Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Darwin Revisited:Females Don't Always Go for Hottest Mate
Wall Street Journal ^ | 5/5/06 | SHARON BEGLEY

Posted on 05/05/2006 4:53:27 AM PDT by mathprof

At first glance, the "sexy son hypothesis" makes perfect sense. According to this pillar of evolutionary biology, a female who chooses a high-quality male will have sons who inherit dad's allure. They, too, will therefore have their pick of females, allowing mom to hit the jackpot: grandmotherhood.

But when scientists followed male flycatchers whose dads were real catches (as judged by a forehead patch that is this bird's equivalent of perfect abs), they found no such thing.

The sons "did not inherit their father's ... mating status," the Swedish researchers wrote in the February issue of American Naturalist. As a result, mom got fewer grandkids than did females who settled for less-attractive males. The studs were so busy mating they had no time to raise offspring, causing their health and fecundity to suffer. Homelier birds were better dads, raising sons who had more mating success.

Poor Darwin. After he developed his theory of how organisms change through variation and natural selection, his thoughts turned to sex. Because females have few eggs (compared with males' limitless sperm), their best strategy is to select the highest-quality males for mates, he wrote in 1871. That way, their progeny also would have superior traits. The offspring would survive and reproduce better, making mom's fondest wish -- to become a grandmother -- come true. (In evolution, success means reproduction, not only for you but for your descendants unto the nth generation, too.)

[snip]

Or so textbooks say. Just as Darwin's theory of natural selection is under attack by America's religious right, his less-known theory of sexual selection is catching flak from some biologists.

(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...


TOPICS: Miscellaneous; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: crevo; crevolist; darwin; darwinism; sexualselection; singles
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-84 next last

1 posted on 05/05/2006 4:53:28 AM PDT by mathprof
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: mathprof
Darwin Revisited:Females Don't Always Go for Hottest Mate

Thank God...

2 posted on 05/05/2006 4:54:35 AM PDT by the invisib1e hand (Orthodoxy: The antidote to the Dictatorship of the Media.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mathprof

There's hope for me yet...


3 posted on 05/05/2006 4:55:43 AM PDT by beaureguard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mathprof

I'm glad the Swedes spent their tax money on this study and not mine. Some of these studies don't need a PhD to tell us the obvious.


4 posted on 05/05/2006 4:56:42 AM PDT by caver (Yes, I did crawl out of a hole in the ground.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mathprof



The fact that John Kerry has been married twice verifies this.


5 posted on 05/05/2006 4:58:39 AM PDT by SouthernFreebird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mathprof

That would certainly explain the Heather Locklear-David Spade rumors.


6 posted on 05/05/2006 5:05:45 AM PDT by Dahoser (Time to condense the stupid party nonsense: Terry Tate for RNC chairman.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mathprof

When a religion is spit and paper founded on sand, you have to keep patching it back together.


7 posted on 05/05/2006 5:09:56 AM PDT by RoadTest (The wicked love darkness; but God's people love the Light!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dahoser



Uh, David Spade is a cutie. He's no Richie Sambora that's for sure but he can hold his own.


8 posted on 05/05/2006 5:09:59 AM PDT by SouthernFreebird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: mathprof

This gives all of us hope.


9 posted on 05/05/2006 5:10:06 AM PDT by nonliberal (Graduate: Curtis E. LeMay School of International Relations)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mathprof

I would like to test this theory,,,,with Jessica Alba. Anything for the advancement of science.

:-)


10 posted on 05/05/2006 5:10:17 AM PDT by kb2614 (Hell hath no fury than a bureaucrat scorned.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mathprof

So the big goal is becoming a grandmother?? Whatever...


11 posted on 05/05/2006 5:13:43 AM PDT by CheneyChick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mathprof
Darwins theory still holds true.

This article never touches on another aspect. It keeps saying that the women select the men.
I states that homelier looking men settle down and raise families quicker with more success.

Well thats not rocket science. The homely guys latch on for dear life to the first female that will give them the time of day. They are not going anywhere because they have nowhere to go. Females are attracted to this guy because he insures a good father for her children.

The good looking guys are not worried about women. They can pretty much have their pick and if one woman rejects them, they are not worried because they are confident enough to know they can find another. They still have the primordial urge to reproduce but it is manifested in the form of lust. They have the luxury of being able to spread as much of their seed as possible without having to stop to carry ones purse through the mall.
12 posted on 05/05/2006 5:14:12 AM PDT by HOTTIEBOY (AIXELSYD TAEB I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mathprof
Darwin Revisited:Females Don't Always Go for Hottest Mate

But they dump his gay a55 soon enough.

13 posted on 05/05/2006 5:14:46 AM PDT by martin_fierro (< |:)~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SouthernFreebird
but he [Spade] can hold his own.

Until recently......he probably was.

14 posted on 05/05/2006 5:15:58 AM PDT by edpc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: edpc



Bwahahahahahahaha!


15 posted on 05/05/2006 5:17:51 AM PDT by SouthernFreebird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: SouthernFreebird

LOL!

I was thinking that Bill Gates was considered a great catch, but the John Kerry example is even better verification.


16 posted on 05/05/2006 5:19:07 AM PDT by kidd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: mathprof

I was recently discussing this sort of thing with my wife ... Morgan Fairchild.

17 posted on 05/05/2006 5:21:35 AM PDT by ClearCase_guy (Never question Bruce Dickinson!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mathprof
Darwin Revisited:Females Don't Always Go for Hottest Mate

================================

My wife did.

18 posted on 05/05/2006 5:21:46 AM PDT by Manic_Episode (Some mornings, it's just not worth chewing through the leather straps...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mathprof
I have often thought such studies are studied because studiers like to investigate anything with a sexual component, although I can say with all candor I've never spent a particle of a second contemplating the sex lives of crickets.

I have always thought among those of the human persuasion, a lass may like a bit of adventure along the way. Still, in the end, pheromones and instict developed in millions of years of trial and error will encourage her to pick a lad with two main characteristics. The first will be one with DNA to complement hers in making the next generation marginally stronger than the present one in dodging obstacles of all shapes and sizes. Then, the same lad has to be the most adept, at least in her estimation, at providing for the group and protecting them from the wolves and the barbarians at the gate.

19 posted on 05/05/2006 5:21:50 AM PDT by stevem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mathprof
as judged by a forehead patch that is this bird's equivalent of perfect abs

I got mine on order.


20 posted on 05/05/2006 5:22:34 AM PDT by Larry Lucido
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-84 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson