The real purpose of our upper heads

[13788]

View_From_Below: This is, ah, a little different...

I recently happened across a BBC News item on line, reporting on a study done at the University of Valencia in Spain.

The study finds that men who are regarded as attractive by women-- in fact turn out to have better semen.

Researchers took sperm samples and photographs of their study subjects. A group of women used the photos to rate the men on their attractiveness. The sperm samples were evaluated for quality-- motility, viablility, number of sperm, etc.

The women rated the men's attractiveness by their photos; then the researchers showed the women photos of men grouped by sperm quality and asked them to rate them again.

The more attractive men-- "symmetry of face" seemed to be the universal quality of those men rated most attractive-- turned out to also have the highest quality sperm. [A previous Australian study also claimed that men with "chiseled jaws" and classic masculine features also had better overall health.]

Reseachers deduce that, biologically speaking, "good looks" advertise "superior health," and in selecting men with good looks women are acting on biological instinct to choose mates who are in fact most qualified to procreate and provide....

Perhaps guys in the hunt should get in line after all for those male make-over shows and plastic surgery deals...the jawline is all....

Here's the link:
http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/mpapps/pagetools/print/news/bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/2943464.stm

 

[13788]

SchroederJr: Nothing like a good jawline... Mmmm. Oh, how I do love 'em.

 

[13788]

H8Monga: One day I hope to look like this!

I know for sure I'll get all the ladies and have some strong troops!

 

[13788]

7x6andchg: The real shame of it, Hapi--

Michael Jackson was a relatively attractive black man before this all started.....

Oh well...Billie Jean is not his lover.

7x6&C

 

[13788]

H8Monga: Michael was black?! You're joking right?!

 

[13788]

joe22xxx: From what I've read, men are attracted to women in the same way. Attractive woman = healthy fertile partner. I wonder if a similar study of women has been done?

One time in a bar a cute drunk girl came up to me and told me she wanted to have my baby. I wonder if this counts?

 

[B_DoubleMeatWhopper]

[quote author=Hapi Papi link=board=meetgreet;num=1059787575;start=0#4 date=08/01/03 at 21:36:52]Michael was black? [/quote]

Hard to believe isn't it? From a poor black boy came a rich white woman!

 

[13788]

Javierdude22: LOL....(cough)...no seriously, that must be the saddest story ever. The dude had such potential...

But back to topic. I'm kinda surprised by it...and i personally also find it hard to believe, but stranger things have happened. Nowadays though they do so much research on so many topics, that i sometimes wonder: who cares?

Theres this international award on the lamest research ever, and also the saddest excuse for money spent. Last year a group of scientist 'won' who investigated the sinkage of foam on beer, and the causes in the differentitaion of time.

Oi...

 

[13788]

Ineligible: I've seen an attempt using aging software to recreate what MJ would look like now without all the artificial modification, and the result shows remarkable resemblance to our own Hapi Papi!

So you're there already, Hapi!

 

[13788]

H8Monga: [quote author=Ineligible link=board=meetgreet;num=1059787575;start=0#8 date=08/02/03 at 03:43:57]I've seen an attempt using aging software to recreate what MJ would look like now without all the artificial modification, and the result shows remarkable resemblance to our own Hapi Papi!

So you're there already, Hapi![/quote]

Oh hellz naw!
I don't look THAT old!
But I do like my nose!

 

[13788]

gigantikok: [quote author=Javierdude23 link=board=meetgreet;num=1059787575;start=0#7 date=08/02/03 at 03:04:09]LOL....(cough)...no seriously, that must be the saddest story ever. The dude had such potential...
...[/quote]

Continuing off topic:

Aw come on guys, I think you're being a little hard on Michael. His whole life has been about excess, no doubt he would go all the way with surgery (and then some). Either way, his childhood was pretty messed up. So what if he arrived at court with tape on his nose, so what if the tip of his nose fell off, so what if he mysteriously turned white (due to really really really expensive medication that reverses the pigment in the skin, as I've heard)... he may bizarre, but his music was great! Either way, his bizarre behavior is why we keep talking about him, so in a way, maybe he's doing something right. :

On topic:

I must have some damn strong semen, then. ;D Nah nah, i kid....

