Posted by Skimission at 6/23/08 8:49 a.m.

"Why would you even want to look at another woman when you have me?"

Eve

Posted by rhp6033 at 6/23/08 2:04 p.m.

The male is biologically programmed to notice a female from a distance, so he can persue her. This becomes a bit more obvious if you think in terms of a caveman who is searching for a mate. The things which men find attractive tend to be features which benefit the reproductive process. For example, luxurious hair and teeth indicate good health. Wide hips facilitate childbirth, and large breasts seem to indicate the female is capable of nursing her young. A narrow waste indicates youth and therefore availability (not already claimed by a competing male).

The female, on the other hand, knows that childbirth will bring significant responsibilities, and looks for features which might benefit her more in the long-term. A large, muscular body in the male means he can protect her and her children from harm, and probably supply them all with plenty to eat.

Over the centuries, these features have tended to be bred into our genetic makeup. People without these genetic "urges" tend to not re-produce as successfully as those that do, and therefore lose out in the scramble for genetic survival of the fittist.

Sure, as rational men and women, we don't need these features nearly as much as our caveman ancestors did. And it is true that rational thought can overcome genetically-enduced hormones to some extent. But it's a bit like trying to hold your breath - eventually you have to give in to instinct. Maybe not to act upon those urges, but perhaps to at least take a second look or two.

So when the wife challenges you with "Were you looking at that girl????", perhaps you can respond with "Of course not! I'm just visually oriented, by virtue of my genetic makeup!"

Or maybe not.

Posted by unregistered user at 6/23/08 8:09 p.m.

Mr. Horsey, please speak for yourself, not all guys are like that.

rhp6033, did you just make that whole thing up? How do you know how cavemen lived?

Posted by Ballard Pimp at 6/24/08 9:57 p.m.

David, I just realized that you probably knew an ex-wife of mine at the UW in Communications -- Wanda Adams. She's doing features for the Honolulu Advertiser these days and I think she has a local NPR program. If I'm right, give me a buzz at pedonbio@yahoo.com.

Posted by easystrider at 6/26/08 10:36 p.m.

A woman's breasts have been called her second face. To which most men say, "Second...Huh? Wha's first?"

Posted by unregistered user at 6/27/08 9:01 a.m.

To: unregistered user;

"rhp6033, did you just make that whole thing up? How do you know how cavemen lived?"

I read it in an article somewhere, a few years ago, written by some sociologist, I think. Can't remember any more details than that. How he/she might have come to those conclusions I don't know.

Another article (I think by a different author) explained that men were hunters of larger animals, so they would pursue their query, kill it, and bring it back to camp quickly so that the meat could be shared before it spoiled. Women tended to be hunters and gatherers, so they would spend the days searching among the brush and shrub for nuts, fruits, and edible veggies which they would also bring home to share.

According to that opinion, it explains the differences between modern-day buying habits of men and women. When a man enteres a grocery or clothing store, he is going there to buy something specific, which he will buy and then return home. If he sees something else on the way in or out, he might buy that also, but only if it doesn't divert him from the path to his primary goal. A woman, on the other hand, will browse through the store to see all that is available, comparing items and quality, and bring home whatever seems to best suit her needs - even if her primary reason for the trip is discarded along the way.

Anyway, that's one author's opinion. Seems to be a grain of truth there, but like all such things it is a generalization which can easily be taken too far. I've gotten too old to remember who wrote every article I read, considering I read two or three newspapers and some magazine articles online every day.