/sci/ - Science & Math

>>6905493
>Males and females of other species are much more similar and hard to distinguish.
And some they look like completely different species all together. So humans aren't abnormal I don't think.

>>6905493
There's not much difference tbh. If I was ayylium I'd assume we all look the same.

Remove aspects as hair and clothing and we don't really look that different though, naturally we're better at distinguishing the sex of our co-species than the ones of other species.

>>6905493
If you were another species you may not be saying that.

Here, have a female and male Angler Fish.

If you were a badger and lived around badgers your whole life you would be able to distinguish badger genders easier.

>>6905504
> When a male finds a female, he bites into her skin, and releases an enzyme that digests the skin of his mouth and her body, fusing the pair down to the blood-vessel level.[15] The male becomes dependent on the female host for survival by receiving nutrients via their shared circulatory system, and provides sperm to the female in return. After fusing, males increase in volume and become much larger relative to free-living males of the species. They live and remain reproductively functional as long as the female lives, and can take part in multiple spawnings.
>I will never be an anglerfish male

>>6905511
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ek_wCaBZTCg

>>6905493
hormones
the female hip structure is designed to allow the head of the fetus to pass through
breasts are a mamalian traid used to cair for young
everything else is trivial

>>6905511

holy shit that sounds erotic as fuck, so intimate.

>>6905493
>Males and females of other species are much more similar and hard to distinguish.

Really, fаggоt???

>>6905525
>hormones

that's a big one though.
also bone structure is a pretty obvious thing too.

what is the point of your photoshop pic? I don't get it. disguises don't mean anything

>>6905493
Sometimes I can't tell OP if you're trolling or just plain fucking retared.

Human males and females look EXTREMELY similar when compared with some other sexually dimorphic species.

>>6905537
>>6905531

>hurrr muh low-probability rare exceptions!!!!

>>6905537
>Human males and females look EXTREMELY similar when compared with some other sexually dimorphic species.

Indeed. The external differences are extremely subtle compared with some other animals, we just notice our own differences more because we're looking for ways to tell eachother apart

>>6905493
Lol why is the jpg entitled "gallon of breast milk"?

>>6905551

GOMAD, gallon of milk a day, is /fit/ advice to get strong.

>>6905535
>what is the point of your photoshop pic? I don't get it. disguises don't mean anything
>disguises don't mean anything

yo do get it

hormones play a big role in shapeing your bodies and not just externally.

How different are we, really? Besides breasts and the genitals, every other difference is much more subtle, like minor variations in bone size or shape. It's subtle enough that traps can exist.

>>6905535
>what is the point of your photoshop pic?

the point is to show that human males and females look so similar that making one look like another is trivial.

op is an idiot

>>6905542
Well if the bloating of the lower one is dependent on gender I'd say those are pretty distinguishable.

you dun goofed OP

What factors make a species tend towards low sexual dimorphism? What factors make a species favor larger females than males?

>>6905583
Orangutans are real interesting because the beta-males look rather close to the females in your pic, but can change into huge ass alpha-males within a short time span given he has no competitors.

>>6905586
this guy must be alpha as fuck then. look at those facial flanges

>>6905493
>human females look so much different from human males
Speak for yourself. I didn't even notice that people with boobs are always women until I was 7.

>>6905516
>Hank Green

>>6905560
the reason some women are more attractive than others is that feminine features are more present.

You should consider the ideal female and male.

The ideal female has narrow shoulders, longer legs compared to their total height, rounded cheakbones, and a smaller head.

While for the ideal male it's the opposite of all the things mentioned.
Broad shoulders, shorter legs, angular cheekbones, and a larger head.

>>6905627
Is Ronaldinho the ideal male?

>>6905635
not too bad, but not great. I'd consider brad pitt to have all those features I mentioned

>>6905627
>longer legs compared to their total height
This always confused me. Why do males have longer legs if it's a desirable female trait too?

>>6905639
i said compared to their total height. you can have shorter legs but still be tall

>>6905635
>Nignog
>Ideal

>>6905592
ayy lmao

>>6905641
That's weird, I swear I read somewhere that females have a worse ratio than males.

