breastesesses

[Guest guest]

The most intriguing theory I've heard (and this is grossly oversimplified) is

that they were a Fisherian selection by disadvantaged males of females whose

additional breast tissue made them appear nonfertile. Alpha males can have all

the fertile females; lesser males must approach females while they are

unattractive to alphas, hoping to earn reproductive access by provisioning them

while they are most in need of additional food (ie, pregnant/lactating). Such

provisioning also builds relationships, and in the long run leads to better

survival rates for the offspring of these lesser males, who often end up

provisioning each others' offspring. Alphas, on the other hand, may neglect or

under-provision their many offspring while in search of more booty, yet may

enforce harem status for females, thus denying them provisioning by other males.

So, the theory is that breasts started out as bits of extra fat that were

repellent to higher-status males, but attractive to lower-status males, who knew

they would have to work harder and look for bargain-basement access to

reproductive opportunity.

As for breasts becoming attractive or neutral rather than repulsive, that could

happen gradually or suddenly. As various compositions of breast tissue arise,

some of that extra breast tissue may be perceived as more productive, or more

contributive in some way to the health of offspring. Perhaps the additional fat

becomes significant as a food reserve or improves immunity (note that some men

relish the word " healthy " as an appreciative euphemism for buxomness). That

would argue for a gradual warming to their loveliness. Another theory holds

that the line between attraction and repulsion is perilously thin and malleable;

a switch can be flipped, so to speak, and very quickly what had been repulsive

becomes attractive, and the rate of Fisherian selection accelerates. Also,

humans seem to become more fascinated when this line is being straddled, easing

the transition from attraction to repulsion.

[Guest guest]

Mati-

>The most intriguing theory I've heard (and this is grossly oversimplified)

>is that they were a Fisherian selection by disadvantaged males of females

>whose additional breast tissue made them appear nonfertile. Alpha males

>can have all the fertile females; lesser males must approach females while

>they are unattractive to alphas, hoping to earn reproductive access by

>provisioning them while they are most in need of additional food (ie,

>pregnant/lactating). Such provisioning also builds relationships, and in

>the long run leads to better survival rates for the offspring of these

>lesser males, who often end up provisioning each others'

>offspring. Alphas, on the other hand, may neglect or under-provision

>their many offspring while in search of more booty, yet may enforce harem

>status for females, thus denying them provisioning by other males.

>

>So, the theory is that breasts started out as bits of extra fat that were

>repellent to higher-status males, but attractive to lower-status males,

>who knew they would have to work harder and look for bargain-basement

>access to reproductive opportunity.

I'm not sure why you're intrigued by the theory, but whoever came up with

it has precious little understanding of how evolution actually works.

-

[Guest guest]

On 9/12/05, Idol <Idol@...> wrote:

> I'm not sure why you're intrigued by the theory, but whoever came up with

> it has precious little understanding of how evolution actually works.

Or theory in general? It makes me squint my eyes, and it

unnecessarily introduces new layers of complication that is neither

justified by explanatory necessity or evidence.

Chris

--

Want the other side of the cholesterol story?

Find out what your doctor isn't telling you:

http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com