Sexual selection has made good damn sense for millions of years. You not understanding it doesn’t suddenly change that.
Selection of mates in human is usually a joint effort. In animals, it’s usually the males showing off and the females doing the “likes”, so to speak. The males do select too, which females to show off for. The thing with many animals, is that they mate, propagate, split up, and the female has the offspring, which is usually able to fend for itself within a year. As SHE is doing most of the pregnancy and feeding of the offspring, it makes sense that she has last “word” in the selection.
Humans usually pair off for life. Our offspring needs YEARS, DECADES, before it can fend for itself. As we spend so much of our lives as couples, both males and females are active in the selection process. Most of the time is spent NOT propagating, so personality and shared interests are more important than mere looks.
Sexual selection is PART OF natural selection, dolt!
The “best” mate is chosen because s/he indicates good genes, and more likely to have offspring which might survive long enough to have offspring of their own. Which is what natural selection is all about.
Men and women usually agree to select each other. How is the selection process not beneficial to the human race, and how, with a dangerously overpopulated world, can it impede human survival? If anything, we are breeding ourselves into extinction!
Cro-Magnons were modern humans, silly-nilly.
We don’t know why Neanderthals went extinct. It might be that their big brains made vaginal births harder and harder. It might be that our ancestors were more brutal and violent than Neanderthals. What we do know is that we interbred with them. All non-African humans have Neanderthal genes in our DNA.
Society back then was not nearly as divided as we thought it was. Everyone hunted and gathered; their survival depended on it. They could not afford silly gender roles standing in the way. The young and strong did most of the hunting, children and older people did most of the gathering. But everyone went on big hunts, and everyone was constant on the lookout for things to gather.
The height or muscle mass were ALSO important during hunts, dolt. Intelligence was used all the time; while preparing and preserving food, making tools and clothes, telling stories as a way to keep history alive.
If anything, women value intelligence more than size. Men seem more focused on each other’s sizes, while women want the funny ones.
You’ve never met any women in real life, have you?
Both ability to dance and symmetrical faces imply good genes. It’s nice to dance, and symmetrical faces are pleasant to look at.
In the current year; men of all heights are involved with women of all heights too.
It’s almost as if all types of bodies are of use to humans, both tall and lithe...
Large body frame – lots of muscles, longer legs, good for hunting and running
You forgot that last part, didn’t you? Being able to run from dangerous animals is good for survival.
Yeah, it’s harder to feel safe where devices like guns exist.
That picture is just silly! Those girls are just fascinated by the "abomination". You can find similar pictures with Robert Wadlow surrounded by MEN who are fascinated by his size.
The taller mating partners also have bigger brains, usually, or they would look like those inbred brothers. Few, if any women would like that.
image
Women in general don’t like violent men, we like strong and kind men.
About 80% of men are in steady relationships with women.
“Beta”, and “alpha” is all poppycock, based on a misunderstanding of social structure in WOLVES. Wolves only act like that in captivity, and humans are not wolves at all.
So, you aren’t disgusted by 100 percent of women, because they prevent you from having your fun?
A very small group of women seek out violent prisoners.
Humans aren’t like most other animals. We don’t “mate” just to procreate. We fall in love with someone we like to be in company with, someone who makes us feel special. We might live together with that person for 50-60 years. Some have children by accident, some try year after year and never become pregnant, some don’t want any kids.
I’d say we would be more likely to go into regression and extinction if women WERE to mate with “not-good-enough-males”.