>>6905656
from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_proportions#Leg-to-body_ratio

"A study by Swami et al. of American men and women showed a preference for men with legs as long as the rest of their body and women with 40% longer legs than the rest of their body[9]"

>>6905602
> not liking things
I was hoping he posted this though:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-BbpaNXbxg

>>6905584
Species where quality instead of quantity of offspring is more important tend to have less variance in size between males and females.

By this I mean, species with a significantly large difference in size between genders tend to have offspring which mature quickly and/or have a large number of offspring, males invest little time in their offspring.

Species where there isn't a large difference in size between genders tend to have relatively fewer offspring which mature slower; and so the male/father invests time in offspring development.

In humans we have both aspects, which is why women tend to gravitate toward significantly taller men for short term relationships, and men a little taller for long term relationships

>>6905646
>>>/pol/
Go back to the 7th circle of hell faggot

>>6905535
B8

>>6905677
Citation needed

>>6905635
No. I'd take a scientist anyday over some footballer whose brains have gone to his feet.

>>6905681
Overreaction/10

>>6905714
Same guy, there is definitely a need for citations. Don't take my word for it. I just remember hearing about this from several lecturers, some people proposed the human trait of clothing is to hide sexually arousing body parts, to prevent lack of male input into child development; since human brains grow so large we need to be born with a non-fused skull and take 10+ years to even leave childhood unlike other less intelligent primates

>>6905725
Why are you still here? Go eat a shotgun barrel

>>6905681

>we are all le liberals here

no

>>6905704

how is that b8? u know we can tell males and females apart by hormones and bone structure...

>>6905729
I'm a different guy, but you really do sound like a foaming-at-the-mouth fanatic. Fuck you. Let me guess, just got back from a Blood- err I mean Michael Brown rally?

>>6905730
Atheism, liberalism, and science all go hand in hand. Its the trio de l'illumination as I like to call it.

>>6905511
that's awesome as fuck

>>6905736
>tip de l'illhation

>>6905525
it's amazing how well some women can dress themselves up as men

>>6905571
no it's just because he's getting his ass fucked

>>6905736

except they don't, otherwise I wouldn't be here arguing the contrary

>>6905677
a little taller than significantly taller is quite tall

>>6905516
this song is really nice

>>6905730
>not disliking different color skin
>liberal
pls faggot

>>6905736
Math PhD student here. Most graduate students I come across are highly illiberal whose politics range from the center right to the libertarian far right (while being left on social liberties, but right where it counts). Usually the token democrat that I've come across is usually the outspoken one, who likes to regurgitate what they've read on dailykos or democraticunderground. Often, afterwards, once this person leaves the room, most of the female grad students laugh and roll their eyes. Attached is evidence supporting my claim, with a few more posts to follow.

Sure is puahate in here

>>6905751

>>6905754
This one is just for keks.

>>6905756
pls be in london

If anyone, for some reason, doesn't believe me, check here: https://yougov.co.uk/profiler#/

>>6905753

nahhhhhh puahate is dumber than pua

>>6905763
What's considered center-right in the UK is left-wing by US standards.

OP let me answer your question, I am a biologist.

Many animals have two genders that looks very similar, and many look very different. This is called sexual dimorphism. In birds, it's common for males to have more flamboyant features that it uses in competition to attract mates. If you have a bigger tail, then you're more likely to be seen by predators, get in fights, and die. If you've got a bigger tail and you're still alive to mate, a female sees that as a manly man and often will choose to mate with the bigger, brighter option because to her that means better genetic fitness for her offspring.

To look at humans objectively we should compare them to our closest relatives, the other great apes. Now, most apes do not have as much sexual dimorphism as we do. To an ape, a human woman has freakishly large breasts and buttocks, and males have freakishly large genitalia (even relatively "small dicked" humans). We're also oddly lanky and hairless, which is another topic entirely.
Apparently, our ancestors have been selecting for these traits. To us, we would rather mate with someone who has large breasts or buttocks, or a large penis. I'm sure some of you feel that way. Well just imagine this occurring over millions of generations.
Although this isn't true of everyone and as humans we have the wonderful gift of intelligence that allows us to have different opinions and beliefs that may seem contrary to our evolutionary nature.

