ANSWERS: 6
-
Bad genetic code, poor mothering skills, one's own safety, to name 3.
-
If spending time and energy caring for her younger siblings genetically pays more than spending the same energy and time for her own children. A mother shares 50% of her genes with her daughter, 50% of her genes with her sibling. Now if her parents alone can't provide enough food for her siblings, she can help them and thereby increase the the amount of 'her' genes in future generations. This is a form of kin-selection, or kin altruism. Keep in mind that this example is just for 'evolutionary reasons'. We don't have to reproduce at all if we don't want to, it's just that until human being became intelligent, there was no other way to be.
-
No. But that doesn't mean much. Evolution doesn't mean that every individual is an optimized breeding machine. Bad genetic combinations need to be weeded out of the gene pool somehow. . Mind you, this doesn't have to be something the person feel consciously. They may simply not want kids while having terrific genes. . Evolution is about averages. On average - those with more suitable genes will have more offspring that live long enough to have more offspring that those with less fit genes. . +5
-
No, Although I don't have children and I understand and agree with enlightened and conscientious peoples reasons for not having, or having less children, it always seemed very devo to me. I think it would be an ominous sign if it happened on a grand scale.
-
Cause they're really, really ugly?
-
Because "Mister green teeth" smells bad, because he might be carrying diseases, because he might hurt her, because he might sire inferior children...
Copyright 2023, Wired Ivy, LLC

by 