There's no answer to that question that doesn't boil down to "magic"
-
-
Replying to @CovfefeAnon @RokoMijic
50% of the human population is already eugenicists and has been practicing eugenics on a world wide scale for hundreds of thousands of years. We call them women.
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Our eugenicists evaluate the whole human in a social context and spend months doing it. And they are very picky. And they all have there own ideas of constitutes the best. You would replace this with something more expert and bureaucratic? Trust the experts? Or bureacrats? Lol.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @RukawaVa @RokoMijic
This is laughably wrong. Eurasian women have not had sexual freedom of choice for at least 50k years and so their mate evaluation algorithms are not precisely attuned to positive traits. Example:pic.twitter.com/gp0oX8fuQv
3 replies 0 retweets 8 likes -
I think "selection for attraction to X" should lag "selection for X" even where mate choice is free: gender-specific adaptations evolve less efficiently where there is sexually divergent selection. (This means your point would hold even if mate choice was free.)
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @EvilVizier @CovfefeAnon and
This is actually a complicated problem I need to think about more. Suppose peacocks move to an environment where a large tail is likely to get them killed. So it's strongly selected against. But peahens, who exercise free mate selection, won't readily stop choosing larger tails.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @EvilVizier @CovfefeAnon and
At any rate, it seems like there are multiple scenarios where attraction could lag even if mate choice is free.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @EvilVizier @CovfefeAnon and
Evil Vizier 👳 Retweeted Evil Vizier 👳
I don't think I'll finish this because it's too much work and few will care, but here's an explanation of my "attraction lag" theory. TLDR, sexual preferences tend to target "outdated" traits.https://twitter.com/EvilVizier/status/1452168807036772366 …
Evil Vizier 👳 added,
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Imagine it this way - women's "attraction lag" dates back to when they last had free sexual choice - at least 50 kya. Since their mating choices haven't really been influenced by their tastes, selection hasn't worked to drive some tastes to fixation and others to extinction.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Yeah I understand your argument there. What I'm saying is that that would happen EVEN IF they had free choice. So it strengthens your point.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
Sure, even if they did have free choice it doesn't have much to work with since the natural pressures on men in Eurasia were so strong Ladies can all love a guy for whatever reason but when Genghis Khan wipes out their tribe they get Genghis or nothing
-
-
Well I'm not really in agreement with your Y-chromosome argument (which others have criticized)... But yes, basically I think natural pressures can change phenotype faster than mate preferences will change, at least in certain cases.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 likeThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.