FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Sexual Selection
Sexual Selection
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
As a psychologist I am very interested in human behaviour, and after one week of joining this site I have noticed something quite interesting. There is a theory in evolutionary psychology called 'sexual selection' in which it is has been found that in most species the male does the competing and the female does the choosing (e.g male peacocks are brightly coloured to attract the female) This is evident in all walks of life but also on here too. Having compared female and male profiles there is one pattern that continuously emerges...the females list very clearly what they are looking for e.g 'only tall men, must be clean shaven, must be between 35-50 etc etc. It is almost like the male has to qualify himself to the female.The male profiles on the other hand advertise what they have e.g well endowed, tall. They are competing with one another for the female.
I remember seeing one poor females status which said 'only joined this site 30 minutes ago and already have over 60 messages'. Just very amusing to consider just how much competing the male has to do and how the woman gets to choose. I highly doubt in the space of 30 minutes a male would get anywhere near 60 messages, they would be lucky to get 6.
This is not a moan by the way, just a mere observation and one that, due to my profession I am interested in. I wont bore you with the evolutionary reasons behind this behaviour as I am sure you are all fed up with this long message as it is! (would be more than happy to though if people are actually interested)
I wish all you males out there the best of luck in competing and the females good luck in their choosing!
happy swinging |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I think it is something we were all aware of, but didn't know the specific reasons for it, save as to say 'that's men for you'
I also think ratio plays a significant role |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"in most species the male does the competing and the female does the choosing"
Male competition is fine by me, what I don't like however is that we're all lumped together under the same, inherently negative sounding category of 'single male'. If there were multiple, graded categories of single male however, then you'd soon see demand increase for the ones actually making an effort, rather than simply writing three word profiles, posting no pics and sending 'fancy a shag' type messages. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It is obvious but perhaps the reasons behind it from an evolutionary standpoint are not. "
Ah...the theory of evolution....as yet to be proved. There are those that swing but do not believe in Evolution. Happily, I do as I am an improvement on my Father, however, his genes try hard to drag me back. This accounts for my predilection for onions. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *livia_KWoman
over a year ago
South London |
I actually find human behaviour fascinating. A huge part of evolution is adaptability and survival of the fittest. This doesn't just refer to the physically strongest, but also the success of an individual of the species to adapt to its surroundings and society. The greater the ability to form social relationships, the higher chance they have of reproducing and passing on their 'stronger' genes.
So basically, if some guys on here made more effort in communicating with others when trying to get a meet, the greater chance they have of spreading their seed around (so to speak)  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ezebelWoman
over a year ago
North of The Wall - youll need your vest |
"It is obvious but perhaps the reasons behind it from an evolutionary standpoint are not.
Ah...the theory of evolution....as yet to be proved. There are those that swing but do not believe in Evolution. Happily, I do as I am an improvement on my Father, however, his genes try hard to drag me back. This accounts for my predilection for onions. "
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It is obvious but perhaps the reasons behind it from an evolutionary standpoint are not.
Ah...the theory of evolution....as yet to be proved. There are those that swing but do not believe in Evolution. Happily, I do as I am an improvement on my Father, however, his genes try hard to drag me back. This accounts for my predilection for onions. "
Another person who doesn't know what "theory" means.
A theory is not the same as a hypothesis. By definition, a scientific theory is in fact a proven hypothesis. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I actually find human behaviour fascinating. A huge part of evolution is adaptability and survival of the fittest. This doesn't just refer to the physically strongest, but also the success of an individual of the species to adapt to its surroundings and society. The greater the ability to form social relationships, the higher chance they have of reproducing and passing on their 'stronger' genes.
So basically, if some guys on here made more effort in communicating with others when trying to get a meet, the greater chance they have of spreading their seed around (so to speak) "
My own caveat on this point is that any communicating I do is simply for the purpose of communication - no ulterior motives; they must have been left at the operating theatre in 2003 when my seed production ceased to be |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"I actually find human behaviour fascinating. A huge part of evolution is adaptability and survival of the fittest. This doesn't just refer to the physically strongest, but also the success of an individual of the species to adapt to its surroundings and society. The greater the ability to form social relationships, the higher chance they have of reproducing and passing on their 'stronger' genes.
So basically, if some guys on here made more effort in communicating with others when trying to get a meet, the greater chance they have of spreading their seed around (so to speak) "
good point |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
The biggest fallacy of evolution is the concept of survival of the fittest x it is one of many evolutionary concepts not the one
I will always cite evolution is survival of that able to procreate again
For example crabs are shit their survival has nothing to do with fittest it is based like many by breeding million of rubbish creatures
Sometimes it is survival of the best evolved caring mum
Evolution if needed a nutshell is survival and adapting to that which can procreate in these circumstances at this time x
If evolution was only based on the fittest many species would not a exist and b sometimes co exist symbiotically |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *livia_KWoman
over a year ago
South London |
"The biggest fallacy of evolution is the concept of survival of the fittest x it is one of many evolutionary concepts not the one
I will always cite evolution is survival of that able to procreate again
For example crabs are shit their survival has nothing to do with fittest it is based like many by breeding million of rubbish creatures
Sometimes it is survival of the best evolved caring mum
Evolution if needed a nutshell is survival and adapting to that which can procreate in these circumstances at this time x
If evolution was only based on the fittest many species would not a exist and b sometimes co exist symbiotically"
I was talking about human evolution, not crab evolution |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"For example crabs are shit their survival has nothing to do with fittest it is based like many by breeding million of rubbish creatures
"
Perhaps people should stop being so hard on chavs then - one day our descendants may be eating them in sea food restaurants. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It is obvious but perhaps the reasons behind it from an evolutionary standpoint are not.
