We're Still Dealing With Natural Selection

We're Still Dealing With Natural Selection

As human beings, we are still animals. When it comes to dating, mating or finding our other half, we are also still dealing with natural selection. I think many try to disregard this natural process that plays out in the animal kingdom every single second of every single day, as antiquated and unfair to those that do not typically fall within the parameters that we as a society at large have decided, do exist when it comes to natural selection or attractiveness to a potential mate. These things are still in play, and they always will be because this process has ensured that generations and generations have survived as well as thrived thus far.

For example, if there is a short balding guy, he complains that women don't like him because he's short and bald and can't get a date, yet our society has decided that tall with more hair is generally more attractive than short and bald. If a woman knows a man will have trouble in life because of these qualities and it's been re-enforced through television, movies, parents, friends, social interaction, etc., she tends to select against those qualities in a man. The same goes the opposite way. If you are an obese female, society has generally decided that healthier or more fit females are considered more attractive and in this case, better for bearing children, and so men tend to select for that. Does it mean people ignore typical standards of attractiveness and go outside the norm? Of course it does, but not as much as they adhere to them.

We're Still Dealing With Natural Selection

This is natural selection. We as animals are selecting traits whether unconsciously or not, that may have bearing on our future children and their survival. Most of us won't be in the woods trying to fend off bears and building log cabins from scratch, but there is also social, emotional, and physical survival that occurs for us every single day and certain attributes can help those future children and even ourselves in a world that can be impossible, harsh, and cruel to them without them.

I ask then, how is it some fault of the members of our society for selecting these and other traits we deem, the cream of the crop? You see it all the time, these endless rants about how it's all the fault of women or it's all the fault of men for not liking a certain person because they are xyz. Natural selection has always been cruel and decisive. It's the father lion, killing his cub for fear of competition at it's worst, or rejection in human form at it's mildest. For an entire society to go against the natural order, would mean we'd be selecting for our own downfall or extinction. Natural selection favors the strong, the attractive, the healthy, those that are intelligent, and in our society, those that tend to be more wealthy or have earning potential. It is why the other half not naturally born with such gifts, works so incredibly hard to get any type of leg up they can whether it's make-up, lifting weights, plastic surgery, hair extensions, male enhancements, going to college, and on and on. It is also why those at the top also work hard to maintain their own status in society.

Rejection is a part of nature which has helped many a creature to survive and thrive through centuries including ourselves. To suddenly come to the conclusion that this century it is suddenly any more or less cruel than in the past, is ignoring a lot of what has gotten you here to this point in the first place. It will be for those that aren't the tops, to decide instead of complaining, to try to find their own way to get a leg up, that will in fact, get to go against the grain and push their DNA forward above those that sit back and accept essentially and passively, their own extinction by complaining about what they already know exists and doing nothing about it. You essentially have to do what everybody else is doing, and do what it takes to not be left behind.

We're Still Dealing With Natural Selection
Add Opinion
5Girl Opinion
28Guy Opinion

Most Helpful Girl

  • Mrs_Claus
    Why you described is actually called sexual selection, it's similar and still a part of natural selection, but also a different mechanism. That being said, I think perhaps human emotion and romantic interaction needs another, more specific category. Falling in love with a person and starting a family is an extremely complex series of events that have many possible outcomes. It's not merely based upon physical traits that we find appealing in another, but personality is the biggest part of the equation when you're looking for your soul mate. Psychology is the complexity, they write entire encyclopedias on the subject, he'll, it is its own branch of medicinal science.

    It's why not everyone is infatuated with people who have a certain combination of physical perfections, but rather we fall in love and marry like minded individuals, people who think like we think, share our interests, sense of humor, and worldviews. My hubby doesn't need a swimmers body to have my love, and I don't have to look like a fashion model, because it's not your body that's important, it's you.
    LikeDisagree 4 People
    Is this still revelant?

