Post: #1

http://m.upi.com/story/UPI-3701371209184/

Pretty interesting.
I wonder if younger females of other species produce healthier offspring.

Post: #2

Uh-oh. This is going to be the new 75 cents to the dollar, men are all rapists mantra.

Grandma would be viable for reproduction, except for the evil men.

Post: #3

In other news Darwin rolls over in his grave upon hearing that article title.

Post: #4

Lol

Post: #5

Quote:"If women were reproducing all along, and there were no preference against older women, women would be reproducing like men are for their whole lives."

Okay, lets come back 50,000 years from now, and see if men start going sterile at middle age due to empowered cougars marrying 19 year houseboys to service them.

Post: #6

Talk about begging the question. Why, in the absence of menopause, would men prefer younger women to begin with?

Post: #7

lol Did most women even live long enough to reach menopause?

Post: #8

(06-14-2013 08:04 PM)Exactaking Wrote:  

Quote:"If women were reproducing all along, and there were no preference against older women, women would be reproducing like men are for their whole lives."

Okay, lets come back 50,000 years from now, and see if men start going sterile at middle age due to empowered cougars marrying 19 year houseboys to service them.

So they actually think someone would fuck 79-year old women?

Post: #9

Quote:The study also doesn't account for the dangers of pregnancy and childbirth in older women.

Yeah, that's not a big omission or anything. Carry on, nothing to see here...

Quote:Computer models suggest that competition among men of all ages for younger women left older females with a diminished chance of reproducing. Over time, human males stacked the Darwinian deck against continued fertility in older women.

Did the men stack that "Darwinian deck"? Or were men making choices based upon a "Darwinian deck" that was already stacked for them?

In short, did male choice lead to decreased fertility among older women? Or was there already a clear difference in fertility between younger and older women that influenced male choice?

I'd bet on the latter. After all, what reason could we suspect to lead men to choose younger women? Probably beauty. Beauty, as we know, is fertility. It stands to reason that if male mate selection favored younger women, there had to be a good reason for it. Men didn't choose younger women "just because". They likely chose them because they were more beautiful...and therefore more fertile (the fact that life expectancies have never been very long until recently also probably influenced this choice to mate young).

That means that in all likelihood female fertility variation over time influenced male mate selection, not the other way around. Men picked younger women because of their beauty and because of the fact that they didn't have a lot of time to mate and raise children.

What reason do the researchers have for going against that?

Quote:But Rama Singh, Richard Morton, and Jonathan Stone of McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario, say that theory does not add up from an evolutionary perspective.

"How do you evolve infertility? It is contrary to the whole notion of natural selection. Natural selection selects for fertility, for reproduction -- not for stopping it," Singh said.

...they had a hunch. It doesn't "look right". OK.

What if the theory of natural selection is more complex in this case? What if humans are simply unusual? We defy natural selection in many ways with our intelligence, technology and organization, complicating the application of the theory (ex: contraception, civilization). Why should we simply assume that something contrary to Darwinian theory is inherently implausible?

Quote:"This theory says if women were reproducing all along, and there were no preference against older women, women would be reproducing like men are for their whole lives," Singh said.

...doesn't this kind of assume that women could have reproduced all along in the first place (read: there was never an inherent fertility difference between women 16-35 and women 35-50+)?

Isn't that kind of a large assumption to make? Because if age differences in female fertility existed from the get-go, then it would have been impossible for women to have been "reproducing all along", and the male preference for younger women would merely have been common sense as opposed to a malicious "stacking of the Darwinian Deck" against the older woman (whose lack of fertility was never his fault).

Quote:Singh says the new research, published in the journal PLOS Computational Biology, suggests that if menopause developed over time, it could also be reversed.

And here the agenda is revealed.

Cougars, rejoice! You're all beautiful, and 40 would actually be the new 30 (or even 20!) were it not for the big bad men whose patriarchy "stacked the darwinian deck" so coldly against you. We can reverse this by getting those men to repent for their sins and reverse their unfair, unnatural preference for younger women, thus making your "Sex and the City" fantasies more viable than ever.

You too can be a man with a virtually limitless biological clock! You too can ride the career carousel (or the cock carousel...or both) well into your late 30's and early 40's, still snag Mr. Big (who will be more open to you know that he has been cured of his unnatural lust for young women) and live happily ever after, just like Carrie! Only the patriarchy stands in the way!



I call shenanigans on this entire article and the research it describes.

