Evolution driving women to be more beautiful

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 1415
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 12:13 pm
Location: London, England

PostMon Jul 27, 2009 11:54 am » by Abyssdnb


FOR the female half of the population, it may bring a satisfied smile. Scientists have found that evolution is driving women to become ever more beautiful, while men remain as aesthetically unappealing as their caveman ancestors.

The researchers have found beautiful women have more children than their plainer counterparts and that a higher proportion of those children are female. Those daughters, once adult, also tend to be attractive and so repeat the pattern.

Over generations, the scientists argue, this has led to women becoming steadily more aesthetically pleasing, a “beauty race” that is still on. The findings have emerged from a series of studies of physical attractiveness and its links to reproductive success in humans.

In a study released last week, Markus Jokela, a researcher at the University of Helsinki, found beautiful women had up to 16% more children than their plainer counterparts. He used data gathered in America, in which 1,244 women and 997 men were followed through four decades of life. Their attractiveness was assessed from photographs taken during the study, which also collected data on the number of children they had.
This builds on previous work by Satoshi Kanazawa, an evolutionary psychologist at the London School of Economics, who found that good-looking parents were far more likely to conceive daughters. He suggested this was an evolutionary strategy subtly programmed into human DNA.

He cited two findings from the Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health, a US government-backed study that is monitoring more than 15,000 Americans. The measurements include objective assessments of physical attractiveness.

One finding was that women were generally regarded by both sexes as more aesthetically appealing than men. The other was that the most attractive parents were 26% less likely to have sons.

Kanazawa said: “Physical attractiveness is a highly heritable trait, which disproportionately increases the reproductive success of daughters much more than that of sons.

“If more attractive parents have more daughters and if physical attractiveness is heritable, it logically follows that women over many generations gradually become more physically attractive on average than men.”

In men, by contrast, good looks appear to count for little, with handsome men being no more successful than others in terms of numbers of children. This means there has been little pressure for men’s appearance to evolve.

The findings coincide with the bicentenary of the birth of Charles Darwin, whose theory of evolution first described the forces that shape all species.

Even he, however, might have been surprised by the subtlety of the effects now being detected by researchers looking into human mating.

The heritability of attractiveness is widely accepted. When Elizabeth Jagger became a model, her mother, the former model Jerry Hall, said: “It’s in her genes.”

Women may take consolation in the finding that men are subject to other types of evolutionary pressure.

Gayle Brewer, a psychology lecturer at the University of Central Lancashire, said: “Men and women seek different things in their partners.

“For women, looks are much less important in a man than his ability to look after her when she is pregnant and nursing, periods when women are vulnerable to predators. Historically this has meant rich men tend to have more wives and many children. So the pressure is on men to be successful.” :lol:
Image "Fear not the path of truth for the lack of people walking on it."

User avatar
Posts: 2661
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 9:09 am

PostMon Jul 27, 2009 12:04 pm » by Hesop


Herein lies the conundrum.....society's opinion of "beautiful" evolves as well. What was considered beautiful 100 years ago, is no more.
Image

Writer
User avatar
Posts: 74
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 12:40 pm

PostMon Jul 27, 2009 12:55 pm » by Zaphod


It's only natural that females should be racing to catch up with the males in the human race. It's clear that the male form was perfected centuries ago while human females have had to paint their faces and wear nice looking clothes to make up. Some time in the future, females will be as good looking as us males.
:cheers:

Too bad that their brains don't evolve as well (anyone know a good blond joke?).

OK, now I'll sit back and wait for the sh** to hit the fan :ohno:

Initiate
User avatar
Posts: 121
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 11:23 pm

PostMon Jul 27, 2009 12:56 pm » by Achnaton


hesop wrote:Herein lies the conundrum.....society's opinion of "beautiful" evolves as well. What was considered beautiful 100 years ago, is no more.



Well said, define the word beautiful and how does any one interpretate beautiful :cheers:

In my surroundings (Big populated city) women are almost all bodysnatched by materialism and television. :peep:

User avatar
Posts: 2661
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 9:09 am

PostMon Jul 27, 2009 6:03 pm » by Hesop


zaphod wrote:It's only natural that females should be racing to catch up with the males in the human race. It's clear that the male form was perfected centuries ago while human females have had to paint their faces and wear nice looking clothes to make up. Some time in the future, females will be as good looking as us males.
:cheers:

Too bad that their brains don't evolve as well (anyone know a good blond joke?).