Most Helpful Guy

  • Anonymous
    Stopped reading half way through cause it is clear you have no idea what you're talking about. 1.) Men AND Women (men especially) don't look for the best "survival traits". Currently the preference has been skinny girls with an hourglass figure. Naturally, most animals would prize the opposite. A larger female can a.) More effectively bear a child and b.) Has more fat reserves for the baby during pregnancy. So that point is gone. 2.) All flaws can be covered up, making "Natural selection" useless. Any chick can get implants, so once again the whole "picking the best future momma" is out. This isn't natural selection. I know of so many people with chronic disorders still having relationships, but from a natural selection perspective that makes 0 sense. This is selective breeding, not natural selection.
    Like 10 People
    Is this still revelant?
    • This is gold.

    • @Lostsoulman true dat. Just total randomness, just random people bumping ugliest together.

    • Anonymous

      Anyone has sex with anyone... this much is true, but we're not talking about just sex, we're talking about who partners actually end up having children with and that is when people are much more selective.

      You didn't quite read the paragraph about obese women. Most guys aren't having children with obese women. I did not say skinny, I said they choose healthy and fit women as the ones they tend to choose. That rules out anorexic type and obese type women to have their children.

      I said as much about flaws. Those that don't fit into the cream of the crop, if you'd followed, do what they can to fake the traits that we as a society tend to find attractive. We see this too in the rest of the animal kingdom in some cases. Animals with less than wonderful traits will try to circumvent "their flaws." The point of that is that if, as I said, you passively sit back and blame the world that you can't find a mate, rather than try to circumvent your flaws, you will be left behind genetically.

Scroll Down to Read Other Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said

  • DooMguy



    Ever since the industrial revolution and things like vaccines there hasn't really been any natural selection at all. Don't confuse society with nature

    "Natural selection favors the strong"

    not necessarily, natural selection favours animals/plants with the "right tools for the job"

    "For an entire society to go against the natural order, would mean we'd be selecting for our own downfall or extinction"

    yeah. . . no. Entire societies have already gone against natural order and survived. Think of things like war, genocide, caste systems etc. the list goes on

    We are "animals" but we are unlike any other animal on the planet. We live in an artificial habitat which is separate from nature and use technology/knowledge to give mother nature the middle finger all the time. Trying to apply natural selection to humans in this day and age is laughable


    @Mustachekitteh it's time to object (also I notice that you're master now)
    LikeDisagree 4 People
  • Shorty1991
    Yes, and we're just going to have to deal with it. Speaking as a short chubby female I know I don't fit into many men's preferences. I exercise daily to keep myself in shape and eat in moderation. If I die eathing the food that I love, then I'll fie a happy woman. YOLO. I know that there are guys out there who find me attractive, otherwise they wouldn't look the road that I'm on, and let's just say. None of those guys are ugly and obese. So all is good. :)
    Like 1 Person
  • JohnDoe3000
    Natural selection is a bit more complicated than all the females going after the biggest, strongest males who in turn go after the most fertile females.

    There are various strategies, we can see this with our closest relatives: gorillas have harems, orangutans form nuclear families, chimpanzees are a bit inbetween and their females have been known to cuckold the alpha male with beta males who may not be the strongest but may be smarter (intelligence is an important trait to select for) or more kind than the alpha male.

    Sexual selection can also get out of hand, look at peacocks who are vulnerable because of their big tails, or some human men who are very tall but also very slim (so not exactly able to fight off a leopard) and have back problems. Modern culture (anything after agriculture was invented) may actually be overly promoting sexual selection in areas where it's not good for the long term fitness of the species (we still have hunter-gatherer minds): a spaghettified tall man who is a skilled manipulator will have very high status in our culture and offer great advantages to his children but he may not contribute much to the species' long term physical strength, immunity and IQ. Every species has some variation in sexual selection preference to mitigate problems like these: to some extent beauty really is in the eye of the beholder.
    Like 1 Person
    • Not only that but natural selection is also random. Some guys back then probably were shy so they never got some, doesn't mean they were less attractive it's just that they never put effort so they didn't pass on their genes. I also see ugly people having kids so I really don't think it's only the top Crete of the crop passing on their genes. Lastly, different areas of the world had different selection pressures.

