By source code I mean genetic code. Once we have access to that, the human timescale modification will so totally dwarf any natural selection that it's basically not there.
Except at that point evolution incorporates human modification into itself. Specifically, those who are better at modifying themselves in way that promote their inclusive genetic fitness will out compete those that don't.
Except at that point evolution incorporates human modification into itself.
Which is, of course, a good point to make up a new name so that the old one isn't stretched out of shape.
Upon reading Eliezer's possible gender dystopias ([catgirls](http://lesswrong.com/lw/xt/interpersonal_entanglement/), and [verthandi](http://lesswrong.com/lw/xu/failed_utopia_42/) and the other LW comments and posts on the subject of future gender relations, I came to a rather different conclusion than the ones I've seen espoused here. After searching around the internet a bit, I discovered that my ideas tend to fall under the general category of "postgenderism", and I am wondering what my fellow LessWrongians think of it.
This can generally be broken down to the following claims:
EDIT- Due to some really insightful comments;
I replaced men being prone to aggression as a negative, with men being prone to suicide.
I made the verbiage a little more explicit that no one would be *forced* to change, but would seek out the changes that transhumanism would have available.