Against established doctrine, a small waist in relation to the hip does not signal women's fertility and health. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B39QQeJoh7gXMzhmYy1reDBUM0k/view …pic.twitter.com/M8ds8sopt9
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
It could be that in the past beauty = good genes. But a trip to the hairdresser doesn't improve one's genes, so no relationship anymore.
Darwin's original observation was that mate choice aims at features that DO NOT help in the struggle for existence. He was very likely right
I've never seen anyone argue that WHR indicated good genes. Benefit was considered to be direct in terms of increased chance of conception.
It has been judged an indicator of good genes in practically every publication, or costly signalling, i.e. the same. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20140088 pic.twitter.com/Tc2lRjwvqe
Does the optimal ratio vary over time?
yeah, good genes that dorky scientists prefer. Not 'good genes" from on the ground women making choices. I blew off 1600 for soldier
Best decision I ever made in my life. 1600 has sjw dotrs, no grandkids I've got jr shitlords, good character,
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.