...maybe only kinda strong.

 

[jonb]

[quote author=DoubleMeatWhopper link=board=meetgreet;num=1059787575;start=0#6 date=08/02/03 at 00:17:22]

Hard to believe isn't it? From a poor black boy came a rich white woman![/quote]
I think he and Mickey Mouse are the same:

• Too much money
• Amusement park in the back yard
• Good with kids
• Black guy with a white face

Back to topic. Charles Darwin first proposed that beauty standards are an evolutionary mechanic back in 1871. The peacock's tail confused him; creationists used it as proof against evolution, while orthogeneticists (i.e., Lamarck, Haeckel) believed it was proof against natural selection. Turned out to be neither, just that peahens were size queens.

Today, sexual selection is used to explain gender differences. From beards to lips to hips to breasts, there are some organs (aside from the obvious) where one gender clearly has a different size or shape than the other.

Even the larger penis is now considered a result of sperm competition, which is a result of female promiscuity. Higher-quality sperm also results from sperm competition. If good looks and better sperm correlate, ugly men get the shaft twice. LOL

 

[13788]

Ineligible: I believe they have now shown that peacocks with big tails sire healthier chicks. There are strong suggestions that healthy people are better-looking, though it is hardly a perfect correlation.

 

[B_DoubleMeatWhopper]

[quote author=jonb link=board=meetgreet;num=1059787575;start=0#11 date=08/02/03 at 16:44:42]Higher-quality sperm also results from sperm competition. If good looks and better sperm correlate, ugly men get the shaft twice. LOL[/quote]

I'm not so sure about that. Looking around on any given day, it's obvious that there's a lot of 'ugly man' genes that have apparently beaten the competition!

 

[13788]

View_From_Below: [quote author=jonb link=board=meetgreet;num=1059787575;start=0#11 date=08/02/03 at 16:44:42]Even the larger penis is now considered a result of sperm competition....[/quote]

Hmm. This needs more info, and biology is not my field. Jonb, are you saying that larger penises are an evolutionary strategem for greater success at impregnation? It would seem that the proof would have to be that general penis size for the human population would have increased faster than, or out of proportion to, the general increase in human body size. Is there evidence for that?? And if it is so, would it not follow that latitudinally, in any particular generation, there would be some correlation between size of penis and number/health of offspring? That is, some proof that well-hung guys have more and healthier children...?? Wishful thinking, perhaps...

 

[13788]

joe22xxx: Does this mean that rich goodlooking well-educated white guys end up marrying rich beautiful well-educated white women?

Please tell me this isn't so!!

 

[jonb]

[quote author=View_From_Below link=board=meetgreet;num=1059787575;start=0#14 date=08/02/03 at 21:03:56]Hmm.  This needs more info, and biology is not my field.  Jonb, are you saying that larger penises are an evolutionary strategem for greater success at impregnation?[/quote]
Not quite. It's determined more by female promiscuity. Also, the motility of sperm, sperm count, and distance of ejaculate, along with timing of estrus and whether or not a female climaxes, all play roles in sperm competition. It's more a question of paternity.

It would seem that the proof would have to be that general penis size for the human population would have increased faster than, or out of proportion to, the general increase in human body size.  Is there evidence for that??

Compared to other, more polygynous primates, yes. However, humans also have larger penes than chimpanzees, but more defective sperm. There are two theories: 1) That the defective sperm attack other males' sperm, and 2) that the rest is like a peacock's tail.

And if it is so, would it not follow that latitudinally, in any particular generation, there would be some correlation between size of penis and number/health of offspring?  That is, some proof that well-hung guys have more and healthier children...??  Wishful thinking, perhaps...

It's more an issue of female promiscuity; other reproductive strategies, such as monogamy (as in gibbons) or polygyny (as in gorillas) have little effect on penis size.

