Scientists explain why most of you are ugly

posted at 7:04 pm on March 28, 2007 by Allahpundit

Not me. You.

For some species, females select the most attractive males to mate with: female peacocks will choose males with the longest tail feathers—the peacock version of George Clooney. These more attractive features usually indicate some other level of genetic fitness, such as disease resistance, that the female’s offspring will then also inherit.

According to this method of sexual selection, if females only bred with the most attractive males, then all males should be equally attractive and sexual selection could not take place. (In the peacocks’ case, all males would have similarly long tails.) But clearly this isn’t the case: for every Johnny Depp out there, there’s a George Costanza—in humans, birds and other animals alike.

This so-called “lek paradox” (a lek is a group of males congregated for mating) has plagued evolutionary biologists for decades.

Turns out there’s a correlation between how attractive males are and how diverse their disease-fighting genes are (to stay one step ahead of evolving viruses), and how diverse those disease-fighting genes are depends in part on the male having a high individual rate of genetic mutation. That rate gets passed on to his offspring, so you end up with a bunch of toddlers prone to mutation — and not always in the direction of Brad Pitt. So even if the ladies lined up for the big A, a lot of my kids would still be fugly. Heh.

At least, I think that’s what the article’s saying. Here, enjoy this cartoon demonstration. I used to think Matt Groening created “The Simpsons” but then I read a book that changed my life…

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

my self esteem has been shattered

someone get me a lawyer and an ACLU representative, preferably ugly ones!

Defector01 on March 28, 2007 at 7:06 PM

Don’t know about the rest of you, but I’m pretty, at least for a 6-foot-3 guy. Must be the Irish gene.

No self-esteem problems here.

JammieWearingFool on March 28, 2007 at 7:15 PM

The peacock version of George Clooney? So female peacocks want their mates to be stupid?

Tony737 on March 28, 2007 at 7:17 PM

I ain’t ugly.

OBX Pete on March 28, 2007 at 7:22 PM

See? The creationists are right: it doesn’t take millions of years to go from primordial soup to man. If matt groenig can do it in 35 seconds why can’t God do it in 6 days?

Mr. Bingley on March 28, 2007 at 7:22 PM

Everybody knows that Gorgeous George Loony is a closet guy that’s persuaded to those of the same persuasion.

PC enough?

Kini on March 28, 2007 at 7:22 PM

Dude, we’re bloggers. Of course we’re ugly.

a4g on March 28, 2007 at 7:22 PM

Well, I have three darn good looking kids, so not being a super model didn’t hurt my evolutionary fitness any.

Now if only they’d start reproducing my genes would start spreading through the population like wildfire!

Bob's Kid on March 28, 2007 at 7:23 PM

Love the Fishbone reference in the subtitle.

VTTLOTFDGF is a classic.

John on March 28, 2007 at 7:24 PM

Is this the same science that believes in Global Warming?

If so, then marring your toaster is evolutionary.

Kini on March 28, 2007 at 7:26 PM

Explains why the wife says I look like Abe Vigoda in Depends.

Limerick on March 28, 2007 at 7:31 PM

C’mon, people! Have none of you seen One Million years B.C. or Clan of the Cave Bear?

Hollywood has been postulating this theory for years!

I wonder how the Geico Cavemen would say about this?

kevcad on March 28, 2007 at 7:32 PM

how does this explain feminists? survival of the most fabulous?

Defector01 on March 28, 2007 at 7:32 PM

Is it true that in nature the females select the mate(s)? Seems to me, the males select the mates and the strongest gets the prize(s). Looks ain’t go much to do with it…

I know that certainly true with Lions. Strongest male gets the pride until the nomad young male get strong enough to find a pride to take over…. Strength, not looks.

It’s true in humans too. How many times have you seen good looking woman with really ugly guys? Lots. The guy is usually well off e(economically strong). Think Anna Nichole…

TheBigOldDog on March 28, 2007 at 7:38 PM

Problem: most of the world doesn’t allow selective breeding. Daughters are sold.

laelaps on March 28, 2007 at 7:40 PM

Think Anna Nichole…

TheBigOldDog on March 28, 2007 at 7:38 PM

That’s was high maintenance.

Kini on March 28, 2007 at 7:40 PM

And, while looks may not be passed on, size (strength) usually is. So, I’m not buying any of this..

TheBigOldDog on March 28, 2007 at 7:41 PM

Perhaps, “for some species,” the female gender finds long-haired, unbathed, lice/crab ridden, pot-smoking, socialist-oriented, commune-living, STD carring, pacifist men attractive.

