Fate grants kingdoms to the enslaved, delivering triumphs to the captives.
However, a lucky person like that is rarer than a white crow.Juvenal
Why are there two genders at all? In mathematics, there is a method of proof called “proof by contradiction.” This means that to prove the correctness of a thesis, one tries to prove the correctness of the opposite thesis, and if it becomes clear that the opposite makes no sense, then the original thesis is considered correct.
So, let’s imagine a world where there is only one gender. Such a world might not even need to be imagined. Most bacteria, which reproduce by division, are free from the issues related to getting married. This allows bacteria to reproduce quickly, occupying all available space in no time. When bacteria divide, information about how a bacterium should look, what it should eat, how to protect itself, and how to digest various nutrients is passed on through copying. Errors can occur during this copying process, but bacteria are structured so simply and reproduce so rapidly that these copying errors generally do not hinder the next generation of bacteria. Therefore, bacteria do not expend their energy on maintaining a complex error-correction system. It’s better to divide a few extra times before being overwhelmed by the surrounding world than to die knowing that your division was error-free.
In more complex organisms, the reproduction rate is much lower, and the resources required to create the next generation of offspring are significantly greater. In this case, compensating for erroneous copying is much harder with the speed of reproduction. Therefore, complex multicellular organisms have a powerful mechanism to protect against copying errors. This mechanism is activated at all stages from conception to the birth of a living being, and most miscarriages in mammals are related to the fact that the unborn offspring does not pass the next “quality exam.”
The presence of protective systems allows for a high probability of producing offspring and accurately copying all the information necessary for the growth and functioning of the organism.
It is also important to note that complex organisms require more time to mature—specifically, the stage when a new organism is capable of reproduction. This means that the “protection of copying,” combined with a slow reproduction rate, leads to living beings being unable to adapt to changes in their environment and ultimately going extinct without adapting to the new conditions. However, the world is changing. The climate is shifting, food sources are evolving, and the defensive mechanisms of prey and the attacking strategies of predators are also changing. New ecological niches are opening up while old ones are closing. In these conditions, all organisms that failed to find a way to maintain reliable copying on one hand, while ensuring their own variability on the other, have gone extinct. Those that have survived, reproduced, and now dominate the Earth are the beings that have developed a form of reproduction that involves taking genetic information from two parents to produce offspring.
How does it work? When, as a result of random copying errors, a new trait emerges that a) does not hinder the individual’s survival and allows it to reach adulthood, and b) enables it to reproduce with another individual of its species, this trait spreads through the population like a disease. If a crested bird developed a red crest instead of a blue one and reproduced asexually, then the red crest would only appear in its offspring. However, if reproduction required another crested bird, then the red crest would be present in both the offspring of that bird and the offspring of its mate. In the next generation, the red crest would be found in all the grandchildren of the crested bird, meaning in the offspring not only of its children but also of its in-laws.
Traits, or genes, are passed down in a slightly more complex way, resulting in some descendants having a red crest while others do not. However, the trait of “red crestedness” will eventually become a common characteristic of the crested bird, and in distant descendants, the red crest will start to appear almost on its own, inherited from a grandfather or great-grandfather, even when both parents are entirely blue-crested.
Just like with people, take eye color, for example. It’s quite common now to encounter individuals with blue eyes, but the first person with that eye color appeared only about 6,000 to 10,000 years ago. In other words, within a maximum of 10,000 years, the trait of blue eyes, which is the result of a mutation in the HERC2 gene that leads to reduced melanin production in the iris, spread from the first ancestor to nearly the entire population of the planet Earth.
If people reproduced asexually, blue eyes would only exist among the descendants of a single individual. With sexual reproduction, blue eyes can appear in the descendants of the first blue-eyed person as well as in the descendants of all their partners across generations. And if, for some reason, a disease or catastrophe were to occur tomorrow that only blue-eyed individuals could survive, it would be sexual reproduction that would allow humanity to maintain its population at a level sufficient for further development, giving a chance for survival not just to the descendants of that ancient blue-eyed ancestor.
But the world is so harsh that tomorrow we might need, say, both blue-eyed and short-legged individuals at the same time. And it is sexual reproduction that ensures such a great diversity of individuals that both short-legged and blue-eyed ones will definitely be found. Bacteria, on the other hand, have a harder time with this. That’s why bacterial cultures are practically incapable of developing resistance to two antibiotics at once, as it’s hard to imagine a “child” of two bacteria simultaneously, one of which has randomly developed resistance to antibiotic A, while the other has to antibiotic B.
In other words, the presence of two sexes provides complex organisms with both stability and variability, which are necessary to adapt to a constantly changing world.
That’s why each of us is unique. It’s almost impossible to imagine an “average person,” because aside from external traits, there are many characteristics that don’t affect appearance. These include digestive traits, resistance to certain diseases, and blood types, which, by the way, are remnants of humanity’s struggle against ancient diseases and the development of immunity, that is, antibodies to them. We are all exceptions to the rules. In comparison to each of us, redheads or, for example, homosexuals represent a broader group of people than the one we belong to.