>>6905793
>wonderful gift of intelligence that allows us to have different opinions and beliefs that may seem contrary to our evolutionary nature.

why would any sort of intelligence be against evolutionary nature?

>>6905763
that's some nice government shit, my shitty 3rd world country can't even...

Daily reminder that if your digit ratio is 2D:4D >1 you likely suck at math and life

>>6905793
I don't understand how breasts were considered attractive back before clothing that let them keep their shape existed.

Even the worst ass isn't as floppy as an average pair of breasts.

>>6905750

>its about the colour of the skin

howtospotaliberal.exe

>>6905803
daily reminder that it literally means nothing and that you're a faget.

>>6905840
> 2D:4D>1 pleb detected

>>6905840
>cant skii
>2D:4D is bullshit

http://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/12391439

>>6905803
God tier 0.90 2D:4D reporting in

>>6905847
>>6905853

you guys are worst than the lanklets that hate on manlets.

You're not any less of a failure because one of your fingers is longer than another. But keep telling yourself this, I'm sure your superior finger length will comfort you in times of need

>>6905863
manlet with 2D:4D>1 detected

i bet your iq is sub-130 too

>>6905876

I did one years ago and yes, it was around 108.

Good luck with that bigger IQ putting food on your table you lanky, long fingered nerd.

>>6905863

>>6905635
Is Charlie the ideal male?

>>6905639
Speed, men have wider legs too so they look smaller, but in reality they're about as long as a woman's legs.
>>6905736
Atheism is the ideology of the ignorant, science is the philosophy of the naive and simple, liberalism is both.

>>6905751
>>6905754
>>6905756
this is b8, ignore

>>6905729
Wow, check out the all accepting liberal.

>>6905805

even cavemen wore "skins/furs"
The humans who left africa wore clothes. Since they lived in normal/cool environments.

The species who stayed in africa, well, just see for yourself they haven't changed much

>>6905793
only dudes are attracted to guys with large penises though. Women seem indifferent to the issue.

>>6905525
because men and women totally don't develop different quantities and types of materials in the brain

>>6905985
>This is what small dicked fags actually believe

5 inch penis, 110 iq, 2D:4D>1, 5'9 manlet detected

>>6905985
>Women seem indifferent to the issue.

have you not seen omegle videos of random chicks reacting to seeing large penises?

Their jaws drop, their eyebrows shoot to the top of their heads and their eyes bulge out.

Then they start biting their lips, it's pretty funny.

>>6905995
im a manlet but i have an oversized cock so your wrong about that

>>6905909
>science is the philosophy of the naive and simple
>>>/pol/
>>>/stormfront/
>>>/out/

>>6905803

I guess I'm a grill with man-hands.

PHYSICS MAJOR HERE I COME.

>>6905996
Shit nigga, time to start jelqing

>>6905803
pleb hands detected!

>>6905493
Because God was good to us.

>>6906012
>implying opposable thumbs isn't what put our species at the top of the food chain

>>6906012
Your hands look like goddamn feet.

>>6906012
ayy lmao

>>6906012

no1 mentioned mosquitoes :(

>>6905493
sexual dimorphism is low in humans, actually, and seems to have closed the gap relatively for at least since we were early hominids.

I'm guessing sci doesn't have many primatologists or evolutionary genetecists.

this board seems more for phys and math nerds

>>6906076
>sexual dimorphism is low in humans

stopped reading there.

>>6906100
it is relative to other apes, retard

in primates there are tournament species and a few relatively monogamous non-dimorphic species. almost all apes are tournament species with a winner take all strategy. There is only one ape species less dimorphic than us.

We are seemingly somewhere in the middle, morphologically, but given that there is only one less dimorphic species, that puts us typologically skewed towards less dimorphism

You're a math major. I knew it

>>6906007
>he cant argue so he redirects me.