We call those “Code Pink.”

georgej on March 28, 2007 at 7:44 PM

I blame “beer goggles”.

Buzzy on March 28, 2007 at 8:00 PM

“Honey why does our baby look like the Milk Man ?”

“Baby its just genetics. You disease fighting germs didnt get past down to junior so he naturally de-evolved into a postman.”

William Amos on March 28, 2007 at 8:06 PM

I don’t mean to toot my own horn, but…I’m very much the ladies man…or at least I would be if I wasn’t a blogger.

amerpundit on March 28, 2007 at 8:07 PM

Thank God I’m better looking than both George Looney and Captain Jack Sparrow. I’m bigger, faster and stronger…and darnit, people like me! Now–where did I put that thigh-master???

robblefarian on March 28, 2007 at 8:12 PM

More bad science.

Zorro on March 28, 2007 at 8:21 PM

I have the looks and the body for the internet.

right2bright on March 28, 2007 at 8:21 PM

Hencock: Natural Male Enhancement or Large Bank Account?
You do the math.

Peacock: Code Pink Girl or Anna Nicole Type?
Neither, only the one that brings me my beer.

Ah, simplicity!

Kini on March 28, 2007 at 8:21 PM

I know that certainly true with Lions. Strongest male gets the pride until the nomad young male get strong enough to find a pride to take over…. Strength, not looks.

I don’t think its that clear cut with humans. I was always sort of shy although generally good looking. But it was only when I starting talking that women liked me. All this genetic stuff is grand but human consciousness and personality accounts for so much that I don’t think comparisons to peacocks and lions are applicable.

aengus on March 28, 2007 at 8:30 PM

Replace “starting” with “started”.

aengus on March 28, 2007 at 8:30 PM

right2bright,

I’ve got just the right face, for radio.

amerpundit on March 28, 2007 at 8:39 PM

I look pretty good with a nice font.

spmat on March 28, 2007 at 8:55 PM

We’re ugly? AP’s the one who watches panda porn :P

lorien1973 on March 28, 2007 at 9:13 PM

I come from a long line of short skinny guys with absolute babes as wives (myself included). WTF does that mean?

HerrMorgenholz on March 28, 2007 at 9:18 PM

I could be on Tyra Banks’ “America’s Next Top Model”…if I wasn’t a man and if I didn’t have any self-esteem.

SouthernGent on March 28, 2007 at 9:25 PM

When I was in high school and college, I was all about the looks and not much else. Once I got close to graduation, though, and started looking for “the One,” my priorities changed. I looked for someone whom I could trust and respect, who would earn a good living, who would make a good father, etc. I think I ended up with a good-looking guy anyway, but that wasn’t my priority anymore. My husband might not have made it through Darwinian natural selection back in the days of primitive humans, but he’s certainly among the fittest in our modern sit-behind-a-computer-and-make-oodles-of-money world!

I’m glad he doesn’t look like George Clooney. Everyone I know who married an exceptionally great-looking guy is divorced now. (Not to paint all you exceptionally great-looking guys with one brush…)

aero on March 28, 2007 at 9:42 PM

Did this writer factor in how it’s the best dressers (clothes being human feathers) are always gay?

- The Cat

MirCat on March 28, 2007 at 10:22 PM

A sensible discussion of this subject is impossible, because most people have not studied human mating patterns extensively enough, or disinterestedly enough, to be sufficiently knowledgeable and sufficiently objective on the subject. Amid such a vast clamor of ignorance, prejudice and emotion, the voice that speaks reason and knowledge is drowned out.

Alas ….

Ali-Bubba on March 28, 2007 at 10:44 PM

Everyone I know who married an exceptionally great-looking guy is divorced now.

aero on March 28, 2007 at 9:42 PM

An outcome for which you should blame … feminism.

Feminism told women that (a) modesty and chastity are bad things, and (b) that being “equal to men” is the goal of life. Therefore, women started dressing like floozies, screwing like whores, and treating men as sex objects.

Nowadays, any halfway decent-looking guy with half a brain and 30% of a personality can get laid on demand, so naturally any really good-looking guy, married or not, is pursued by hordes of floozies.

Ali-Bubba on March 28, 2007 at 10:52 PM

My 9 inches of manhood makes up for my face…

Tim Burton on March 28, 2007 at 11:17 PM

In my junior year of college I was dating a very good looking blond, blue eye, basketball player with a 6’5″ frame. Then in a finance class I met this handsome, brown hair, hazel eyes 5’8″ soccer player. In less than a month he had my boyfriend and I broken up. My g/fs were like why? Tehn theyb met my husband. It was and still is his personality.

