Interesting graphs and charts department

[Clodfobble]

That's pretty funny. I wonder if previous elections have had the same phenomenon. No matter what, half the country is always unhappy with the result...

[xoxoxoBruce]

What it takes...

[xoxoxoBruce]

Spring sprung...

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

What it takes...

Oof.

One-bedroom condo here.

[xoxoxoBruce]

It may be conformational bias but I find these three charts easy to accept...

[glatt]

Yep.

We're afraid of the stuff we mostly can't control. Cancer, terrorists, murder, etc.

We know how to prevent heart disease, but it's no fun to eat a dry salad for every meal.

[Clodfobble]

Cancer does take a broader age spectrum, though--very few heart attacks happen in your 30s, but we all know people who have gotten cancer in their 30s. It's scarier to think about dying young.

[Glinda]

It just makes you wish you were dead.

[Happy Monkey]

If you've been eating fish.

[BigV]

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

If you've been eating fish.

EW.

[xoxoxoBruce]

In spite of Libertarians...

[xoxoxoBruce]

The never ending analysis speculation about the USA.

[Undertoad]

The main job of all individuals, in all species, plant and animal, is to pass along their DNA.

In humanity, more females pass along their DNA than males. In all human history, there are twice as many women in the DNA record than there are men.

So half the men are out. Some men don't care for sex with women. Some men don't pass along their DNA on a voluntary basis. (But historically, it hasn't been so much of a choice; arguably, we didn't even understand the exact relationship between sex and pregnancy until recently in human history.) Some men don't care for sex at all.

But the biggest reason men don't get to pass along their DNA is that they are rejected by the women. For whatever reason, they don't do the mating dance well, and are not selected.

Today, sometimes, we can see why those men are rejected. Prehistorically, we're not so sure. Here is the most amazing graph on this topic, ever.

On the left, the number of men reproducing their DNA. On the right, the women.



8,000 Years Ago, 17 Women Reproduced For Every One Man

It turns out that, after the advent of agriculture, human behavior suddenly and radically changed... on every continent. Rather suddenly, the women became highly selective. Suddenly it was really rare for a man to qualify.

(It's like middle school all over again...)

If you read the article you will find that they have theories about why this is so, but nobody really knows!! All they know is that it's the first marker that human culture affected evolution.

[Undertoad]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

8,000 Years Ago, 17 Women Reproduced For Every One Man

If you read the article you will find that they have theories about why this is so, but nobody really knows!! All they know is that it's the first marker that human culture affected evolution.

Well, that took a month.

ScienceAlert: "Something Weird Happened to Men 7,000 Years Ago, And We Finally Know Why"

... within a clan, women could have married into new clans, while men stayed with their own clans their entire lives. This would mean that, within the clan, Y chromosome variation is limited.

However, it doesn't explain why there was so little variation between different clans. However, if skirmishes wiped out entire clans, that could have wiped out many male lineages - diminishing Y chromosome variance.

Computer modelling have verified the plausibility of this scenario. Simulations showed that wars between patrilineal clans, where women moved around but men stayed in their own clans, had a drastic effect on Y chromosome diversity over time.

It also showed that a social structure that allowed both men and women to move between clans would not have this effect on Y chromosome diversity, even if there was conflict between them.

This means that warring patrilineal clans are the most likely explanation, the researchers said.

Wall of nerd shit! Break it down:

Only sons of Anthony are allowed in clan A
Only sons of Barry are allowed in clan B
Women can go between clans (because they are whores property not warriors)
Clan A wipes out entire clan B
Now there is genetic diversity of women but not of men

It happens at the development of agriculture, because that is the point where clans/tribes stabilize and become much larger, and longer-lived.

[Clodfobble]

I don't buy the notion that women were more selective. This looks to me like a man-vs-man issue, as it almost always has been throughout history. Harems, for example, were not an example of women being selective; they were an example of one man having more power than the rest. Same with the sister-wives in traditional Mormon culture. Evolutionarily, women seek safety and food for themselves and their children before sexual satisfaction. So if one man beats all the others into submission--either physically or economically--the women don't really have a choice. They're already completely beaten both physically and economically (we don't know for sure about 8,000 years ago, of course, but I think it's fair to extrapolate from the last 2,000 years of recorded history).

The answer, of course, is to give the women all the money and power. Then you would see the most egalitarian sexual distribution possible.