518. Women May Be Getting Wiser By An Ongoing Evolution Of Their Cognition
The following are speculations in continuation to entry 487 (Wide-Faced Or Narrow-Faced Men), where I quoted two sources:
http://www.world-science.net/othernews/120107_facialstructure
http://www.livescience.com/14909-wide-faces-predict-unethical-behavior.html
According to these sources, some studies allow the cautious conclusion, that narrow faced may be less of a risk to a woman's wish to be treated well, while wide faced men may be more of a hazard.
The following are speculations in continuation to entry 487 (Wide-Faced Or Narrow-Faced Men), where I quoted two sources:
http://www.world-science.net/othernews/120107_facialstructure
http://www.livescience.com/14909-wide-faces-predict-unethical-behavior.html
According to these sources, some studies allow the cautious conclusion, that narrow faced may be less of a risk to a woman's wish to be treated well, while wide faced men may be more of a hazard.
The first of the two sources also mentions one plausible objection to this conclusion:
"A major objection to the idea that facial features could predict bad behavior, they said, has been that men with such features would swiftly drop out of the gene pool. Presumably, no one would trust them so they would have trouble mating. "
Today I found another source, which is highly interesting in this context. It could indicate, that such men's traits and women's susceptibility to become the victims are indeed dwindling away from the gene pool:
"In a trend that can be identified going back to the mid-1800s, U.S. skulls have gotten bigger, taller and narrower as seen from the front,"
"Over 1,500 skulls were included in the research"
"The average height from the base to the top of the skull in males has increased by 8 millimeters (0.3 inches), the Jantzes found; skull size has grown by 200 cubic millimeters, a space equivalent to a couple of small peas. In females, the corresponding increases are 7 millimeters and 180 cubic millimeters."
The authors are considering different possible reasons for this change without preferring one thereof.
I am wondering and speculating, if the reason could not be a real impact upon the gene pool of both genders, because of the combination of two factors upon women's procreative behavior:
- Women's growing cognitive awareness and intelligence, enhanced by better education, enables them to make wiser choices.
- The availability of appropriate methods enables them to successfully live in accordance with these choices.
1. Wise choices.
Women, who are less prone to blindly follow instinctive urges, but who are instead more careful in their rational and cognitive choice of a man, tend to prefer the caring and decent men over the physically powerful and ruthless studs. If the most agreeable and least hazardous men happen to be predominantly narrow faced, then the measured changes of the skull proportions over the relatively short period of less than two centuries could indicate evolution by sexual selection. It would be the evolution of a more cognitive and less instinctive control of the mating behavior.
Under the presumption, that narrow faced men really are more agreeable and less detrimental to the emotional wellbeing of women, while the wide faced men are greedy and selfish by usurping resources as the better providers for their offspring, the shift in women's choice is a cognitive shift.
It is their shift towards more awareness for being an individual person entitled to correct treatment, therefore refusing to be exposed to bad treatment.
It is a shift away from the acceptance of and submission to being only a womb and to making sacrifices in the favor of procreation, as is the goal of the instincts.
2. Availability of methods.
As long as inconsiderate jerks were able to manipulate and coerce women to have offspring against their wish, they contributed more to the gene pool than did the more considerate men.
2. Availability of methods.
As long as inconsiderate jerks were able to manipulate and coerce women to have offspring against their wish, they contributed more to the gene pool than did the more considerate men.
The modern medical possibilities are allowing women the option to only have wanted children and only with the partner of their choice. This has certainly an impact upon the gene pool. It not only explains a shift in the gene pool of male traits, it also explains the shift in the inherited female trait of the mate preferences.
A woman with the power to decide, with whom she has how many children, is only prone to have as many children as she wishes, when she is satisfied with how she is treated by her wisely chosen mate. Unhappy women, whose instincts have caused their wrong choice of a jerk, are prone to restrict the number of children. Therefore by having more children the women with the genetic predisposition to choose the caring and decent men contribute more daughters with this predisposition to the gene pool.