Human reproductive strategy hasn't been figured out because we run the gamut from classical polygyny (e.g., Arabian harems) to polyandrous group sex (e.g., some Amazonian societies, where more male partners is believed to cause healthier children).

 

[13788]

View_From_Below: I'm sorry to seem obtuse about this, Jonb, but I need to ask if you would, umm, ahh, type slowly, as it were.
[quote author=jonb link=board=meetgreet;num=1059787575;start=0#16 date=08/04/03 at 16:06:30]
Not quite. It's determined more by female promiscuity....it's more a question of paternity.[/quote]

What exactly is determined more by female promiscuity? Do you mean the occasional occurrence of larger penises? Or the success of larger penises at impregnation? [If the latter, how in the world do we know?] And when you use that term "female promiscuity," do you mean the simple ability to choose continually among multiple partners, or something more sociological? And I'm lost on the paternity reference.

And when you say "sperm competition," are you talking about the particular or the general? Individual cases of literal sperm competition (multiple male partners in quick succession), or species-wide, longitudinal competition of some sort?

Again, sorry to be dense on this, but biological theory is not my forte, and I'd like to understand your point. Apologies to all those who understood Jonb the first time for my seeming to be dense.

I think you are saying that a larger penis (or the strong jawline, or the symmetrical face, etc., in the original posting) is like the peacock's tail: the peacocks with the flashier tail attract the attention of more peahens, and so those peacocks have a slightly better chance of success at scoring. If the Valencia research is right, it is then probable that males with those various "I am attractive" features also should have higher quality sperm.... true? (That would set up interesting competitions: how good are your sperm if you're hung but ugly? Or drop-dead handsome but modestly endowed? And so on. As DMW noted, it certainly appears that there are plenty of unhandsome, unhung guys around who are successful in the mating and offspring game. Good thing for most of us that charm can often trump both looks and cock! )

VFB

 

[jonb]

[quote author=View_From_Below link=board=meetgreet;num=1059787575;start=0#17 date=08/04/03 at 18:21:22]What exactly is determined more by female promiscuity?[/quote]
Selection for a larger penis.

Do you mean the occasional occurrence of larger penises?  Or the success of larger penises at impregnation?  [If the latter, how in the world do we know?]

When a woman is promiscuous, every man's chance of being the father is reduced. But the man whose sperm 1) are faster, and 2) don't have as much distance to swim is more likely to be the father.

And when you use that term "female promiscuity," do you mean the simple ability to choose continually among multiple partners, or something more sociological?

I mean if she sleeps with multiple men.

And when you say "sperm competition," are you talking about the particular or the general?  Individual cases of literal sperm competition (multiple male partners in quick succession), or species-wide, longitudinal competition of some sort?

Individual cases of literal sperm competition.

I think you are saying that a larger penis (or the strong jawline, or the symmetrical face, etc., in the original posting) is like the peacock's tail:  the peacocks with the flashier tail attract the attention of more peahens, and so those peacocks have a slightly better chance of success at scoring.

Yes, if all other features are equal - and if she sees the penis or it's extremely obvious. Taller men, men with a more symmetrical face, etc. have a better chance.

Sexual selection gets confusing.

If the Valencia research is right, it is then probable that males with those various "I am attractive" features also should have higher quality sperm.... true?  (That would set up interesting competitions:  how good are your sperm if you're hung but ugly?  Or drop-dead handsome but modestly endowed? And so on.

Um, no. Sperm competition is a form of sexual selection unique to polyandrous and even-split promiscuous situations, along with female adultery (which is itself a way to get one man's genes and another's position).

As DMW noted, it certainly appears that there are plenty of unhandsome, unhung guys around who are successful in the mating and offspring game.  Good thing for most of us that charm can often trump both looks and cock!  )

Cyrano de Bergerac, I presume?

 

[jonb]

I'd like to add a story my grandfather once told me: During the era of smallpox, many men committed suicide because of how it had disfigured their face. They were so proud, being tall, dark and handsome. But the smallpox scars ended that real quick.