Ah...the theory of evolution....as yet to be proved. There are those that swing but do not believe in Evolution. Happily, I do as I am an improvement on my Father, however, his genes try hard to drag me back. This accounts for my predilection for onions.
Another person who doesn't know what "theory" means.
A theory is not the same as a hypothesis. By definition, a scientific theory is in fact a proven hypothesis. "
Why is it called 'Theory of Evolution' then and not 'Hypothesis of Evolution'? And how does that account for whales which have de-evolved? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"It is obvious but perhaps the reasons behind it from an evolutionary standpoint are not.
Ah...the theory of evolution....as yet to be proved. There are those that swing but do not believe in Evolution. Happily, I do as I am an improvement on my Father, however, his genes try hard to drag me back. This accounts for my predilection for onions.
Another person who doesn't know what "theory" means.
A theory is not the same as a hypothesis. By definition, a scientific theory is in fact a proven hypothesis.
Why is it called 'Theory of Evolution' then and not 'Hypothesis of Evolution'? And how does that account for whales which have de-evolved?"
They didn't, they got too heavy to live on the land so got back into the water, they never ceased to be mammals. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Why is it called 'Theory of Evolution' then and not 'Hypothesis of Evolution'? And how does that account for whales which have de-evolved?"
From wiki:
A theory is not the same as a hypothesis, as a theory is a 'proven' hypothesis, that, in other words, has never been disproved through experiment, and has a basis in fact.
In modern science, the term "theory" refers to scientific theories, a well-confirmed type of explanation of nature, made in a way consistent with scientific method, and fulfilling the criteria required by modern science. Such theories are described in such a way that any scientist in the field is in a position to understand and either provide empirical support ("verify") or empirically contradict ("falsify") it. Scientific theories are the most reliable, rigorous, and comprehensive form of scientific knowledge,[2] in contrast to more common uses of the word "theory" that imply that something is unproven or speculative (which is better defined by the word 'hypothesis').[3] Scientific theories are also distinguished from hypotheses, which are individual empirically testable conjectures, and scientific laws, which are descriptive accounts of how nature will behave under certain conditions.[4] |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
regardless of the distinction between theory and hypothesis - the evolutionary reason for women being more choosy is because in a period of 9 months they can only produce one offspring whereas a man can produce potentially hundreds. Therefore as the whole point to evolution is to reproduce, men are not as choosy - they just care about getting it in, whereas as females need to ensure their partner has resources etc. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I'm really not convinced human females are picky when it comes to procreation shall we just examine the fathers of the children born to the under 20s
Also don't think humans have a huge amount to do with the survival of fittest concept , if it did I'm not so sure intelligence would have evolved as it has note this is my opinion x
To my mind without research theory and hypothesis are equally un validated by science
Although parts of evolution are still theory , most of it is fact , it's just modesty caution objectivity that permits us to still call it the theory of evolution as their are idiosyncrasies that are not yet cannot yet be absolute |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Also don't think humans have a huge amount to do with the survival of fittest concept , if it did I'm not so sure intelligence would have evolved as it has note this is my opinion"
Remember that 'fittest' doesn't literally mean strongest/fastest/toughest etc, it basically refers to who is most capable of surviving and thriving in their environment, and intelligence is an extremely effective survival tool. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"As a psychologist I am very interested in human behaviour, and after one week of joining this site I have noticed something quite interesting. There is a theory in evolutionary psychology called 'sexual selection' in which it is has been found that in most species the male does the competing and the female does the choosing (e.g male peacocks are brightly coloured to attract the female) This is evident in all walks of life but also on here too. Having compared female and male profiles there is one pattern that continuously emerges...the females list very clearly what they are looking for e.g 'only tall men, must be clean shaven, must be between 35-50 etc etc. It is almost like the male has to qualify himself to the female.The male profiles on the other hand advertise what they have e.g well endowed, tall. They are competing with one another for the female.
I remember seeing one poor females status which said 'only joined this site 30 minutes ago and already have over 60 messages'. Just very amusing to consider just how much competing the male has to do and how the woman gets to choose. I highly doubt in the space of 30 minutes a male would get anywhere near 60 messages, they would be lucky to get 6.
