Darwin awards are for people that remove themselves from the gene pool before they procreate. The parents already reproduced and the kids that die have no control over the matter so Darwin awards don’t apply in either case.
I mean, technically the parents are removing themselves from the gene pool. I haven’t heard the stipulation that it’s “before procreating”. I think getting your kids killed by an easily preventable disease is macabre, but technically counts.
Right. Man, this thread just reminded me of the old days (for me) hanging around on the Darwin Awards forums when they first opened up a decade or two back.
There have been endless arguments about what should qualify or exclude someone from consideration for an award. The existence of existing children doesn’t exclude one from getting an award because death by stupidity still prevents you from having any more children. But getting your own kids killed due to your own stupidity does though. The children didn’t cause their own deaths (or sterilization), and that is one major key to winning an award, self selection.
If anyone cares, there are actual rules at the forum that have been getting hashed out since this all started in usenet groups in the mid eighties.
The general rule for a DA is that you have to cause your own death or sterilization in a spectacularly stupid and hilarious fashion. Getting kids killed, while spectacularly stupid, is never hilarious and still leaves the idiot parents free to continue breeding.
So many darwin awards this decade…
Darwin awards are for people that remove themselves from the gene pool before they procreate. The parents already reproduced and the kids that die have no control over the matter so Darwin awards don’t apply in either case.
I mean, technically the parents are removing themselves from the gene pool. I haven’t heard the stipulation that it’s “before procreating”. I think getting your kids killed by an easily preventable disease is macabre, but technically counts.
You’re right that it doesn’t have to happen before they have reproduced but it must be a self inflicted injury that prevents future reproduction.
Right. Man, this thread just reminded me of the old days (for me) hanging around on the Darwin Awards forums when they first opened up a decade or two back.
There have been endless arguments about what should qualify or exclude someone from consideration for an award. The existence of existing children doesn’t exclude one from getting an award because death by stupidity still prevents you from having any more children. But getting your own kids killed due to your own stupidity does though. The children didn’t cause their own deaths (or sterilization), and that is one major key to winning an award, self selection.
If anyone cares, there are actual rules at the forum that have been getting hashed out since this all started in usenet groups in the mid eighties.
Seems pretty self inflicted, no?
The general rule for a DA is that you have to cause your own death or sterilization in a spectacularly stupid and hilarious fashion. Getting kids killed, while spectacularly stupid, is never hilarious and still leaves the idiot parents free to continue breeding.
Also the poor kids that are medically unable to receive certain vaccines, and depend on herd immunity. 😞