[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math


View post   

File: 41 KB, 640x480, 1478606294475.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9177803 No.9177803 [Reply] [Original]

What is the evolutionary advantage of sexual selection? Being attractive is not synonymous with fitness

>> No.9177808

>Being attractive is not synonymous with fitness

Yes it is? Do you find obese people attractive? How about people with Downs Syndrome? Just because it's not a perfect measure of fitness doesn't mean its not a good one.

>> No.9177818
File: 23 KB, 460x493, 1469393650785.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9177818

OP, it is for the most part. Not just physically, but being witty and charming is a good sign of neurological health, social prowess and capability. also, the sexy sons hypothesis:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexy_son_hypothesis

>> No.9177839

>>9177803
Healthy genes are attractive, and genes are more than just physiology

>> No.9177953

>>9177803
A healthy male is more likely to provide food and shelter for offspring. A healthy female is more likely to survive birthing offspring, more likely to enable child to survive birth as well because fewer complications, and mother can now help raising child or continue to birth new children. Healthy people produce more children who can survive to produce themselves, so it is evolutionarily supported

>> No.9178025

>>9177803

how are the people in OP's pic healthy?

They're young dumbsluts so they're probably poor and stupid. Plus they're way too skinny to make a healthy baby, as they have very little fat. And there's no indication that they are physically fit, they're very weak and fragile looking desu.

A fatter, older, more experienced woman would be more capable of taking care of children

>> No.9178198

>>9177803
In most cases being sexy implies healthy. Forget makeup exists.

>> No.9178221

>>9177803

Rockin RAINBOW TITS! TITS TITS AWESOME TITS IN A SHIRT TITS!

What, OP?

>> No.9178231

>>9177803
It helps you reproduce. Thats the evoluntionary advantage. If you can't pass on your genes then nature doesn't care how "fit" you are,

>> No.9178310

>>9177803

Man, I really want to cum inside Rainbow Dash now.

>> No.9178322
File: 194 KB, 1496x949, maxresdefault.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9178322

>>9178198

>blocks your path

>> No.9178502

This thread got me thinking. When did the greens for liking your grandchildren (and being happy they are born) come from? I mean, people didn't live long enough to see their grandchildren until recently?

>> No.9178521
File: 1.04 MB, 1072x1205, 1492991884296.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9178521

>>9177803
Sexual selection is better than completely random mating (or no sexes at all - just cloning).
It does not mean it cannot go astray.

>Being attractive is not synonymous with fitness
Much more complicated. Many people find the weirdest things attractive - this is already an advantage as it leads to diversity.
But most often it's tits and phat ass - which means she is well fed, ready to procreate and won't have problems with child bearing.
If she is popular it's also a trait, as copulating with her upgrades your position in the pack and you'll be the first one to eat meat.

>> No.9178523

>>9177803
>Being attractive is not synonymous with fitness
Only peacocks that thrive can support their huge displays.

What is unusual about humans is that women are the ones with the most pronounced display behavior (discounting homosexual men). An explanation might be the disparity between the productivity and social status of a male hunter versus a near helpless pregnant woman, obtaining his affections to crucial to reproduction. The roles are reversed, whereas the female peacock has all the resources she needs and has only to choose the fittest male, with humans (until recently) the woman must prove her fitness to prove she is worth investing resources in.

>> No.9178774

>>9177803
Sexual selection exists because its an evolutionary stable strategy. Genes which are considered attractive will be successful, not neccisarily because they provide an advantage in fighting or hunting, but simply because the majority of the opposite sex finds that phenotype attractive. Any deviation from the genetically determined attractive traits is a hinderance, and thus will not propagate.

>> No.9178796

>>9177803
>Being attractive is not synonymous with fitness
not, but it's close enough you ugly loser

>> No.9178953

>>9177803
being fit is a must for being attractive.

>> No.9178959 [DELETED] 
File: 243 KB, 382x417, 1307646543001.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9178959

If sexual selection exists why do I see pairs of ugly people? And no, they have no money or intelligence to equalize it. Shouldn't ideally all ugly people be forever alone? Sexual selection just sounds like a big meme to me.

>> No.9178982
File: 6 KB, 225x225, mwPCZ_qico_eJBfg3lCtSgg.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9178982

>>9178502

Is this necessarily true?
1) infant mortality skews historical life expectancy to the low end
2) birthing ages being historically lower means shorter generation gap
If the above is true, you would be a grandparent by 30 or maybe earlier -depending on how far back you're talking. Beyond that there may be utility derived from caregiving as a division of labor. Old fucks cant hunt efficiently but they can act as caregivers while younger clan members hunt and forage.

>> No.9179008

power and money make attractive phenotype but not fit genotype

>> No.9179016

>>9177803
Sexual selection is always based on some measure of fitness. But it can (and does) very quickly run amok.

Say a bird with a big red tail, where the females select for bigger tails. The offspring then has males with bigger tails and females with a preference for bigger tails. So tails keep getting bigger. At least until some other factor restrains it.

>> No.9179021

>>9178502
Surviving long enough to know your grand children, and passing on vital parenting skills to your children seems pretty beneficial to me.

>> No.9179352
File: 69 KB, 1169x579, musk.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9179352

>>9179016
>Sexual selection is always based on some measure of fitness. But it can (and does) very quickly run amok.
so has it run amok in humans? if so how? im legit curious now

>> No.9179359

>>9177803
It does give you more opportunity to procreate.

>> No.9179441

damn how 2 get fit?

>> No.9179501
File: 8 KB, 116x122, 1407382249759.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9179501

>>9178025

t. over-the-hill spinster

>> No.9179511

>>9177803
It's not synonymous but it's a good estimate. Many well developed secondary sexual characteristics correlate with fertility and health.

As a side note I love how bratty those girls look. I want them to humiliate me.

>> No.9179551

im surprised no-one in this thread recognizes lindsay lohan

>> No.9180037

>>9179352
>run amok
Yes. In the sense that it goes beyond the simple utilitarian process of selecting a healthy mate. People can get attrackted to some very strange shit.
No. In the sense that we haven't developed big red tails. Although humans do display clear sexual dimorphism.

>> No.9180119

>>9179551
I'm not surprised. Took me a second look to confirm but this is r/sci/ after all

>> No.9180596

>>9179441
There's a board for that. Read the sticky. >>>/fit/

>> No.9180608

>>9178322
>Females likes vigorous males
>So males who danced better got laid
>But males that had bigger feathers looked as if they danced more
>So the "Big feather" meme was passed on
>Males now compete by also having big feathers
I have no proof of this

>> No.9181127

>>9178025
Do they shows signings of any disease?

I mean they have such a healthy skin and hair don´t they?

And they are fit, which in our society means ++

>> No.9181148
File: 32 KB, 400x382, 1500434194382.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9181148

>>9177803
Healthier babies, Healthier offspring.

(Not necessarily smarter.
for smarter babies you need to seek the PHENOTYPE)

>> No.9181168

>>9178521
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2wRvhbJIQQ

>> No.9181177
File: 148 KB, 1200x900, beb.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9181177

>>9181148
how can I get a mate with the feminine PHENOTYPE?

>> No.9181178

>>9177808
>mating with a mentally ill good looking girl is fine

>> No.9181184

>>9181178
attractiveness does not necessarily mean physical traits only. A mentally ill girl would probably do plenty of unattrative things like defecate on herself, drool, flail around etc.

>> No.9181200

>>9181184
>defecate on herself, drool, flail around etc.
Add retarded crying sounds and you've got Japanese porn.

>> No.9181232

>>9177803
The biological definition of fitness is reproduction.

>> No.9181235

>>9177803
>thinking evolution is some sort of directed process that attempts to create the most fit organism

>> No.9182370

>>9181184
>rative things like defecate on herself, drool, flail around etc.
hnnng