Monday, March 31, 2008

98; More Theories

So I was thinking about butts, breasts and eyes. I understand butts and breasts, but I don't understand eyes.

That is, when a guy looks at a woman's chest or rear there is a rational explanation.

According to my theory of Unified Gandering (UG), there is a biological explanation for men staring at women's breasts and butts. I will also divulge my corollary about men being interested in younger women.

It must be recollected that the theoretical starting point is that sexual intercourse is undertaken with procreation in mind. And we must remember that the purpose of procreation is to ensure that your genes get passed on to the next generation.

Now primates, in general, are nasty things. Especially when they are young. Primates have one of the longest periods of development of any animal. They take a long time to mature to adulthood. As such the parental involvement of primates is far more intense and lengthy than that of, say, a toad.

"Have you laid all the eggs?"

"Yes, Mort. Aren't they darling?"

"Nope. Want to go back to the pad and abandon the little swimmers to their fate?"


And they hop away into the sunset, leaving their young to metamorphose on their own. Primates can't do that. Young are a necessary burden if you want the species to survive. This explains breasts. Breasts are an indicator of milk production. Historically the better off one is, the larger the breast size. Undernourished females will have smaller breasts than well-nourished females. So if you are sizing up a mate you want to make sure she can feed your child, and won't abandon it to fend for herself.

Okay, so it makes sense that butts are also gauged in sizing up a mate. There's a pretty consistent correlation between round butts and big hips. Big hips, mating-wise, are a good thing. It means they will be more likely to have a successful childbirth. You want your sexual partner to have big child-birthin' hips, and big mammaries to nourish your progeny.

(Again I am increasingly perplexed by the baby boomers. Twiggy? Seriously? What is wrong with our parent's generation?)

I should also take a moment to address the other cardinal sin of male actions under the UG theory, namely that men tend to gander younger women. But this should come at no surprise. A younger female is less likely to have mated with other males, and therefore more likely to be a good candidate to raise your young. If she's older she might have her own young to care for from a genetic rival. That's why the Nature channel always shows herds of animals like elephant seals with harems of females. Ever notice that the story is the same? Old male, Alpha, controls breeding rights with a bunch of younger females. Eventually he gets too old, and the female elephant seals start talking about him behind his back, make unfavorable comparisons to Hugh Hefner, begin noticing his ear hairs, etc. Other male, Beta, decides he is strong enough, smart enough, (he's feeling good, been seeing a therapist once a week) and senses the time is ripe to usurp Alpha. And guess what? He does. Every time. But the point I wish to emphasize is the old male-young female thing. Older stronger males get breeding rights with young females.

So that explains everything: butts, breasts, and younger women. With one exception, and this is the fatal flaw of my theory: eyes.

You can look at two pairs of brown eyes (that's four eyes in all) and say that one pair is pretty and one isn't. That's not to say the other pair are ugly. I think your eyes are just fine. They just aren't for me.

That's the whole crux. Eyes shouldn't matter. But they do. Humans are friggin' aesthetic and it drives biology wild. Should the distance between the eyes or the shape of the jaw matter to us? Maybe. There could be some biological reason for each being pleasing. And given the butt-breast argument I would imagine there is a strong biological reason for proportions being pleasing. But eye color?

There's really no good reason for it. People have prerequisite colors. (Bed-filler wanted. Only blues need apply.) Even within one over-arching color, like blue, we distinguish some eyes as 'pretty', others as not.

Why this is I have no idea. Perhaps it's the first steps of man past the UG stage.

After all, humans are supposed to be smart. Maybe basing mating preferences on something other than biological instincts is a step in the right direction. Or maybe we'll end up killing ourselves off. Either way it's a win-win.

1 comment:

Karen said...

"A younger female is less likely to have mated with other males, and therefore more likely to be a good candidate to raise your young. If she's older she might have her own young to care for from a genetic rival."

Sure explains the fiasco of 19 year old Lady Diana Spencer and 32 year old Prince Charles....

He should have married Camilla....