OK, now I'll sit back and wait for the sh** to hit the fan :ohno:


Image

Image
Image

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 2182
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2009 6:21 pm

PostMon Jul 27, 2009 6:19 pm » by Daemonfoe


Now if only women would stop getting breast implants, they might evolve some bigger tits too. If you can manage to have at least 3 children, then implants are ok with me afterward, but never before. Stop cheating natural selection. ;)
The two choices we have are something starting from nothing, or something existing infinitely. These are both paradoxes. The existence of everything is therefore a paradox. -daemonfoe

Initiate
Posts: 939
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 12:32 am

PostMon Jul 27, 2009 6:47 pm » by lainn


and we're the ones with inferior intelegence.....ha!!!

The whole reason women are they way they are today is linked to the same multi faceted conditioning of scociety......mens perceptions are shaped as to what is attractive and women submit with trying to appease that male visual want and desire....


Upload to Disclose.tv



Wanting mummys breast to suck on again....how deep is it written in the desires and needs of your subconscious....?...How about taking a look at that.

Conditioned acceptance.....garunteed acceptance...subscribing to magazine pitures....the true definition of beauty has been lost...not completely....but at risk of being......now all created plain janes...

skin...tits...ass....pussy...lips....blowjob...backshot....the young male population veiw the female with eyes they have been conditioned to see them with...not your fault....awaken...connect the dots...to the conditioning....goes deeper than your veiwing....and females are subject as well to the conditioning......sex sells....but pregnancy and childbirth is veiwed as a curse to be feared...by some of our beautiful male species we are merely tools for pleasure....true MEN see us for what we really are..and if one can't find true definition...then one should look in the reflection with a question mark to self

The image of perfection pertaining to the body is a form of mental masturbation


Upload to Disclose.tv


Super Moderator
User avatar
Posts: 17351
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 9:22 pm
Location: In your grill

PostTue Jul 28, 2009 12:31 am » by Slith


daemonfoe wrote:Now if only women would stop getting breast implants, they might evolve some bigger tits too. If you can manage to have at least 3 children, then implants are ok with me afterward, but never before. Stop cheating natural selection. ;)

Agree to disagree here. When I was in highshool, back in the 80's, 75% of the girls had little or no breasts. Now 50% of the grade niners are fully loaded with more to come. Somethings going on, whether it's in the food or what. But I'll be damned If I crash my truck over a 14 year old
Image

The shinbone is a device for finding furniture in a dark room.

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 2182
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2009 6:21 pm

PostTue Jul 28, 2009 6:49 am » by Daemonfoe


Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe it usually happens after a few children have shown up. Though it really bothers me when young girls, just hitting 18 get them. They usually look better beforehand. I didn't mean to imply that all breasts need to be large to be attractive. I apologize for my womanizing ;) And btw, girls have their conditioning too. Everyone is conditioned in an equal manner.
The two choices we have are something starting from nothing, or something existing infinitely. These are both paradoxes. The existence of everything is therefore a paradox. -daemonfoe

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 2004
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 4:30 am

PostTue Jul 28, 2009 11:10 am » by Darrylmckay


dlslith wrote:Agree to disagree here. When I was in highshool, back in the 80's, 75% of the girls had little or no breasts. Now 50% of the grade niners are fully loaded with more to come. Somethings going on, whether it's in the food or what. But I'll be damned If I crash my truck over a 14 year old


I believe this to be a result of all the hormones they feed to chicken and pigs.

Now back to the topic, its all bullshit, women are not getting prettier, evolution dosnt apply here, "homely" women have just as much sex and as many kids as pretty women.

The reason, the ready access men have these days to beer.

Joking women of disclose, just joking.
I will respect your beliefs*, I will research your beliefs, but dont expect me to believe.
* disclaimer-user makes no commitment to live up to this claim


Next

  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post
Visit Disclose.tv on Facebook