>>6906131
>science
>simple
>naive
there, an argument.

>>6905681
> believing what the libs tell you
> 2014

>>6906125
>it is relative to other apes, retard

why would an objective criteria be "relative to apes" this is such a stupid way of thinking

>>6905729
you seem upset. mike brown wouldn't have wanted this

>>6905736
You keep on believing that faggot. chemist, agnostic, libertarian here

>>6906135
Science is simple and naive

>>6906151
see >>6906007

>>6905493

her sweat looks nice

>>6905493
>Males and females of other species are much more similar and hard to distinguish.

saywut?

>>6906445
>dat bitch choosin

>>6906445
pretty sure there was an "except birds" clause in this thread, pic related.

butterflies are really hard to tell apart, even their genatalia is similar

>>6905635

>nigger
>ideal human

this is bait

>>6905736
>Atheism, liberalism, and science all go hand in hand.

Maybe back during the Enlightenment, when liberalism was essentially modern-day libertarianism.

>>6905985
>only dudes are attracted to guys with large penises though. Women seem indifferent to the issue.

Right, that's why humans have evolved giant penises (compared to other primates)--it's because women don't care about penis size!

>>6905736
>Atheism, liberalism, and science all go hand in hand

Yep

>>6906148
>claims to disagree
>but fits the stereotype

Agnosticism and atheist aren't mutually exclusive. You are probably an agnostic atheist, like 99.999% of all people who claims to be agnostic or atheist.

Libertarianism is pretty close to liberalism. In fact, in most places in America (except very liberal places) they are basically the same (just compare the party platforms). Libertarianism is just "liberalism lite" now with extra edge, but it is basically the same shit.

>>6905493
We only look so different because of the way society tells males/females to present themselves. If everyone grew up in a cave without society, we'd all look very similar.

>>6906478
>racism of /sci/

/pol/ please go----------->
we don't need your stupidity here

>>6906505
>Agnosticism and atheist aren't mutually exclusive. You are probably an agnostic atheist, like 99.999% of all people who claims to be agnostic or atheist

>>6905493
>Males and females of other species are much more similar and hard to distinguish

Nope, not generally. It depends on what kind of animals you are talking about. Pick up a basic biology book.

The variation between male and female humans is ultimately genetic. And it is exactly what you would expect from looking at our genetic relatives.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_dimorphism

>>6906151
[citation needed]

>>6906478
Blacks are the ideal *male* - generally taller, more muscle, bigger dicks.

>>6906526

northern europeans are taller, more muscle, and bigger dicks.

sorry m8, pop-culture is wrong. statistics are true.

>>6905996
>women prefer bigger dicks

Nice fallacy you have there.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_sharpshooter_fallacy

If your sample of women is "sluts on omegle", you ain't exactly picking the top (or even middle) of the fucking gene pool. It is like you saying, "/pol/ says jews are the devil, so all humans think jews are the devil".

A real man wouldn't give a shit what a slut thinks. He would pay her, fuck her, and be on his way. Don't confuse sluts with actual people. Sluts are objects to be used. It doesn't matter what they think.

>>6905493
see: sexual dimorphism

>>6906532
>northern europeans are taller, more muscle, and bigger dicks, the statistics are true

[statistics needed]

You realize you are /sci/, right? Evidence or GTFO!

>>6906557

umm google it? it's common knowledge that Northern Europe has the tallest, biggest men.

It's also common knowledge that the strongest men in the world are Northern Europeans, look at all the Strongman competitions and powerlifters too...

Statistically, the tallest people in the world, as measured by country are the Dutch. The average height for all adults for the Netherlands is 6 feet 1 inch (1.85 m). Standing next to the Dutch, almost shoulder to shoulder, are the Danes. Average height in Denmark is 6 feet (1.83 m).

http://www.wisegeek.org/which-country-has-the-tallest-people.htm

>>6906548

women and sluts are both fans of large penises.

do you have any studies showing that women are brain-damaged and not receptive to penis size and girth? That would really be bizarre

>>6905635
>>6906526
>ideal mate is big guy with huge cock

What are ya'll 12?