  • Dimmu
    1-we don't wait for some to die so we can mate the others

    2- not all of us marry hot people , I prefer personality

    3-disabled marry too

    Damn, I have a brain
    LikeDisagree 4 People
    • Anonymous

      Having a brain does not equate with intelligence. It just means you have one like everyone else, so I wouldn't congratulate yourself on that one.

      You didn't comprehend what I wrote. Every culture on earth has standards of beauty and traits and characteristics they value. There will always be people who fall in line with those, and those who don't. If you are the latter half, a lot tend to blame the world for being so unfair to them when certain types of people who fall into those accepted categories get picked over them repeatedly... natural selection. If they simply accept this fate, and complain and stop trying, their genes will die out. Even if we look to our fellow animals, those that are deemed inferior have to find non-traditional ways to mate. They may kill the competition's children or try to sneak in and mate with the alpha's female or females, or other methods.

    • Anonymous

      If one simply accepts that rejection and internalizes it and never tries to usurp or interfere with natural selection, selective breeding, what have you, then there is no chance. So as I said, many of us who don't tend to fall into said categories do try and do everything we can, instead of simply complaining, to get a leg up... i. e. working out, creating a winning personality, plastic surgery, going to school, etc.

    • Dimmu

      I like how you instead of answering my comment you kept assuming stuff Just to be the right one
      But I won't even respond to that childish thing

      1- people don't marry according to beauty
      2-your more than boobs and hips

    • Show All
  • Fathoms77
    All true.

    Except given the state of health of this country, I almost wonder if natural selection will have to accept generally lowered standards the whole way 'round. :P
    Like 4 People
  • JustWorthlessMe
    wow... women upping the idea that shallowness is not their fault... shocker!! (oh I forgot it's only bad when men do it)
    Like 1 Person
    • Anonymous

      If I asked you what you like in a woman, that's going to exclude certain people psychically, mentally, emotionally, financially, etc. You, nor anyone else just picks any old person who introduces themselves to you. You select, based on some criteria you've decided for yourself who you want to date/sleep with/or marry and/or have kids, if you choose to do so.

      None of us should sit here and pretend that in every culture, there isn't some standard of beauty that a lot of people ascribe to and things they find in the opposite sex more attractive than others. That's reality and you'd be lying to say it doesn't exist for everyone to some degree regardless of their sex.

    • Anonymous


  • BigJake
    Great, a lecture on Darwinian theory from someone who doesn't understand comma placement. You should tackle Wilson and MacArthur's influence on club game in your next take.
    Like 3 People
  • realityphil
    10% of guys fucks 90% of women. That's why you have most guys fucking no more than 5 girls in whole life (two girlfriends, a fat chick from party, a wife and a 50$ ho), while you have that small group of hot guys, who bang two new girls every weekend.
  • Unit1
    Of course we are and we always will be. More so now than ever I think.

    It's unfortunate how some of us have to deal with it but life was never easy.
  • Sublime45
    Very good take! It was certainly an interesting read! :D
    LikeDisagree 3 People
  • ObscuredBeyond
    Man is way more than just an animal. Always has been, and will be.

    This is evidenced by the fact that in the panel above, I was able to mentally bookmark two of the women as "interesting" - but my preference for company would be based on the values and views and personality of the one I found most compatible with me in those areas. Abstracts that are not observed in the nature of most creatures.

