Regarding the MUNSTAH reaction to alicorn foals

Saw it asked recently about the purpose and implementation of the “MUNSTAH” reaction to alicorns, in light of alicorns’ noted increased intelligence as separate phenomenon from those diagnosable with smarty syndrome.
Why would a dam be made to have an immediate and often violent reaction to seeing an alicorn in her just-birthed litter ? The foals which are, arguably, the single greatest motivator in a mare’s programming from kernel up through every level of emotional build, such that their own self-preservation will be overridden to provide for and protect them, turns with such abruptness it is shocking. It was a somewhat last-minute “kludge,” an addition to the code, as a control for the alicorn population. Internal memos at Hasbio brought up the concerns late in the development cycle.
Alicorns, the study suggests, are the ones who would have the potential to overcome their programming, to adopt more self-determination and possibility of learning to decode human behaviors and communication, posing a threat to its creator species. The smarty syndrome has its own means of self-destruction built into the smarty’s lack of a sense of hubris and empathy - a smarty will pass its genes in an alpha function but is not likely to be able to be taught or learn leadership or betterment past its own drives and ego. The responses to smarties in the average herd is also a self-preservation encoded, although less deliberately. But as regressive as the alicorn alleles are, a strong enough expression of them in both sides of the parentage could begin to concentrate generationally until a critical mass of alicorn intelligence is reached which render the creatures useless as biotoys as they will have too much autonomy. So as a precaution, in the unlikely event that the biotoys began breeding outside the auspices of Hasbio (HIGHLY unlikely :roll_eyes:), their reaction to horn-and-wing-combination is an immediate fight-or-flight dump from the adrenal glands tending to cause the foal to be murdered. Inelegant in concept, but elegantly implemented. One has to wonder were the directors of the project really concerned about fluffy intelligence ascendency because of the speed of their breeding ? It seems to me they manipulated the genome to increase the recombinant incidence of pegasi and unicorns within a litter, which just so happens to increase chances of alicorn, well before they found alicorn intelligence to change the user experience of the biotoy during field tests. But they couldn’t bring out the alicorn possibility without sacrificing the pegasi/unicorn quadrants.
Similarly Hasbio anticipated there would be a demand for designer colors versus earth tones, but the bad-mummah behavior of rejecting poopie-color foals is more deeply embedded in their programming from much earlier in the development cycle. Rejecting is a softer visceral reaction than the utter horror at wingie-hown munstah, not triggering the adrenaline but a cortisol/beta-alkyloid reaction. Frankly the reason for the poopie-color rejection stems from the fact that poopie-colors are, like it or not, dominant, as they are more what the natural colors of their animal-derived genomes would favor. The programmers could increase the incidence of bright colors in gene shuffling but not completely suppress the “undesirables.” Frankly I think they did they consider at all that fashions may change over decades and what are considered “designer” colors in a generation’s time may fall out of favor. No company using any kind of creative design could expect to satisfy all demos in the market with one aesthetic for all time - could 100% of biotoy owners equally desire a Rainbow Dash colored pegasus ? In a fashion cycle, shouldn’t scarcity itself create a desire for a less common product ?
Back to the “munstah !” reaction to alicorns - this is a bit of orphan code, there’s no support conditional processes or classes related to it in the API, so in fact, it can be compensated for with proper conditioning. A mummah can be trained, with proper motivation (negative conditioning usually requiring great pain or stress memory markers). It takes a great deal of effort for a feral mummah to resist giving stompies or to nurse a ali foal rather than run away from it. But the human-raised breeding dam, whose first line of training from foalhood was housebreaking, which in turn triggers her programmed knowledge of the wittabawks song to her babbehs, has literally had her neural pathways restructured by conditioning training. This is not to say no ferals can overcome their programming, or that all domesticated fluffies can be trained to override their bad-mummah behaviors, but it is possible. A particularly well-trained breeder may accept poopie, nu smeww pretty, stupee, munstah babbehs, and it may correct its own foals behaviors when they express that bit of code in reaction to their siblings, but the mare will never be able to train her daughters to be gud-mummahs in the same regard - this requires their hoomin mummah or daddeh to administer proper punishment or withholding of essentials to motivate the desired behavior.
Bit of trivia - the same engineer that designed the wingie-munstah babbeh response is the same one who designed the WAN DIE loop, which was also added on in the 11th hour very close to release date. This Hasbio programmer’s identity was stripped out of the source code comments, but the commenting style leaves little doubt this was the same individual’s effort, and the procedure class itself is very terse and efficient. One wonders what could happen if this subroutine were excised from the fluffy genome.

4 Likes

If you wrote so much already, why not write a story. About that hasbio programmer for instance

9 Likes

It’s a good idea that there was a programmer who develops such ideas in the fluffys, now it depends on each headcanon here you present yours and I find it fascinating. although personally I think that the development of one of the alicorn “monster” is simply the fluffys’ intellectual rejection of the idea that there is a being that can have wings and horns. Surely someone programmed the idea of ​​"monster" but perhaps in cases of deformities such as fluffys with 2 heads or fluffys with 6 legs, failures that are not very pleasant to look at and far from the idea of ​​selling hasbio. In my headcanon, the alicorn fluffys was the next step and they were already in the fluffys’ DNA, but they weren’t yet formed to understand and love them when PETA happened. But in savagery some were born with the passage of time as a natural evolution

the original explanation was that alicorns were never meant to exist not just be rare so like all things a fluffy can not understand they call it a monster

Either it’s a glitch, or it’s a way of inducing artificial rarity made by Hasbio techs who hated fluffies.