There are literally a million other more beneficial criteria. For instance; someone who has no chance of heredity disease and a super immune system. A big cock size doesn't mean shit if all you kids are born retarded and die of sickle-cell.

>>6906561
>it's common knowledge that Northern Europe has the tallest, biggest men.

No. That isn't common knowledge, hence why I wanted a source. I don't know what country or region you are from (USA here), but I can guarantee you it in not common knowledge here. Not even among scientists. Probably, because it not actually important in any way shape or form.

But, it does look like you are right. Thanks for source and information!

>>6906561
Actually, as a Dutchie I can safely say that you're completely misunderstanding national statistics and genetics.

Dutch are the tallest NATION in the world. They're not the tallest people in the world.

That award goes to that African tribe/genetic group where every man and woman is like around 2m.

>>6906548
Women DO prefer bigger dicks.

That's why humans have the biggest dicks relative to bodysize in the animal kingdom.

>>6906563
>do you have any studies saying women are not receptive to penis size and girth?
>implying I said that

Your average woman doesn't have a big vagina. The average vagina is smaller (even when wet), in comparison to the average penis size. Yes, penis size will matter, but only below some minimum value. Any size above that doesn't matter in terms of vaginal stimulation.

If you stretch out a vagina, then the minimum of penis it needs increases. But the amount of neutrons and shit in the vagina doesn't. All you do is make her need larger and larger cocks to feel the same about of pleasure she used to! Hence, size matters to sluts, because they have loose gaping vaginas.

This isn't rocket science here.

>>6906582
Your reasoning doesn't make any sense

>Women DO prefer a shitty sense of smell
>That's why humans have a shitty sense of smell relative to most in the animal kingdom

>>6906580
That's what I thought. Thanks for the clarification.

>>6906582
Well not quite. Women do find larger penises more sexually pleasurable, up to a limit (8-10 inches) depending on the individual it seems.


The reason we have quite large dicks relative to bodysize is due to larger penises being able to deposit sperm beyond small dick competitors.

>>6906587
>If you stretch out a vagina, then the minimum of penis it needs increases. But the amount of neutrons and shit in the vagina doesn't. All you do is make her need larger and larger cocks to feel the same about of pleasure she used to! Hence, size matters to sluts, because they have loose gaping vaginas.

Basic human anatomy fact. If your penis can permanently stretch a vagina, your penis must be about the size of a newborn child.

Are you autistic?

>>6906611
>can't read

You should read what I wrote, instead of what you want to see. Everything I wrote was consistent with the fact that a vagina stretches (or shrinks) as a function of time and the size of things inserting into it.

And where did I say or imply "permanently"? Protip: I didn't. Never mentioned such a thing. Actually read what I wrote and please stop making up shit.

Some animals rely on scent more than vision, and those animals are usually pretty uniform like snakes. Things like humans and ducks use vision and have different colors or visual cues (broader shoulders on males, broader hips on women). Also since hormone levels dictate how sexy and male or female you look, and our foods have been pumped with hormones lately, it's become way more distinguishable lately

>>6906611
>If you stretch out a vagina
>If you permanently stretch out a vagina

These are two different things idiot. Why are you equating them? Do you not know what a vagina is? Please lrn2basicreasoning

>If you have a suntan
>If you permanently have a suntan
See the fucking difference?

Did you just learn English or something?

>>6906596
>disagreeing then agreeing
>failing to comprehend 'humans vs other animals'

>>6906630
He is disagreeing with the reasoning, but agreeing with some of the conclusions. Those are two different things dumb ass.

The "other animals" part is bullshit. It is like me saying "Since human have more caner (compared to other animals), then women must prefer men with more caner". NONSENSE! Use your fucking brain.

>>6906582
> That's why humans have the biggest dicks relative to bodysize in the animal kingdom

>muh banana slugs

It's like you're just making shit up

>>6906622
>>6906627
If you're not talking about permantent stretching, why even bother talking about stretching?