    So if the one with the yellow background and scarf proved to be a loony-leftist with more than a few screws loose and the redhead chick was sane, I'd give my time to the redhead even if I found the one with the scarf more outwardly physically appealing to look at.
  • Lochlan
    Darwin's studies have been distorted. The nature of cooperation is mentioned almost one hundred times more frequently than competition. Without it, the status of apex predator and complex global social structure could not be achieved. We are outside of the ecological niche, we have no "natural" role in nature because we are the first to achieve this status and must continue to effectively construct stability with nature. What you believe is modern "natural order" is a mental illness of listlessness. For the majority to allow extractive institutions to push unsustainable energy practice into commonplace is going to require more cooperation and keen knowledge to be the remedy. Superficiality has little space in the culmination of a system failure. That is, if we don't learn to achieve, manufacture the equilibrium with nature and our inclination for energy. Which again, can only be achieved with cooperation.
  • TheDevilInside
    I was about to write good luck telling the gagers this. This, as is also the case with pro-life, is somehow a topic that most gagers don't agree with. I have tried making points like this in the past, and what did I get? Nasty attacks. It's like people on here just can't accept that they are indeed mammals, part of the animal kingdom, vertebrates, and are basically a very highly evolved primate species. We still have some animal instincts in us, including fight or flight, and the natural selection thing. Just 2 out of so many.
    • I don't mind any of this either and it's where people get me wrong. It's because I fully agree with this, that I am so full of shit and my thinking rubs off wrong with people. For example:

      - many men can't get laid (natural selection). So the principle of prostitution is a viable option for these men.
      - this doesn't make a man a loser, rather, just not genetically lucky. I wish people would see this.
      - men reach sexual selection peak in their late 20's and 30's. So it makes sense why they leave their wives or long terms for younger women.
      - young women will go for this because young women are at their selection peak at a younger stage.
      - obese women still can get sex more than the average guy because due to natural selection, many men go without and are thirsty as fuck.

      These are facts. And it's nobody's fault. That's how it is.

  • Library
    I hate to say this but natural selection is a good thing
    • Anonymous

      It's never been a bad thing if it's occurring naturally (as in not because someone decides only people with blue eyes and blond hair should survive), but I think a lot of people would like it not to exist or pretend that the rejection they get is coming from a place of undo harshness. We're all selecting, all of us, and we're all rejecting as well.

  • Gommers
    We're dealing with an altered media driven form of natural selection. This is not true natural selection and you'd have to get rid of your phones and cancel your TV and Internet services to regain a concept of what you actually find attractive. That and all of your friends would have to do the same, and you'd have to never speak to anyone outside that group of people with no connections to media influence.

    You're being sold a lifestyle through media and products, and you buy that shit by the gross... If you want to actually live a happy fucking life and find a partner that will stay a lifetime with you, I'd suggest that you just restart your entire social life completely.
    Like 2 People
    • zagor

      There have been trends as to what is attractive far longer than there has been mass media. It just spreads wider and faster now.

  • rjroy3
    The most adaptable to change survive yes. We've setup a system that adapts to change so that we as a society can survive and thrive. That's why we tend to ignore certain truths in nature. But in that same vein the rules aren't applied quite the same. In the animal kingdom you die. For a human you can learn, grow and improve yourself. Then bam you're better suited in life and finding a potential mate. What you were born with matters much less. at least in the western world. If you're born a slave in the African jungle... you're basically apart of the classic animal kingdom.
  • Love_Is_Eternal
    We are not animals. Macro evolution is a hoax and has never been proven. It's one of the biggest brainwashing scams ever fabricated.
    Disagree 7 People
    • Gommers

      We are animals, and that's all we are... to state otherwise is clearly and hilariously incorrect. We're not special just psychotic.

    • @Gommers Anyone who has been stupid enough to fool themselves into thinking they are an animal are beyond help and are intellectually dead.

    • Riggers

      I'm interested as to why you think we're not animals, we have the same organs as say a Lion, we have the same bones and flesh of a lion, we grow hair just like a lion, we eat drink and poo and pee just like a lion,

      Why is the lion an animal and we are not? Is it some personal belief that we are superior to the lion? Haha, go into a cage with a lion and get mauled, and tell me then who is the biologically superior being, it certainly isn't us.

      The only reason why are so successful as a specie is because we are intelligent. In a natural 1on1, a lion would beat a human every single time. But it's our ability to make weapons, our ability to make armour to defend ourselves, that is our key to survival.

      A human being on its own, compared to most other species, is actually incredible weak and vulnerable. Only with the inventions were capable of making are we dominant. We are animals just like everything else, were merely very intelligent ones.

    • Show All
  • JezzaKyletbh
    Whoa, it's like we have the female Carl Sagan here, or something.
  • Righttobeararms83
    Natural selection is a good thing as it doesn't pass on bad genes such as short eyesight.
  • GoldCobra
    Wait so am I going to get eliminated by natural selection? :O
    Like 1 Person
  • sp33d
    Still dealing with it? This is how it has been and will remain at all times.
  • anonman32
    i think the sly and the cunning have definitely an advantage here. adaptability = survival.

    "You essentially have to do what everybody else is doing, and do what it takes to not be left behind."

    i disagree with this, if you do this you are subjected to a herd mentality. i agree there is safety in numbers but when it comes to individually making decisions that is gonna be pretty much useless.

    the human being is competitive as well as helpful, in some aspects of life we help one another and in others we compete. if you have a competitive edge above the rest then you are doing really good. this can be any skill or trait that you have acquired over the course of your life. it is not always wealth and privilege.
    • Anonymous

      The phrase should actually be amended to say: "you essentially have to do what everybody else (should be) doing, and do what (you have to) to not be left behind." I'm also not so much referencing physical survival here as much as I am the ability to be able to pass on your genes to the next generation. In that sense, we are all quite literally competing against one another for the pool or men and women out there.

    • anonman32

      yeah thats true but there's 50% men and 50% women currently in the world population so we can all reproduce if we want to.

    • Anonymous

      That's not true. Not everyone who exists can reproduce, so the sample size is not 50/50

    • Show All
  • Alex88F
    meh. what animals dont have is media brainwashing you with stereotypes and such bs. a woman will be never interested in a male once he is different than those pictured in the media. And i fhse does, she will be judged by her peers and pretty much give up on the man once she realizes that "he's not much of a catch" IE he ain't conforming to certain stereotypes. See also, he ain't no high status male.
    As far as natural selection goes, eh, its a fucked up game. Personally im more into having male friends and hang around them than go out with women and be picked on and rejected once "lust" is over and "(in) natural selection" take over.
  • relaxrelax
    LikeDisagree 6 People
  • Adigelunar
    pGood post
  • Derpdeder
    BBC rule baby
    Disagree 1 Person
  • Anonymous
    "Dealing with"
    What do you mean, "dealing with"? Natural selection is the best!

    I actually motion for more natural selection. Our society today is too wuss-ified. We have too many warning labels and too many regulations. It seems like everyday I am being told some new bull-scat regulation about how kids can't run out a few feet into the road to get candy in a parade. Or that you can not camp in a national park below the age of 18.

    We are quite literally destroy the progression of humanity by saving the lives of the stupid.
  • Anonymous
    What about ones who get people attracted initially but not in the long run?
  • Anonymous
    Yep, some of us are always rejected because we are unfit to be selected :(
  • Anonymous
    I wonder if you'll still hold this natural selection "theory" tightly if you're ever diagnosed with an illness and need treatment?
    LikeDisagree 3 People
    • Anonymous

      I'm living with a chronic illness, so yes.

    • Anonymous

      Well that's sad because I don't believe in survival forge fittest. I believe that the strong should protect the weak and we as a specie are only as strong as our weak and we have
      moral duty to ensure the weak are cared for.

    • Anonymous

      We're in a stage in our history where at least in the US, there is relative calm and peace. We aren't at war on our own soil. You have time to take care of the weak. However, we know from things like Katrina, and other natural disasters that most people will try to do what they can for the weak, but if push comes to shove, and it often does, the weak are left behind because for the strong to survive, they have to leave them behind and thus the strong really do go on and survive. This is how nature works. When you are dealing with a low food supply, famine, war, you cannot afford to spend all your resources caring for the weak unless you intend to perish in your efforts or at least put yourself in harms way. I'm not saying it's not noble and people shouldn't do it, it just happens in all animals.

    • Show All
  • Anonymous
    Well judging by this take it looks like I won't be getting a girlfriend.
    Like 1 Person
    • Unit1

      You're not alone, buddy. Trust me.
      Better get used to it now.

    • Rissyanne

      I wouldn't take this to heart...

    • Anonymous

      @Rissyanne You believe there's a flaw in this take?

    • Show All