>>13486550It would take a lot more work than you appreciate for a version of the human species to evolve that is incapable of ever producing offspring with a micropenis.
Imagine if you were running a business that made watches, and you knew about an issue where every 1 in 1,000,000 watches produced stops working after 1 week of use or less. And suppose the cost of a return in these cases was $100, while the cost of implementing a more exacting assembly process that made this 1 in 1,000,000 event never come up again would be $10,000,000,000.
Obviously you wouldn't spend $10 billion to fix a problem that costs you $300 to $400 per year.
Similarly, you should expect a process will evolve that works well the majority of the time but definitely not perfectly 100% of the time for any case of significant complexity (which means any instance of multicellular biology really). The cost of a process evolving that's perfect would be way higher than the gains of preventing the possibility of a rare problem. Life isn't free. It needs to have structures and processes that can reasonably support it without needing to syphon off a trillion food calories per day to stay running, and also the closer to perfect you get the more difficult it will be to protect and maintain all this additional overhead needed just to prevent that one rare problem, which means constantly introducing even more potential problems the more complicated things get.
