<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Meta Attractiveness</title>
	<atom:link href="http://jonti.org/intelligent-society/meta-attractiveness/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://jonti.org/intelligent-society/meta-attractiveness</link>
	<description>Building connections between ideas.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 Jun 2010 18:05:23 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: David</title>
		<link>http://jonti.org/intelligent-society/meta-attractiveness/comment-page-1#comment-412</link>
		<dc:creator>David</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Nov 2009 19:23:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jonti.org/?p=204#comment-412</guid>
		<description>But don&#039;t you think natural selection would have already programmed us to do that? what i mean is that a gene that causes us to desire the most &#039;attractive&#039; woman with whom we do not have the most attractive offspring would not be as prolific as a gene that causes us to find attractive the woman with whom we could have the most physically attractive children? The initial scenario you&#039;ve described seems to be a case of poor natural selection, where big-nosed men find medium-nosed women attractive. Genes that cause such behavioral tendencies would not multiply well assuming that medium-large noses (in the offspring) are not all that desirable.

And isn&#039;t there evidence that what people find attractive IS dependent on the person&#039;s own physical characteristics? That very thin people are attracted to women with shapely curves (Tyler, for example).

In any case, i wonder if the random lottery of meiosis overwhelms any such selection... after all, any gene from any parent only has a 50% chance of getting passed on.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>But don&#8217;t you think natural selection would have already programmed us to do that? what i mean is that a gene that causes us to desire the most &#8216;attractive&#8217; woman with whom we do not have the most attractive offspring would not be as prolific as a gene that causes us to find attractive the woman with whom we could have the most physically attractive children? The initial scenario you&#8217;ve described seems to be a case of poor natural selection, where big-nosed men find medium-nosed women attractive. Genes that cause such behavioral tendencies would not multiply well assuming that medium-large noses (in the offspring) are not all that desirable.</p>
<p>And isn&#8217;t there evidence that what people find attractive IS dependent on the person&#8217;s own physical characteristics? That very thin people are attracted to women with shapely curves (Tyler, for example).</p>
<p>In any case, i wonder if the random lottery of meiosis overwhelms any such selection&#8230; after all, any gene from any parent only has a 50% chance of getting passed on.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
