Postpartum depression

What is the evolutionary biological/evolutionary psychological reason for postpartum depression?

In Finland, if you are under the age 15, the most likely person to murder you is your own mother. I believe this is the case elsewhere too. Especially if the child is under one year old and is killed by his/her parent, it's over 15 times more likely that the killer is mother than father (in Finland, between the years 2003-2019, 32 childs under the age 1 were killed by their mother, while 2 childs under the age 1 were killed by their father).

So everytime such a case is in the media, modern "psychologists" point out that postpartum depression is real and that is the cause for mothers killing their babies. But what is the cause for postpartum depression? And to that question, these modern "psychologists" answer with a bunch of social reasons, like trouble in the relationship, not enough money to cope, small livelihood and such...

Also an interesting fact that speaks against the "extreme depression" of these women: Women who killed their own children and then later claimed that they tried to kill themselves too (so "extended suicide") didn't actually kill themselves... so it was a failed attempt... meanwhile there are many cases where a male has killed his children and then himself. If the situation is totally desperate, then why only males succeed in the extended suicide and women don't? Why it seems that it's only possible for males to actually lose the will to live? Well, maybe because women talk bullshit and the act that they did (infanticide) had nothing to do with extreme depression (unlike in males, who clearly were actually desperate).

Do we dare to explain this phenomenon with biological and evolutionary reasons rather than social psychology?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Wikipedia wrote:

Many Neolithic groups routinely resorted to infanticide in order to control their numbers so that their lands could support them. Joseph Birdsell believed that infanticide rates in prehistoric times were between 15% and 50% of the total number of births, while Laila Williamson estimated a lower rate ranging from 15% to 20%.  Both anthropologists believed that these high rates of infanticide persisted until the development of agriculture during the Neolithic Revolution.

It is known that some indigenous people still practise infanticide, like those living in the Amazonian forests.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Quote :

In Brazil, it is commonly believed that disabled people do not exist amongst Indigenous populations. Popular myths circulate that Indigenous babies undergo severe scrutiny at birth and those with any physical peculiarities are immediately eliminated. Such practices are indistinctly named "infanticide" and disregard the sociocosmological and historical specificities of the 305 Indigenous groups inhabiting the national territory.

So what do we know?
* Females kill more their own children than males.
* The younger the child is, the more likely he/she will be killed by his/her own mother.
* It is explained by depression, but this depression clearly doesn't extend to the individual herself... even when they claim so... Men almost always succeed in extended suicide, but in women the success rate is much lower. So clearly women don't have such a strong desire to die... meaning the situation is not seen as totally desperate by the woman... meaning the woman sees some hope in the future for herself, but not the baby.
* In the past infanticide was common practise. Even today indigenous people practise it. The people who "proudly" practise it, practise it for eugenic reasons.

Of course this subject is very controversial... But do we dare to say that females nature, as being a filtering agency, is seen here somewhat? Do we dare to guess that alpha male's offspring are not killed by their mother, while beta male's offspring are?

A female must self-decive to be impregnated and carry through with her pregnancy.
From the beginning, females have to enter a state of hormonal intoxication - heat - to help them overcome their fight/flight mechanism, allowing an alien other - a male, often bigger and stronger - to approach and penetrate her.

The self-deception does not end there.
The sperm must rush to the ovum, because the female autoimmune systems kick in, and then when one manages to fertilize the egg, the egg must be protected - otherwise her body will abort what is, obviously, alien to her body.

When she gives birth the hormonal intoxications continue - love.
As I've defined love it is a bonding mechanism necessary to overcome natural survival impulses, allowing heterosexual and social cooperation to evolve.
A mother's love identifies with the baby - considering it an extension of herself. she experiences a similar boding with her sexual mate.
Like all intoxications they wear off in time, and they may trigger esoteric psychological repressed parts of the personae.
That's why we have good and violent drunks - the individual's repressed self emerging with the aid of the intoxicant.
What follows a night of intoxicated highs is the lows of a hangover, as the brain attempts to rebalance itself after it has been scrambled.
The day after is a day of suffering, depression, and sober reckoning.
The mind is often ashamed of what it had done - if it can remember - when under the influence of drugs or alcohol, or hormones.

I think this infanticide is due to a woman's sober rejection of the male she had been intoxicated with.
She can no longer self-deceive, and the realization sets in how she has been deceived on many levels.
The prospect of carrying on with years of consequences is daunting.

It's a way of rejecting the male, by killing the part of him that managed to survive her self-preserving processes.
She may even want to rid herself of what reminds her of her own gullibility; her own failure to detect the man's true essence.

Satyr wrote:

I think this infanticide is due to a woman's sober rejection of the male she had been intoxicated with.
She can no longer self-deceive, and the realization sets in how she has been deceived on many levels.
The prospect of carrying on with years of consequences is daunting.

It's a way of rejecting the male, by killing the part of him that managed to survive her self-preserving processes.
She may even want to rid herself of what reminds her of her own gullibility; her own failure to detect the man's true essence.

I figured something like this too.

I bet that most killed infants are of lower quality male's offspring.

But of course, infanticide is rare in developed countries.

More common phenomenon is this where a woman gives birth to a retarded or disabled child and she is presented as a hero of society. An example from Finland (I've shared this before here) [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Also we have Facebook groups with tens of thousand of people, who gather around their shared problem of their fat or stupid child getting bullied. If I had a disabled or mentally weakly gifted or otherwise freak child, I would get love and compassion beyond measure.

So today it is actually tempting to have children that are not of quality.

In a way, it almost seems that those women that commit the infanticide, must be "healthy". I bet majority of those women are young, so they are not too heavily infected with the modernity.

And even though infanticide is considered very disgraceful and dastardly thing to do, women who committed it can get atleast some sympathy in the media, by saying that they had personal problems, family problems, they were tired, they suffered from postpartum depression...

Imagine if the women would be honest and come forward with: "Yeah, I killed my child, because I realized what a huge mistake I made and I didn't want to invest to my offspring - that was of a male of a lesser quality - anymore."

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

— I,Hypocrite (@lporiginalg) [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Ex-utero abortion...