Aside from people doing gangbangs, most people have sexual encounters so far apart their bodily orifices will never stretch beyond the normal size.

You fucking retarded cunt.

>>6906635
>He is disagreeing with the reasoning, but agreeing with some of the conclusions
No, he disagreed with the conclusion. Well done. (reading tip for autists: first line responds to first line, second line responds to second line)

>>6906582
You don't make any sense. You say:

1) A = Humans have the biggest dicks relative to body size
2) B = Women DO prefer big dicks
3) A->B

But, B would be the cause of A!!
It should be B->A! Your reasoning is backward!
If you trying to prove B, you can't just say since A happened, therefore B! It's wrong!

Furthermore, according to you. If we killed all the animals, then Women might not want big dicks? Other species dick size preface has jack shit to do with us! A Women doesn't think about how other animals choose dick, before she makes her choice.

>>6905586
>>6905592
orangutans are actually the only apes that aren't in a patriarchal dominance i.e. alpha males etc

gorillas, humans, great apes etc. are

>>6906675
Levelup your english dude.
"That's why..." is the opposite of "That's because..."

>>6905493
how fucking retarded are you??

>>6906673
>problem with reading comprehension

>>6906582 and >>6906596
They both conclude "Women DO prefer bigger dicks". That is there conclusion.

>>6906596 says the reason why is "...sperm ..."
Hence, "...sperm ..." - > Women like big cocks

>>6906582 says the reason why is "...bodysize ..."
Hence, "...bodysize..." - > Women like big cocks

Your brain is kind of fucked up.

>>6906676
bonobos too, they're pansexuals who don't form mating pairs either.

>>6906686
>They both conclude "Women DO prefer bigger dicks".
After initially disagreeing. "Well not quite." Which I should've specified to begin with. Apologies for being a lazy greentext fuck.

>>6906682
>reading comprehension

>>6906582 is trying to refute >>6906548

If the "body size" comment is not intended as a "that because". Then >>6906582 is meaningless. It would just a blind assertion, and what he thinks is consequence of that blind assertion. It is like me saying; "Oden exists, that's why there are beautiful mountain". Its comically bad. And never proves Oden exists. But that's what you are saying he did, right?

So, if your right >>6906582 is a fucking idiot.
If your wrong ("he meant it as that's because") >>6906582 is still wrong and still a fucking idiot (see >>6906675)

You just completely discredited >>6906582. You proved him and his the "My relative body size" shit completely wrong. Nice Job!!!!!

>>6906745

>>6905493
larger lips let them chew and liquidise food more easily. breasts and hips are obvious. longer hair prevents them running away, which was a survival advantage for tribes exhibiting this trait.

>>6906745

>>6906745

>>6905583
>the face on that orangutan on the right

>>6905493
Why would you use a photo of a female thats surgically alterated to make a point? Most males and females look alike, desorted visons of how genders are suposed to be have nothing to do with this. Use some statistics and you wil see that average humans look alike, no matter whats their gender. We just rather some traits more than others because we find them atractive but genetics dont usually give a fuck about that, we are super diverse but our appereances trends to mean.

>>6905592
Jude's Cries this guy looks like he knows he's the fucking boss.

>>6905542
I know this is a Rhinophrynidae, but Microhylids (similar to this species) do have sexual dimorphism. However, it's size and coloration-related.

It's hard to tell if they are flat chested and have no ass

haven't you seen Mulan?

>>6905493
What about angler fish?

>Males and females of other species are much more similar and hard to distinguish.
False, your brain was designed to tell the difference between male and female humans so you are better at it.

>>6906941
To be fair, most asian men look relatively effeminate to begin with.

>>6905751
>interested in mathematics, physics
>typical profession:engineering
nice try homo

>>6905551

did you even look at the picture

>>6906142
because evolutionary traits are always relative to an environment.

gb2 physics

>>6906454
naturally pomeranians can tell each other apart. it's just that you're a human

>>6906526
they can't feed a family, that more or less disqualifies them

>>6905768
Gawd blerss Murrica!!!