It’s About Making Babies!

Tire of Men

Natalie posted an update on her family on Tired of Men today. (A few years ago, Nat was Tired of Men. She writes the popular Baggage Reclaim blog.) One recent event was a brief TV appearance on Sky News in the UK Monday, commenting on five popular online topics. The last one caught my attention

I enjoyed the SkyNews clip. This was my first glimpse of the actual, real Natalie. Natalie has opened so many doors for me, from her insights in relationships regarding Emotionally Unavailable partners – and how we attract them because we are often Emotionally Unavailable ourselves. Natalie introduced me to the phrase “smuggling peanuts“. What a talented lady!

The last segment of the clip covers findings that many dogs are less intelligent than in the past. That breeders are selecting for cute and docile, rather then dogs that excel in the work their breed was developed for.

Does this hold for people?

I wonder why no one talks about that with people.

Leo Frankowski mentions this in one of his SF novels. It might be in Cross-Time Engineer, or one of the following books. He comments on how French girls were prettier (in the 13th century!), because France had been “civilized” longer – and survival was less important than social status in picking a bride. Where in 13th century Poland, a good wife-candidate was more likely to be sturdy, robust, tolerate many births well, hard working – and warm to cuddle with during long and cold winters.

Yes, yes, this has impacted my perspective on dating and mating, but nonetheless..

Repeating the strategy focuses the results

When we can see the impact on dogs, in a relatively short span of generations, can we doubt that beer ads and fashion magazines, Playboy and Seventeen are also skewing the gene pool?

On the dogs story – I was told about 1980, that the German Shepherd dog breed in America was much less sane, much less useful than the European dog at that time. People were breeding for size – nothing else. The first two dogs I remember growing up were German Shepherds. Both were put down – one for attacking baby calves in the barn, the other for attacking my cousin (I still think this was an over-reaction – she ran at our house in the dark, ahead of her family, waking the dog sleeping on the stoop. One big scratch, across her forehead.) The thinking was, that once a dog tasted blood, it would attack again. While working in a pet shop in Corpus Christi, Texas, someone pointed out that some people there wanted the *big* dogs. Where the breed standard for German shepherds is 70-65 pounds, there were local dogs in the 200 pound range. Just as many toy breeds sacrifice intelligence and sanity for size, the over bred big dogs do as well.

Horses

One bit of advice given to first-time horse buyers, is to *avoid* smart horses. Horses that think, that have an imagination – spook more often, are more aware of changes and motion near them, are more likely to play tricks or get stubborn on the rider. A pleasant, alert horse is much better for the beginner.

Must we choose one or the other, comfort or best for the future?

While I want a pleasant, peaceful companion and home, I see the need for the next generation to be as smart, as disciplined, as self-reliant as possible. They should be brave, curious, fearless, and ready to confront what is wrong. Does that mean I should be looking for these qualities in a companion – then spend my life living up to the image of the kind of mate such a person would be satisfied with?

Yep. I ‘spect so.

Would an exceptionally pretty, exceptionally sexy mate tend to produce offspring more likely to be targeted by sexual predators, by manipulators? Would the offspring of such a mate need to be protected, or would they be building the next world?

And, heck, I thought I was just looking for the smile.

Eve-101.com asks in “The Battle of Cupid“,

Singles or couples, who reigns supreme on February 14th?

**Rain on parade alert**
Valentine’s day was a pagan fertility ritual. Like many adoptions of the church when they discovered the Celts, this became .. uh, a day “to remember St. Valentine”. Wasn’t there something about snakes? No, that was Patrick. Sorry.

Magic

It’s all about magic.

Not just “put some magic in our sex lives” magic. Real, coveted, Church calendar changing magic. Valentine’s Day is about an ancient fertility rite. Fertility, as in “get pregnant”. This dates back before commercial interests transformed the world in the Renaissance, and “proper thinking” took it place as social guiding principle over reality.

A bit of misquoted history – Don’t bother looking for corroboration.

The lingerie, the candy, the sappy cards, are a misguided hat tip to the underlying festival. What happened, was that the fertility rite folks understood that the excitement and release of makkin’ whoopy was magical. Really. And the Catholics wanted that magic bound to the church. So they “discovered” they were celebrating that day and pulled some wool over some eyes. Where the fertility rite involved sexing out your worship of the gods, now we discreetly, with the Church’s blessing, indulge in “romance” – that is still expected to raise power and magic for the use of the Church, through carnal indulgence.

An new slant on “sexy Valentine”

That is right. You are *expected* to “get lucky” to make the Church strong. Just like those ignorant, befuddled pagans did. Only, the pagans weren’t all that ignorant or befuddled – just looked down on by the high-and-might (celibate!) priests. Note that the celibate priests were also raising, and dedicating, their sexual energy to the church by not squandering it on mere mortal women, I guess. This does sound hokey today, but recall the Church squandered years and much money, debating just how many angels could dance on the head of a pin. Before pins were factory-made and of a dependable size.

The fundamentals

Valentine’s Day is not about celebrating romance. Or devotion. If you are really going to celebrate the day, it has to be in an intimate relationship. Otherwise the magic falls flat and just flutters about. And if you try the cheap candy, the second hand lingerie (oh, yuck!), and strike out – not only the gods will be down on your ass. You will have a disappointed partner to deal with, too.

Ya gotta get the squeal, to show respect and praise for the gods that went in for that kind of thing.

Back to the question

Is it better to be dating or single for this holiday? Coupled. Well-coupled is always better, any day and every day. Mated, even. This holiday was custom made for mated, married people. And people that want to get that way – if your “celebration” pleases the gods, the gift is fertility. As in, pregnant! (Notice we still, today, centuries after the Church swiped the pagan festival, call babies “a blessing?”)

Don’t believe me?

Just look up some time. The “mistletoe” thing, where you hang a sprig over the door (Doors, brooms, many things were sacred to pagans. We still say “life is sacred” today!) and kiss a girl you catch there? This is a very watered-down version of the intent of the custom, to bless the lady of the house with a lovely baby for the year. Very watered down version of the original custom.

Back at Eve-101, where this started

I hope the guy in the Eve-101 article was being ironic or sarcastic or something contrary to the words he used. Because venial and shallow seem to shine through.

And, T. Brad? – for my money, if you aren’t participating with an intimate partner, you aren’t taking part at all. Send your Mom and Sister a card, and leave the vandalism in your diary.