ST Alpha - "Just because lesbians wouldn't procreate (willingly) in nature, doesn't mean the trait isn't useful in an" (Reading a Post)

SlickerTalk
Search Archives
The Leaderboard
The FAQ

Login
Create Account

Search Dr. S. Talk
TT/ST Wiki
How Well Do You Know ...

RSS Feed

Hosting by DigitalOcean

Support ST on Ko-Fi

Down to Post

Backboards:

Posts: 172

In response to "technically speaking only bisexuals..." by Danedukenuuk

Just because lesbians wouldn't procreate (willingly) in nature, doesn't mean the trait isn't useful in an

Posted by TWuG Jul 27 '09, 12:06

evolutionary sense.

Responses:

This is true. however, overall I am not getting their theory. THey're saying that women are getting more beautiful but men aren't. - loosilu Jul 27, 12:10 4
- for a long time in human evolution we have lived in a male dominated world - Danedukenuuk Jul 27, 12:16
- If the offspring of attractive people is 26% more likely to be female, then that means the attractiveness would be increasing disproportionately to - Beryllium Jul 27, 12:11 1
  - that first thing would be a landmark scientific discovery in itself. -- nm - Reagen Jul 27, 12:12
- I think there's an unstated assumption that boys look like their fathers and not their mothers. -- nm - Reagen Jul 27, 12:11
actually if you agree evolution is passing on and mixing genes - Danedukenuuk Jul 27, 12:10 2
- Unless you facilitate genes being passed on. -- nm - TWuG Jul 27, 12:11 1
  - sure and then you do try and mix and pass on genes -- nm - Danedukenuuk Jul 27, 12:13

Post a message top

Replies are disabled on threads older than 7 days.