I see the Evolutionary psychology is strong in this thread. This is inevitable for this board, at least so it seems (in "sex threads" anyway).
As for me, I'm in no position to be picky, so I'm like whatever....
Surely everyone subscribes to at least a few aspects of evolutionary psychology, no?
As I am a person (AFAIK) and thus included in the description of "everyone", the answer would have to be 'no'.
You honestly don't agree with any aspect of it? Why? I'd like to know why I'm wrong.
Well on the issue of sexual attractiveness it is worth noting how little in human history and life sex has had
conciously to do with reproduction. We are mammals and like mammals we have social sex - the notion of a 'mate' may have little to do with anything.
Furthermore, differences of what defines attractive have changed so much throughout human history and still vary across the world that create rules on this issue seems absurd. (And of course throughout human history whether you were attracted to him/her or not did not matter one fig when it came to your eventual mate(s). There are still large parts of the world that are like this). However, the idea of sexual attractiveness AFAIK seems to be pretty universal - I could give a cod evolutionary explanashun about this. But I could do the same if the opposite happened to be the case. After all, if our 'role' in our lives is solely to reproduce (this idea, though considered Darwinian in some circles, isn't at all really. Creatures don't have purposes) why have this strange pickiness about it?
