean more toward strong Fisherian hypotheses and they think incels are instead 'genetically superior' because they think society is in a fisherian runaway due to an evolutionary mismatch. People from Fschmidt and Caamibs circle generally dislike other forums for falsely giving off the impression that incels are 'low-IQ'. Yourenotalone.co was also strongly opposed to this theory and leaned toward Fisherian hypotheses. Older forums such as IncelSupport generally considered observable effort the most consistent predictor of mating success instead of sexiness or 'good genes', a view wiki editor Altmark22 also holds.
Fisherians vs Good Geners[edit | edit source]
An alternative explanation for animals' mate choices is Fisherian selection, which suggests that male ornamentation evolved to make males more attractive to women and not necessarily evolving for healthy offspring. In other words, that female mate choice is mostly neutral with regards to population viability. Fisherians tend to emphasize the role of sexual selection in male ornament runaway, where traits for population viability are neglected, also called a fisherian runaway. Some fisherians point to experimental literature that contradicts the good genes hypothesis.
Good geners think that male ornamentation evolves as a signal of ability to have healthy offspring and thus they think that sexual selection is primarily eugenic, i.e. that it increases population viability over time. This view is supported by Hamilton-Zuk's parasite theory.
Matt Ridley (1993) calls this debate the 'Fisherians vs Good Geners'. Cronin 1991 calls this debate the 'sexy sons' vs 'healthy offspring' debate.
Even though there is a lot of rivalry between good geners and Fisherians, these explanations are not mutually exclusive and may shape animal's phenotypes together.
Even if most of human mate choice is eugenic, (for which there is little evidence, e.g. health and partner count only correlate weakly), eugenics is a dubious societal goal anyhow as outlined in the eugenics article, at least as long it causes deaths or incels.
Contemporary good geners[edit | edit source]
Besides blackpillers, the good genes hypothesis is also promoted by e.g. Canadian professor Jordan Peterson as well as by modern (but not traditional) eugenicists and racialists such as Edward Dutton. They go looking for reasons why female preferences might indicate 'good genes', for example by saying women prefer symmetrical faces because symmetry is an honest signal of developmental stability, low mutational load and hence overall genetic fitness. Further, developmental stability is thought to be necessary for overall health. Taken together, one would expect that symmetry and health are correlated in the overall population. However, several studies did not find such a link:
Contrary to the hypothesis that symmetry cues health, the largest study of facial asymmetry and health to date found no relationship between these variables. Researchers used data from a British cohort study of 4732 individuals and found that facial symmetry at age 15 was unrelated to longitudinal measures of childhood health, including measures of the proportion of childhood years spent unwell, average number of illness symptoms per year, and total number of infections.
Even though facial attractiveness is correlated with health (see beauty), and even though bad genes may be visible in extreme cases such as disfigurement, certain genetic conditions such as down syndrome, these kinds of links appear to be very weak overall.
Good geners tend to contradict themselves though by also implying that incels are overlooked irrationally by women, unless they are only speaking of specific incels or are ok with what they would think would be dysgenics if incels were not overlooked.
Some, but not all, feminists also promote the good genes hypothesis by insinuating that sexual selection outside of patriarchy is a moral and rational sorter of good and bad genes, including a feminist who held a prominent position in the FBI. Feminists more often take issue with Darwin in general though, so these overtures are infrequent and often passively expressed in arguments, if at all.
A minority of journalists, such as Brian Clarey signal explicit belief in the good genes hypothesis.
Homocel hypothesis[edit | edit source]
The prevalence of outright Chad worship among some blackpilled incels appears to have a homoerotic undertone, reminding of the homocel hypothesis. Chad worship may ultimately be driven by a desire to get sodomized by Chad after telling him how great his genes are in order to get some crumbs in return.
References[edit | edit source]