Skip to comments.
Handsome men evolved thanks to picky females
New Scientist ^
| 5/12/04
| Andy Coghlan
Posted on 05/12/2004 4:08:11 PM PDT by LibWhacker
Today's handsome hunks may owe their good looks to a sexual power shift towards the fair sex during primate evolution.
As our ancestors evolved, the ability to attract a female mate through good looks became may have become more important in the mating stakes than the ability to fight off male rivals, suggests a new study.
By analysing the shapes and sizes of facial features in chimps, gorillas and other primates, researchers in Germany and the University of Cambridge, UK, found evidence suggesting that our ancestors may have gradually sacrificed fighting for wooing.
"Our research suggests that in early humans, a face that was attractive as opposed to aggressive conferred an advantage," says Eleanor Weston at the Research Institute Senckenberg in Frankfurt, a member of the team.
She says that changes were probably driven by choosy females who began to demand handsomeness, not brute force.
Receding canines
Prominent canine teeth which still signify a male's dominance and fighting ability in many primates like baboons and gorillas, may have been replaced by less aggressive teeth and looks.
Broader faces with prominent cheekbones, not unlike those of contemporary movie stars including Johnny Depp, Orlando Bloom and Viggo Mortensen, were picked preferentially by females.
Weston drew her conclusions after initially studying facial features of chimps and gorillas. In most primates, males have much longer canines than females, a trait that often reflects which males are dominant. This difference was much less prominent in the chimps.
Sexual selection was starting to be driven by the attractiveness of a male's face in the chimps, believes Weston, and this tallied with development of broader faces with more prominent cheekbones, plus receding canines.
The same pattern emerged when Weston unearthed facial data on other primates. Wherever males had broader faces, their canines were closer in size to those of females. The opposite was true in males with more elongated faces.
"At one end of the spectrum were humans and chimps, where mate choice may have been more important," says Weston. "At the other end where you had baboons and gorillas, competition between males may have been more important."
Weston, adds she has further, unpublished data on human faces which supports her conclusions.
TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: evolved; handsome; men
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-79 next last
To: LibWhacker
Naa... I look good because God made me that way.
2
posted on
05/12/2004 4:09:50 PM PDT
by
rdb3
($710.96... The price of freedom.)
To: LibWhacker
So why am I here?
3
posted on
05/12/2004 4:13:00 PM PDT
by
blackdog
(I feed the sheep the coyotes eat)
To: LibWhacker
As our ancestors evolved, the ability to attract a female mate through good looks became more important.Darn!
4
posted on
05/12/2004 4:13:44 PM PDT
by
68skylark
(.)
To: LibWhacker
Yeah, so how do they explain the rest of us?
5
posted on
05/12/2004 4:14:16 PM PDT
by
RightWhale
(Destroy the dark; restore the light)
To: rdb3
I object to the braid removal.
6
posted on
05/12/2004 4:14:57 PM PDT
by
cyborg
To: LibWhacker
Thank you, ladies :-)
To: LibWhacker
This articles fails to address an evolutionary reason for it, though. The females would not have suddenly decided that they liked some look better than others--they would have had some reason for deciding that males with that look would be more likely to reproduce than the others, and hence would have selected them. This author makes it sound like they woke up one day and thought, "hmm, the bulky aggressive look is out!"
(It's a pet peeve of mine that so few journalists who write about evolution seem to understand the way that it actually works!)
8
posted on
05/12/2004 4:15:48 PM PDT
by
johnfrink
To: RightWhale
Us handsome guys are always a point of wonder. Wouldnt it be great if women would respect us for our minds instead of our looks?..Women can be soooo shallow!
sarcasm off
9
posted on
05/12/2004 4:16:49 PM PDT
by
rrrod
To: blackdog
Perhaps those of us in the "visually challenged" department compensate by other means: superior intellect, cunning, big feet...whatever.
To: LibWhacker
I thought it was big feet that attracted women.;^)
To: LibWhacker
Probably was true at one time before the discovery of alcohol.
12
posted on
05/12/2004 4:19:16 PM PDT
by
SpaceBar
To: LibWhacker
The opposite was true in males with more elongated faces.
To: Larry Lucido
Money.
14
posted on
05/12/2004 4:19:55 PM PDT
by
FITZ
To: RightWhale
Good question! :-)
And I notice the author doesn't address the complimentary riddle . . . Why aren't more women . . . um . . . like, 42Ds? Evolution works both ways.
To: LibWhacker
Life is unfair.
Being the handsome devil I am, I can only thank GOD it is unfair in my favor!
16
posted on
05/12/2004 4:21:20 PM PDT
by
Enduring Freedom
(Jean Fidel Qaerry - Vietnam Veterans Against The War On Terrorism)
To: FITZ
Well, I was blessed with neither money, looks or superior intellect. Guess I'll have to go with "big feet."
To: johnfrink
All that is needed to complete the "scientific proof" that you seek is for most 'scientists' in that field to agree that its a possible explanation.
QED
18
posted on
05/12/2004 4:21:58 PM PDT
by
dartuser
To: Larry Lucido
That was cruel!
But true!
19
posted on
05/12/2004 4:22:04 PM PDT
by
Enduring Freedom
(Jean Fidel Qaerry - Vietnam Veterans Against The War On Terrorism)
To: Larry Lucido
> the "visually challenged" department compensate by other means: superior intellect
A wild ass guess: a larger brain Way Back When might have been linked with a shorter "snout." And the fems were able to pick up on the fact that the Homo Erectus nerd was able to fashion a pointy stick, while the Homo Erectus jock couldn't.
Just a guess.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-79 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson