Executions are eugenics, you won't catch all of the murderers before they procreate but over a long enough period of time it makes a massive difference.
For a lot of pedos/gays, I don't think they were actually born that way.
Can only speculate about what the actual ratio is, but I think it may well be a large majority of them are the way they are because they're victims of childhood sexual abuse or other traumas.
Memes and genes are similar in nature, though. You cannot easily completely prune a gene, nor a meme. But both can be selected against in their procreation.
If a large amount of victimizers were victims themselves, that implies a memetic procreation chain. Unless it's 100% passed through, a victimizer is going to abuse multiple victims before one of them "inherits" the victimizer meme/gene. Removing the spreader from the genetic/memetic pool stops them from further spreading their meme/gene. If the "spread", the acquiring of the victimizer trait from being victimized, is only 10%, and they victimize 9 people before being caught and removed, that means the spread is reducing (100->90->81->72->63 etc), and overall less victims, every "generation" of victimizers.
You don't go after victims: some of them may, after all, carry a resiliance meme that helps counter the spread. And you select for that resiliance meme by stopping the victimizers as they appear, over time, same as selecting for trust or nonviolence or sociability or intelligence on genetic levels.
But you do go after the spreaders of the malignant meme. And that solves the problem. Is it tragic they were abused and combined with a susceptability thus inherited the victimizer meme? Yes. Should they be stopped from further spreading that meme? Also yes.
EDIT: I'm using "meme" here in a Dawkins/Metal-Gear-style classical sense of the word, the genetic reproduction of ideas, not cat pictures on the internet, obviously.
There’s a theory that England executed all the people with this gene
Not just England, most of the White, European nations did.
Executions are eugenics, you won't catch all of the murderers before they procreate but over a long enough period of time it makes a massive difference.
It's why they don't want us executing the pedos.
For a lot of pedos/gays, I don't think they were actually born that way.
Can only speculate about what the actual ratio is, but I think it may well be a large majority of them are the way they are because they're victims of childhood sexual abuse or other traumas.
Memes and genes are similar in nature, though. You cannot easily completely prune a gene, nor a meme. But both can be selected against in their procreation.
If a large amount of victimizers were victims themselves, that implies a memetic procreation chain. Unless it's 100% passed through, a victimizer is going to abuse multiple victims before one of them "inherits" the victimizer meme/gene. Removing the spreader from the genetic/memetic pool stops them from further spreading their meme/gene. If the "spread", the acquiring of the victimizer trait from being victimized, is only 10%, and they victimize 9 people before being caught and removed, that means the spread is reducing (100->90->81->72->63 etc), and overall less victims, every "generation" of victimizers.
You don't go after victims: some of them may, after all, carry a resiliance meme that helps counter the spread. And you select for that resiliance meme by stopping the victimizers as they appear, over time, same as selecting for trust or nonviolence or sociability or intelligence on genetic levels.
But you do go after the spreaders of the malignant meme. And that solves the problem. Is it tragic they were abused and combined with a susceptability thus inherited the victimizer meme? Yes. Should they be stopped from further spreading that meme? Also yes.
EDIT: I'm using "meme" here in a Dawkins/Metal-Gear-style classical sense of the word, the genetic reproduction of ideas, not cat pictures on the internet, obviously.