Nature loves exceptions. Exceptions and deviations from some imagined norm are the key to survival and a tool for blindly feeling out the right solution in a world full of new threats. After all, if a disaster strikes, a “non-standard” creature will have a better chance of survival than a “standard” one. Of course, this “non-standardness” must be beneficial in the new circumstances. Moreover, if all representatives of a certain species were absolutely identical, sooner or later there would be circumstances that would lead to the extinction of the entire species. Perhaps, at the dawn of biological evolution, there were “standard” species of animals, but they simply went extinct. Nature has preserved only those species that diligently maintained variability and non-standard traits within themselves.
Nature is a blind constructor. It simply tests out different options, and in most cases, “non-standard” traits do not represent an improvement. They either hinder or have no effect on the life of a living being. Often, there are traits that enhance one aspect but worsen another. For example, increased resistance to worms, in the absence of such parasites, can lead to allergic bronchial asthma. In other words, people who have “learned” to fight off worms, whose immune systems have become sensitive enough to recognize a new enemy, have simultaneously received allergies as a “bonus.” When there are no worms in the intestines, their eggs are not spread through the bloodstream, and their waste does not poison the host, the immune system has nothing to do and starts to “attack” imaginary threats. Was the ability to fight worms a good acquisition? Certainly, yes, until medicine came along. As a result, the tendency toward allergic asthma has successfully spread among all of humanity.
But who determines whether a specific “non-standard” trait is good or bad? The definition of “goodness” is mechanical. If an individual reaches sexual maturity, is able to mate, and the result of the fusion of the egg and sperm leads to the appearance of new offspring, then the “non-standard” trait is viable and is passed on to the next generation. A fish that swims “non-standardly” faster than other fish will clearly be better at spawning and evading predators than its peers. A fish that has learned to survive in cold water in a “non-standard” way will find food where its relatives do not even swim. Any “non-standard” trait increases the chances of reproduction when it proves to be a beneficial characteristic. After all, for instance, fast swimming can be achieved through accelerated metabolism and an increased need for food. In waters where food is scarce, the ability to swim quickly may actually be detrimental. Additionally, the ability to withstand cold requires the organism to produce certain antifreeze substances that prevent the blood from freezing. The production of these substances demands resource expenditure, meaning it will come at the expense of some other important aspect of the fish’s life, such as the quality of its vision.
It’s not for us to judge which “nonconformity” is good and which is not. Time and evolution are the judges of that. We simply need to understand that there are no identical people and no one-size-fits-all approaches suitable for everyone. There are no facts that describe all people absolutely. There are no identical approaches to the soul of each individual. At the same time, we can develop rules that facilitate interaction with the majority of people, while understanding that there are exceptions.
Stereoscopic cinema is designed for people with two eyes who don’t have strabismus. Metro turnstiles are made for right-handed individuals. Traffic lights are for those who can distinguish red from green. It’s absurd to devise strategies for navigating the sexual market that are based on exceptions. Yes, there are exceptions. There are hereditary princes (about 50 of them among 7 billion people), there are oligarchs (another 5,000), and there are simply “not tall, curly-haired, athletic, math graduates with a sense of humor, who are attractive and not boring” — all of these are exceptions. An exception is anything that makes up less than 1% of the entire population. Therefore, women seeking marriage, say, specifically with someone who owns a Bentley, are setting themselves up for failure. Of course, some do marry Bentley owners. But that’s a lottery, not the result of a well-thought-out marriage strategy. At the same time, there’s nothing stopping anyone from hoping to win the lottery while also continuing to do the right things, not relying on exceptions, but working within the rules that apply to the majority.
No matter what theories are used to develop optimal behavior in the sexual market, the factor of luck or misfortune is so discouragingly significant that success is often achieved not by those who do something morally right, but by those who simply get lucky. The secret to such luck is the same as the secret to winning the lottery — at the very least, you have to buy lottery tickets.
There are two ways to build your future. The first: sit by the sea and wait for a ship with Scarlet Sails to sail into the bay, or, in another version, wait for the Magical Prince to ride in on a white horse and awaken you with his kiss. The second: actively use your knowledge, skillfully manage your instincts, make the right choices, manipulate wisely, act thoughtfully, experiment, explore options, and not be afraid to take risks. After all, failures in the sexual market cost us nothing but the time spent trying, while successes can yield enormous benefits.
This book is a guide for those who want to act and try not randomly, but with a clear understanding of what activities will give them a better chance of success. It’s worth continuing to look out to the bay to see if the Scarlet Sails have appeared or, having left the Crystal coffin, to leave a stretch with bells in it, just in case. After all, no one says you shouldn’t believe in miracles and exceptions. You just need to increase your chances of a miracle happening. After all, each of us, by our very nature, is an exception to the rules. You just shouldn’t rely too heavily on miracles; instead, focus on doing the right things. And then, interestingly, the miracle will come, and it will be a success rather than blind luck.