CCRWM on March 28, 2007 at 11:44 PM

I meant to write “then they met my husband”

CCRWM on March 28, 2007 at 11:45 PM

This sheds a lot of light on my first selection of a spouse.

Mojave Mark on March 28, 2007 at 11:54 PM

We definately need to institute ugly day at the mall. All ugly people must stay home one day a year. We have to put up with them all year long and one day free of ugliness isn’t too much to ask!

csdeven on March 28, 2007 at 11:58 PM

Don’t know about the rest of you, but I’m pretty, at least for a 6-foot-3 guy. Must be the Irish gene.

No self-esteem problems here.

JammieWearingFool on March 28, 2007 at 7:15 PM

“Pretty?”

I’m not sure I’ve ever heard a guy describe himself as “pretty” before. Except for maybe THIS one, which of course is our favorite Republican.

Gregor on March 29, 2007 at 12:28 AM

It is much more than looks for us humans. When we’re young it’s all about the looks. As we mature, we realize we’re looking for something far more substantial and sustaining. Unfortunately, as some people age, in their haste to remain youthful they hang on to the “looks” thing and end up unhappy people. At least some I know have ended up that way. People who choose substance over looks seem to have longer and happier marriages.

thedecider on March 29, 2007 at 12:37 AM

On urban legends and looks - scroll down until you see M. Monroe

My favorite joke on ‘brains’ is when at the graduation the proud father tells his friends “my son, he’s got my brains”, and the mother replies “of course, because I still have mine”.

If, when the honeymoon is over, you can have long brunches together, talk and smile to/at each other, go about your tasks in silence and the confidence that the other is there for you, are together at times and completely trusted to be alone on others – it’s beauty.

AP, you’re hilarious.

Entelechy on March 29, 2007 at 1:02 AM

I used to be attracted to beautiful women who were crazy in bed. Trouble is they were crazy everywhere else too.

Buck Turgidson on March 29, 2007 at 1:27 AM

‘Guess this means I’m going to have some pretty ugly kids?

profitsbeard on March 29, 2007 at 1:41 AM

Ali-Bubba on March 28, 2007 at 10:44 PM

Please share.

Connie on March 29, 2007 at 3:13 AM

You are all so, er, um, superficial. Yeah. That’s the ticket. You’re all superficial.

Why, the other day, I was telling my wife, Morgan Fairchild, that the problem with men and women today is that they are fixated on good looks when they should fixate on good looks AND money. And my wife, Morgan Fairchild, agreed with me. Did I tell you my wife is Morgan Fairchild?

Now please pass the Grey Poupon.

You’ve been a great audience. Thank you very much, I’ll be here all week.

georgej on March 29, 2007 at 3:22 AM

Heeey!

I spent two years in the same HS(Chicago Academy for the Arts) as actress Lara Flynn Boyle.She was a ***** to me.
She was born in May of ’70-I was born in October.
She looks about 10 years older than me.
heh.
Oh-and my husband is kind of a “Dennis Franze” type.
He’s a kind of frumpy nice guy.

annoyinglittletwerp on March 29, 2007 at 8:17 AM

So even if the ladies lined up for the big A, a lot of my kids would still be fugly. Heh.

Do not despair big A. You have something that time won’t erode–a big ol’ brain. And that’s what really matters, as Ron White says: looks go, but you can’t fix stupid!!! (Thank God I’m so perfect….)

honora on March 29, 2007 at 1:18 PM

At least, I think that’s what the article’s saying.

No, what the article is trying to say (well, is being forced to say, but doesn’t want to highlight) is:

This so-called “lek paradox” (a lek is a group of males congregated for mating) has plagued evolutionary biologists for decades.

Again, this isn’t some small unimportant piece of news. It’s just more piling on, showing how ridiculous evolutionary theory is. The best example? Certainly not. But just one more none the less. Again, they don’t consider that this actually poses a problem for their theory (read: assumptions), they just pretend they don’t have a full understanding of it yet. The problem is, they don’t have an understanding of most of what they talk about, because it’s all simply assumption, and contradictory evidence is constantly forced to fit in to an ever changing “theory”.

RightWinged on March 29, 2007 at 3:04 PM

Oh by the way, these “scientists” no doubt accept homosexuality… I wonder what their “theory” is people have evolved “gay”.

RightWinged on March 29, 2007 at 3:06 PM

I’m goodlooking and not having kids. Ha!

Me: 1

Mother Nature: Nuthin.

TallDave on March 29, 2007 at 4:57 PM