Post: #10

I'm with Athlone on this. It's a chicken-egg scenario, these dipshits are saying the chicken (male selection) came first because somebody had to be responsible for laying the egg (ironically it's menopause, here).

Post: #11

And men are taller, heavier, faster, stronger, and more dominant because women have preferred such men in evolutionary history.

Thanks ladies.

Post: #12

(06-15-2013 02:28 PM)Kabal Wrote:  And men are taller, heavier, faster, stronger, and more dominant because women have preferred such men in evolutionary history.

Thanks ladies.

is that what happened to africans transitioning from pygmies?

Post: #13

(06-15-2013 02:28 PM)Kabal Wrote:  And men are taller, heavier, faster, stronger, and more dominant because women have preferred such men in evolutionary history.

Thanks ladies.

Post: #14

I love younger women. I guess I'm part of the problem.

Post: #15

Just reading this study leaves a bad aftertaste, and this is supposed to be science. The changing variable here is women losing attractiveness as they age, not men somehow making a conscious decision "old woman = bad". It's not some kind of witchcraft that old guys who can't get it up for their old wives magically lose all symptoms of erectile dysfunction when they're cheating on their wife with their 27 year old secretary. What part of sexual attraction has ever been a choice? The boner does not lie.

The study could instead blame younger women for being more sexually desirable to men than older women, then it would at least make sense.

Post: #16

Uh, don't other, more ancient mammals also have menopause?

It can't be because of shit men did if the species inherited it from the chimp.

Post: #17

This study has been concocted to the sole purpose of shaming men and reassuring women who are past their prime.

Older women can't reproduce for obvious reasons. Firstly, they can't handle the additional stress of childbirth/childrearing on their aging, decaying bodies, at a physical, emotional, and mental level. Young fertile women are much more able to handle childbirth/ childrearing and do keep a very good level of enthusiasm, energy and love(bond-pairing) high due to THEIR YOUTH.

Not even going to mention the difficulty of older women to cope with decreasing desirability each passing year . As a natural reaction to this depressing truth, their hamster is working overtime, and gives them the opportunity to help them escape the desert of reality with self-righteousness and denial , particularly in making revisionist evaluations of their previous dating partners. Well, if you didn't want to consider marriage with a decent man and being blessed with a happy life and progeny, preferring instead chasing bad-boy alphas and pissing your insignifiant existence in partying, slutting it up, etc, it is not man's fault.

As you sow, so shall you reap. But women don't want to apply this golden rule of life to themselves, and hate to be reminded of simple accountability for their own actions.


What I fear the most, is the unwiligness of these hags to take a moment of reflexion, and consider that popping out kids at their age would be a serious hindrance on their child's wellbeing and health, as children coming out of older women possess a higher probability to suffer life-impairing sicknesses like autism, trisomy, etc. God never intended for older women to continue having kids as they deteriorate in every way, with each year passing . He intended that young women marry and have kids at their peak desirability and fertility, in order to produce healthy children. Makes perfect sense.

Post: #18

The stupidest thing about this article is making it sound like a development because of society.

Evolution doesn't happen overnight and in the case of humans having civilization that's still not enough time to develop a trait like this. Shit is going to take tens of thousands of years at least to see some notable changes.

The fossils from the first humans are ugly as fuck... Nature is not so cruel to have men fucking gross old hags.

Also what's the deal with saying male driven selection causes menopause in captive monkeys and whales. That's a miracle if being in captivity alone can cause such an extremely rapid change.

Post: #19

(06-16-2013 10:12 AM)WesternCancer Wrote:  The stupidest thing about this article is making it sound like a development because of society.

Evolution doesn't happen overnight and in the case of humans having civilization that's still not enough time to develop a trait like this. Shit is going to take tens of thousands of years at least to see some notable changes.

The fossils from the first humans are ugly as fuck... Nature is not so cruel to have men fucking gross old hags.

Also what's the deal with saying male driven selection causes menopause in captive monkeys and whales. That's a miracle if being in captivity alone can cause such an extremely rapid change.

At least they are trying to blame it on biology instead of calling it a social construct.

The PC-feminists are... evolving.

Post: #20

Congratulations, scientists finally worked out that we don't want old saggy asses - we prefer young, tight, supple, soft skin. Stay young and beautiful, girls, it only goes downhill...

Post: #21

I hope this is true, it means we have made millions and millions of women miserable with inhospitable wombs. Pay back is a bitch after all the years we have been shit on by women.