Female facial beauty IS sexually selected. But as Darwin ingeniously recognized, sexual selection is not about survival benefits, but about arbitrary signals that may even hinder survival. Fisher captured that in the sexy son hypothesis, which I find elegant.
-
-
Show this thread
-
Any by the way, Shakespeare captured this in his first Sonnet, beauty for beauty's sake, l'art pour l'art.pic.twitter.com/UmanjUMge8
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
No. But it is not about genes that provide a survival benefit. They may even hinder survival, which was Darwin's great discovery. Remember the peacock, which repulsed Darwin?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The effect of facial symmetry has been disproved. The ratio of curves HAS an optimum, but it isn't linked to fitness https://twitter.com/DegenRolf/status/898567862855626753 … As to faces and boobs: There are many, many ways for those to be beautfull, with sometimes oppoosing parameters (broad/narrow, etc)
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
indeed, your clear blanket statement that women's faces give us no valuable information about health and fertility is justified. clearly.pic.twitter.com/L3TYQCK4hQ
-
Never said anything about fertility. That one is a matter of age, not of good genes.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Studies that seemed to show that female facial beauty IS associated with health argued that this is evidence of mate choice for good genes. THAT part doesn't look so good anymore, doesn't it?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This is not the first failed replication.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I know this too well. But empirically, it failed lately. If you are really interested, you MUST read this book:https://twitter.com/DegenRolf/status/863454791283994627 …
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
"Health" in what context? Did they include in the study people health problems humans had in recent evolutionary history, like malnutrition, scurvy, famines, smallpox, malaria, hookworms, etc?
-
Or did they look at a bunch of basically healthy westerners who were immunized against most major diseases as children, had plenty to eat their whole lives, and might have a cold?
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.