Wednesday, September 11, 2013
Brains vs brawn
A ridiculous study out of Emory University today suggests that men with large testicles are worse at being fathers and men with smaller testicles by comparison, were more involved with child rearing and parenting in general. The obvious evolutionary corollary, for you readers who aren't bright enough to understand the implications of this study, is that men who are more physically capable of killing predators and bringing home food are seen as more attractive and therefor better suited to compete for the right to breed the females, but are unconcerned with the offspring after breeding.
That may have been true when we lived in caves, but is physical bruteness really that much of an attractant to women when looking for a mate today? More of an attractant than brains, earning potential, and being a general provider? How many women today when given the choice between a hunky career bartender with big biceps and a college educated geek with a good job, who would they pick for husband/father?
Given a side-by-side choice, I'd think all but the stupidest females would think long-term and pick the smart provider. Brains and earning potential ARE how modern men compete for the right to breed modern females. This observational truth would therefor lead to an obvious, but indelicate conclusion..... that men today with less evident intelligence, but greater physical competitiveness and breeding prowess, are less evolved than their less brawny but smart, employed counterparts.....no?