what have foul mouths got to do with it? plenty of people have foul mouths and do not enslave, murder or rape anyone!

g

@genessa my fucks to give on this site are gone. I have no answer for you.

@djswan well, if you don't fucking know, i don't fucking know either.

g

@Beach_slim A lot of us women (generally speaking) got our mental health problems from men beating us up or being sexually innapropriate - thats how I got my D.I.D Dx

@jacpod Finally a comment in this thread that is eloquent, and simply stated with feeling in it, and absolutely correct.

@Beach_slim To say we have evolved from the species of Apes is an insult to that species. Were it so, we ought to have monuments to our ancestors, not cages, zoos and extermination. Of course one must remember this is not the case with the Native American indigenous population which honors and respects all creatures. There are a few others as well. Anyway, Darwinism is the modern era's mythology. Nevertheless, your comment is well composed.

@Beach_slim I think you have a faulty view of evolution. If I say we evolved from chimps, I'm not saying that we "are on the same level" as the genus Pan. The separation took place six and a half million years ago. Think of the branch of a tree. After the bifurcation each branch went their separate ways. Humans are now of the genus Homo.

@jacpod likewise here with my DID and PTSD

Perhaps @Scrabblenut instead of women proving the Peter Principle they should firstly use the skills they avoid - those of parenting.

Parenting by teaching, succouring and enabling their children to successfully contribute to society. Skills they should have learnt from their mothers.

Then as @SKDeitch succinctly points out there will be no need for cloning and eugenics.

Wikipedia: The Basic Laws of Human Stupidity, explores the controversial subject of stupidity. Stupid people are seen as a group, more powerful by far than major organizations such as the Mafia and the industrial complex, which without regulations, leaders or manifesto nonetheless manages to operate to great effect and with incredible coordination.

These are Cipolla's five fundamental laws of stupidity:

Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation.
The probability that a certain person (will) be stupid is independent of any other characteristic of that person.
A stupid person is a person who causes losses to another person or to a group of persons while himself deriving no gain and even possibly incurring losses.
Non-stupid people always underestimate the damaging power of stupid individuals. In particular non-stupid people constantly forget that at all times and places and under any circumstances to deal and/or associate with stupid people always turns out to be a costly mistake.
A stupid person is the most dangerous type of person.
Corollary: a stupid person is more dangerous than a pillager.

As is evident from the third law, Cipolla identifies two factors to consider when exploring human behaviour:

Benefits and losses that an individual causes to him or herself.
Benefits and losses that an individual causes to others.

Graph with the benefits and losses that an individual causes to him or herself and causes to others.
By creating a graph with the first factor on the x-axis and the second on the y-axis, we obtain four groups of people, with an additional category either existing in its own right or drawn from the members of each previous category whose position with respect to both axes is least extreme:

Intelligent people (top right), who contribute to society and who leverage their contributions into reciprocal benefits
Helpless people (top left), who contribute to society but are taken advantage of by it (and especially by the "bandit" sector of it); note, however, that extreme altruists and pacifists may willingly and consciously (rather than helplessly) accept a place in this category for moral or ethical reasons
Bandits (bottom right), who pursue their own self-interest even when doing so poses a net detriment to societal welfare
Stupid people (bottom left), whose efforts are counterproductive to both their and others' interests
ineffectual people (center)
Cipolla further refines his definition of "bandits" and "naive people" by noting that members of these groups can either add to or detract from the general welfare, depending on the relative gains (or losses) that they cause themselves and society. A bandit may enrich himself more or less than he impoverishes society, and a naive person may enrich society more or less than he impoverishes himself and/or allows himself to be impoverished. Graphically, this idea is represented by a line of slope -1, which bisects the second and fourth quadrants and intersects the y-axis at the origin. The naive people to the left of this line are thus "semi-stupid" because their conduct creates/allows a net drain of societal welfare; some bandits may fit this description as well, although many bandits such as sociopaths, psychopaths, and non-pathological "jerks" and amoralists may act with full knowledge of the net negative consequences to a society that they neither identify with nor care about.