The Oct Tot Mom

Whatever the origin of the Suleman octuplets, their mother is exhibiting classic low-SES behavior.  Mothers of low socio-economic status often espose a “gardening” view of parenting, asserting that children need love, good food, and a warm home.  High-SES mothers often take a “mission” view of parenting, focusing on some goal later in live they want their children to achieve (say, a college degree, a stable life, helping other people in a professional role, founding their own solid family, or some other goal).  Because low-SES children are often caught in a vicious cycle, we can expect similar views out of the 14 Suleman children when they reach reproductive age.

Suleman said she is a good mother.

“Im providing myself to my children. Im loving them unconditionally, accepting them unconditionally,” she told Curry. “Everything I do, Ill stop my life for them and be present with them. And hold them. And be with them. And how many parents do that? Im sure there are many that do, but many dont. And thats unfortunate. That is selfish.”

‘Phenomenal risk’

Suleman said she was fully aware of the risks of carrying eight fetuses. “Those are my children, and that’s what was available,” she said. “It’s a gamble.”

via Octuplet mom defends ‘unconventional’ choices – Parenting & Family – MSNBC.com.

However, the reaction of TV hosts indicates shock that Suleman’s pregnancy was not properly “regulated.”  This is a good thing. Large-scale eugenics and SES-improving programs will require the regulation of reproduction on the part of those whose traits we do not wish to perpetuate, at least until gene therapy and stem therapy comes online. The Oct Tot Mom presents a rare opportunity when an out-of-control human breeder creates outrage among the general population.  

I earlier thought that Obama will become the President most likely to cause a eugenics program in the United States , because national health care naturally makes health everyone’s responsibility.  However, Obama is a Democrat, and Democrat are more eager to regulate industry in resposne to outrages in any case.  It is possible that the Oct Tot Mom fallout causes Democrats to create some regulations which will start us down the role to shaping genotypes in the United States

11 thoughts on “The Oct Tot Mom”

  1. I think there are plenty of Republicans and Democrats who find eugenics repulsive – until they want a better dog, or a faster horse, or bigger cattle, or better whatever.

  2. Men are not pigs, dogs, or cattle. They are property. Men are not.

    A big problem with eugenics is not the goal(s) which may be positive, but rather the “who” as in who is in control. The Politicians managing the Eugenics will respond to their own interests and to their own incentives…the societal goal is not their goal.

    Remember this: If you think central planning politicians can’t manage an economy very well, wait till they are trying to centrally plan our genetic outcomes.

  3. “Large-scale eugenics and SES-improving programs will require the regulation of reproduction on the part of those whose traits we do not wish to perpetuate.”

    Who is “we”?

    “If you think central planning politicians can’t manage an economy very well, wait till they are trying to centrally plan our genetic outcomes.”

    Amen.

    By the way, tell me when you plan to retroactively abort some of my five children. I’ll be waiting with my gun.

  4. sonofsamphm1c,

    Well said.

    Stem cell research has to be one of the most aesthetically ghastly procedures ever invented.

    But promise actors walking, high-paying jobs, and money… and those concerns are marginalized rather quickly.

    purpleslog,

    It’s true that a good first approximation of sin is treating like people and people like objects.

    But as the governance is the rule by men of men through men, that first approximation clearly breaks down.

    There is an ocean of difference between anarchy and central planning, plenty of room to find a nice place to swim.

    That said, the government already uses a variety of outcomes to ensure the emergence of preferable phenotypic outcomes among the next generation (the schools being the most obvious instrument).

    Lexington Green,

    Who is “we”?

    The same “we” who build schools, enact laws, and deter crimes: the people through their government.

    By the way, tell me when you plan to retroactively abort some of my five children. I’ll be waiting with my gun.

    Do you respond the same way to the proposal to better fund HeadStart programs?

  5. I, for one, wholly endorse the SES approach! And I’ve got five data points that tell me the other way is a recipe for failure in the long run. Of course, this is where GWB’s “Gotta have balance” approach best applies.

  6. The smartest person in the world (measured by IQ) makes the argument for eugenics. Check out this podcast of Chris Langan, who has an IQ of 210. In part three he talks about the need for a benign eugenics program. He’s not a mathematician, not a physicist, he’s a bouncer at a bar. What I appreciate most is that his mind has never been poisoned by political correctness. So he’ll make the argument for eugenics and not think twice. I’m pretty sure he’s the inspiration for the movie “Good Will Hunting.” And although I’m an agnostic who leans towards atheism, I believe he makes a decent argument for a creator.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ak5Lr3qkW0&feature=related

  7. “By the way, tell me when you plan to retroactively abort some of my five children. I’ll be waiting with my gun. …”

    I would only be for that if you have a daughter(s) appearing on The Rock of Love.

  8. Hi Dan,

    Those five data points would be my own 5 children.

    Mike

    And I wasn’t bragging. I’m really looking forward to the next generation of Android phones…

  9. Mike,

    In my antilibrary is The Ten Thousand Year Explosion [1,2,3], which addresses how civilization accelerates human evolution.

    We’re the most important environmental pressure we face. Not seeking to influence that pressure, at all, strikes me as odd.

    sonofsamphm1c,

    On the subject of the Rock of Love, and TV skankery [4]

    Seerov,

    Fascinating video!

    One of the interesting findings of psychometrics is that as you go up the IQ ladder, there is less and less relationship between IQ and success.

    [1] http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0465002218/geneexpressio-20/
    [2] http://the10000yearexplosion.com/
    [3] http://scienceblogs.com/gnxp/2009/01/the_10000_year_explosion_how_c.php
    [4] http://www.theonion.com/content/video/in_the_know_are_reality_shows

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *