To: nihil who wrote (27434 ) 6/4/1999 9:49:00 AM From: Ilaine Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 71178
You have touched on a topic that interests me. Man is, or seems to me, anyway, to be the only animal [don't you hate sentences that start like that?] that has self-selected variations based, not on adaptation to the environment, but on sexual preference. I would argue that women's large breasts(compared to the animal world) and men's large penises (compared to much of the animal world, I am aware that fleas, etc. put Long Dong Silver to shame, so please, let's not get distracted here) are the more obvious result of self-selection. One that I don't recall reading anything at all about is height and bone structure. Early hominids were maybe 4 ft. tall at most. Even only a few centuries ago, men were maybe 5'5" at most. Modern diet is the explanation for all the gigantic guys and gals we see all over the place these days. At 5'8" I was the second tallest girl in my class, but now I am dwarfed by younger women. So a lot of it has to be diet, I know. But, but, but, it's well known that women prefer taller men, and men with broader shoulders, than they, as mates. Which means that tall men with broad shoulders reproduce more, and the species keeps getting taller and more muscular. But that means we have to eat things that the hominids never did, otherwise we'll crash and break. The Eastern Africans, the milk drinkers, grow their men seven feet tall. Without calcium and protein, without milk and blood, they'd never make it. I would suggest that, had we not selected for taller, more muscular men, we would not need to drink milk and eat meat. So, I think you are focussing on the wrong end of the telescope. Germans, Norse and Icelanders drink milk because they are big, not vice versa.