>People with poor genes shouldn't reproduce, unless they have other good genes to compensate with (like high intelligence), and only to a limited degree of disproportion.
The problem lies in the fact that it is impossible to describe what are "good", "normal" and "poor" genes unless in the obvious cases in which poor genes lead to disability. Your own standard for "good" genes that you have expressed are the same vanity you accuse bodybuilders of when you compare them to Makeup(beauty) and you only show interest in the time it takes muscles to grow(speed). However beyond those two things there are a myriad of other deciding factors that can lead to a superior individual. An individual with slower muscle growth could produce more stronger and resilient muscles, less susceptible to diseases or cancer or have a metabolism that requires less food and uses food more effective. The list is long and you cannot just look at a singular thing. The genes of an Individual have to be looked at as a package or you end up like dogbreeders who destroy the health of their breed chasing after certain characteristics.
>Quicker =/= too quick
You did not make that difference. You just said that the individual with faster muscle gain is the superior individual. This is simply wrong.
>No. You see, while a person can train with iron willpower and appear "eugenic", his children will most likely inherit his bad genes and suffer from the same physical flaws and mental complexes as he did.
You contradict yourself. The individual who trains and as a result is healthy has no bad genes inside him concerning in this aspect and there is a big chance that his genes also helped create his iron will character, so he doesn't possess the mental complexes you try to invent for such an individual. You also seem to have no idea how genes work, because the genes you start out with are not all the genes that you transmit to your children. Genes change over the lifetime of an individual, mutate and get damaged and then mixed up with the genes of the partner in a process that can eliminate faulty gene, but also can introduce new flaws.
>On the other hand, a slob with good genes will procreate children who will be healthier, stronger, more beautiful and intelligent by default.
Wrong, because the slob has a good chance to waste his good genes on a dysgenic life and never reproduce and if he reproduces that is no guarantee that he will be a good parent and there is a high chance that he stunts he growth of his child.
>That's why weightlifting and excessive exercising is dysgenic when it comes to partner selection.
Unprovable, because just like with your fast muscle grow=better individual claim, you give no metric of what is excessive and what is not.
>Who do you think runs the gyms?
In my corner of the world almost every ethnic mafia except the jews.
<We are reaching cope levels that shouldn't even be possible
No coping Anon, I am 1,90m or six feet and three inches. When it comes to a meele I can easily overpower a smaller man and fold him in half, but it remains a physical fact that in a firefight I am a bigger target than a manlet that is just 1,70m or even 1,60m. We live today in a world where the majority of wars are fought with ranged weapons, vehicles and traps.