This is not a moan by the way, just a mere observation and one that, due to my profession I am interested in. I wont bore you with the evolutionary reasons behind this behaviour as I am sure you are all fed up with this long message as it is! (would be more than happy to though if people are actually interested)
I wish all you males out there the best of luck in competing and the females good luck in their choosing!
happy swinging"
When I joined over a year ago, I had lots of messages too. Not so now. I have recently added to and removed things from my profile in order to try to make it more attractive to men. I do have a body type that attracts me but have met diff body types and diff types of guys too. I now have in my profile for slim or cuddly guys etc. I dont think all females require the same on here or am I wrong ladies?  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Remember that 'fittest' doesn't literally mean strongest/fastest/toughest etc, it basically refers to who is most capable of surviving and thriving in their environment, and intelligence is an extremely effective survival tool."
Indeed, and this point is proven by the extinction of Neanderthal and survival of Homosapien.
I really want to get involved in this discussion but... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *yrdwomanWoman
over a year ago
Putting the 'cum' in Eboracum |
"Also don't think humans have a huge amount to do with the survival of fittest concept , if it did I'm not so sure intelligence would have evolved as it has note this is my opinion x"
There are animals with bigger brains than ours, but not in proportion to the rest of their body. We evolved opposable thumbs and speech. Its a combination that caused humans to be how we are, and we are still not the 'fittest', as any random tiger or shark will prove. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I'm really not convinced human females are picky when it comes to procreation shall we just examine the fathers of the children born to the under 20s
Also don't think humans have a huge amount to do with the survival of fittest concept , if it did I'm not so sure intelligence would have evolved as it has note this is my opinion x
To my mind without research theory and hypothesis are equally un validated by science
Although parts of evolution are still theory , most of it is fact , it's just modesty caution objectivity that permits us to still call it the theory of evolution as their are idiosyncrasies that are not yet cannot yet be absolute "
I was going to just let it slide and accept that people can think what they want....but really!? REALLY?!
It annoys me when people try to refute scientific method. It is the ONLY way we have to understand the universe and our place in it.
Anyway, it's at times like this when I watch "Storm" by Tim Minchin (I recommend the animated version) and it reminds me that no matter what I say you'll not change your mind. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Also don't think humans have a huge amount to do with the survival of fittest concept , if it did I'm not so sure intelligence would have evolved as it has note this is my opinion
Remember that 'fittest' doesn't literally mean strongest/fastest/toughest etc, it basically refers to who is most capable of surviving and thriving in their environment, and intelligence is an extremely effective survival tool."
Brian I understand you are very right x sadly once the daily hate male has delivered pop science to the masses , flippant scientific metaphor soon becomes literal and abused x |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Survival of the fittest, in evolutionary terms, refers to the fittest within a species, not between species.
But now I'm just being pedantic.
I'll shut up now. "
What something means and how the non questioning masses infer are very difficult but then even within species the literal fittest rule does not apply , see crabs and insects where numbers not weigh survival strength per se |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Survival of the fittest, in evolutionary terms, refers to the fittest within a species, not between species."
I was just using Homosapian and Neanderthal as an example of the 'brain Vs brawn' debate as I thought it highlighted the issue well. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Also don't think humans have a huge amount to do with the survival of fittest concept , if it did I'm not so sure intelligence would have evolved as it has note this is my opinion
Remember that 'fittest' doesn't literally mean strongest/fastest/toughest etc, it basically refers to who is most capable of surviving and thriving in their environment, and intelligence is an extremely effective survival tool.
Brian I understand you are very right x sadly once the daily hate male has delivered pop science to the masses , flippant scientific metaphor soon becomes literal and abused x"
And this is why of course human society is governed by the most intelligent of us rather than the physically strongest - actually that's an oversimplification - the most intelligent and RUTHLESS are the ones who control human society. Ok, so we'll often bash our politicians for being what we perceive to be stupid and incompetent, but don't forget that just like us, they're animals looking to better the chances of themselves and their descendants through accruing as much wealth, power and influence as possible, and that will typically be the driving force behind their actions - actually conceiving plans and policies that benefit those further down the social ladder I'd imagine for most is a bit of an afterthought. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Isn't it more like females are preprogramed to want a strong health sprog with the best chance of survival... after all they invest a fair bit of time in baking the bun.
Whereas men are preprogramed to jizz in as many receptors as possible and play the numbers game. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Isn't it more like females are preprogramed to want a strong health sprog with the best chance of survival... after all they invest a fair bit of time in baking the bun.
Whereas men are preprogramed to jizz in as many receptors as possible and play the numbers game."
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By * Jay69Man
over a year ago
Bridgwater - Somerset |
It's not a conscious decision but women will choose men for different things.
The one chosen for impregnation may well be different to the one she chooses as provider.
When no procreation is possible (e.g. age) and NSA fun is the only end, there can be no evolutionary pressure. What informs the choice then.
Also think the cock avatars are like peacocks posing. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"When no procreation is possible (e.g. age) and NSA fun is the only end, there can be no evolutionary pressure. What informs the choice then.
Also think the cock avatars are like peacocks posing. "
Who you would choose as a sexual partner is still largely dependant upon whether or not you'd see them as a suitable 'mate' even if you are having sex purely for fun, as their sexual acceptance of you is further validation of your own attractiveness - if this wasn't the case we'd likely have nothing to base our standards upon.
I'd agree with the peaCOCK bit though |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
