Can't deny that your genes program us that way at least a little bit. The
old hardware does make women more selective and men more eager. But even a
band of monkeys has more going on in it than that.
Actually, that makes me think about a PBS nature documentery (I'm addicted
to them) that followed a troup of monkeys. It turned out to be
matrilinial. The top female was the real power, while the top male mostly
strutted around. The females formed convoluted relationships with a lot of
concern for the pecking system. Male monkey society seemed to be just
overlayed on the female's framework.
A few interesting things about those monkeys: The top male got to mate
the most, but didn't mate with the whole troup. The top male mostly mated
with the top female. A lot of the females had a tendancey to litterally
sneek off in the bushes with the more appealing of the suitors from other
troups. They were in big trouble if they got caught.
Also, it was the females that did the fighting. The males jumped in now
and then, but the females banded together against other troups, and faught
for socail position internally.
Female monkeys had male monkey friends with whom they may or may not mate.
Baby monkeys made friends with males who may or may not be related. Those
male monkeys became the baby monkey's protectors and advocates as the
babies got older.
Humans aren't so different from this. We just add on the evolutionary
advantage to men of their sticking around to see that our oh so feeble
offspring survive the first 10 to 20 years.
Montana Crystal
BoomBdBoom@aol.com
Http://members.aol.com/BoomBdBoom/store.html for musical instruments
>
>Coke bottle glasses??? Oh my god, I think coke bottle glasses are SUCH
>a turn on! I totaly love nerdy girls. Oh ok,,, truth, I love attractive
>nerdy girls/women. I swear, women who look a little "bookish" get a
>second and third look from me. I suppose Ive just proven the above point
>about being visually oriented. But seriously, I've really been
>fascinated with the "nice guys finish last" thread. I can relate to
>this. But you know what? We can talk about sexual trends and "well
>healed" lovers till were blue in the face, but (and I hate to admitt
>it), I really think alot of this comes down to biology. I know, I sound
>like some reductionist goofball but check it out. When it comes to the
>game of "propagation of the species" nature has made a few mandates. One
>is that women (and female mammals in general) have been deemed the
>"selectors" in the mating game. They have been given the innate instinct
>to make their mate selections based upon the criteria of "maximum
>biological viability". They are the "quality controll" officers of the
>species. Thier biology even goes along with this theme. They have a
>limited number of eggs which they are born with and they can produce
>limited numbers of offspring (unless they are catholic). Max bio
>viability means the male that is likely to contribute the most favorable
>genetics to the gene pool. Now, when it comes to "nice guys finishing
>last" I think that is due to the unfortunate fact that somewhere in our
>reptilian brains (limbic system) we (females) still equate
>aggressiveness as favorable trait. This makes for a better "club on
>enemy head basher" or "spear in heart of dinner dude". I think this may
>be one of the reasons women mysteriously go after guys who resemble
>neanderthals. It's the genes stupid! I feel it is also sort of an
>evolutionary adaptation of this same principle when women seem to go
>after guys who drive expensive cars and wear expensive clothes. This
>represents wealth, (and colorfull feathers). In this day and age, wealth
>represents the modern day equivilant of the ability to "kill big
>buffalo". So, you ladies,,, mind those reptilian brains of yours!!!
>
>Men,,, on the other hand are given the instict to ensure that the proper
>NUMBER of procreative acts are accomplished. They have loads of
>spermies, make new ones every day, and LOVE to spread em around!!! They
>(generally speaking) are not quite so concerned with the idea of quality
>as much as quantity.
>
>Sooo, where does this leave us???? Id say it leaves us in the middle of
>an evolving process. I believe it has come to the point where the old
>rules litterally dont apply much longer. I think the "aggressiveness as
>criteria" has passed it's point of usefullness. I would even speculate
>that it seems to be a rather short sighted plan on natures part. Cuz
>unlimately this aggression thing is going to be our collective undoing.
>I think we are in the process of growing out of this reality, I believe
>that nature itself may even be dictating this "evolution away from
>aggression". Hey! us rainbows are on the cutting edge of evolution!!!
>Heres to a new paradigm of human interaction.
>
>Sorry this was so long
>a big fat PEACE to all you belly buttons
>Mark... (shel55@hotmail.com).......................................