Why do pretty people have more daughters?

It appears that natural selection does help individual genes to spread, by subtly biasing the offspring sex ratio so that beautiful people, who can benefit from having a daughter, do indeed have slightly more daughters than ugly people, who cannot so benefit.

psychologytoday.com - Beautiful People Have More Daughters | Psychology Today

Why did Crush go to jail?

On the latest edition of Grilling JR, Jim Ross discussed Brian Adams, best known as Crush in WWE, being arrested on drug and illegal gun charges...

Last updated Jun 6, 2019

How do you innocently flirt with a guy?

You might feel shy or awkward, but here are some ways to flirt with a guy that can help you get past these. Take his name. Sounds easy, right? ......

Last updated Jun 27, 2022

Do you really know who the “One” is? Your true Soulmate?

Promotion

Physically more attractive parents are more likely to have daughters than physically less attractive parents, both in the United States and in the United Kingdom. In an earlier post, I explain that the logic of the generalized Trivers-Willard hypothesis (gTWH) leads to the prediction that physically more attractive parents are more likely to have daughters than physically less attractive parents. The gTWH proposes that parents who possess any heritable trait which increases the female reproductive success more than the male reproductive success are more likely to have daughters. Physical attractiveness, while advantageous for both boys and girls, is even more beneficial for girls than for boys. Men prefer beautiful women for both long-term and short-term mating, whereas women prefer handsome men only for short-term mating (casual affairs and one-night stands), not for long-term mating, for which other traits, such as wealth and status, become more important.

Both the “sexy son” hypothesis and the good-gene sexual selection theory posit that physically attractive men can increase their reproductive success, not by forming long-term pair-bonded relationships (“marriages”) in which to raise and invest in children, but by having a large number of extrapair copulations with otherwise mated women and cuckolding their mates. So should more attractive parents have more sons instead? Can handsome sons achieve higher reproductive success than beautiful daughters?

Given that the probability of conception per coital act is estimated to be about .03, a man must have 33 extrapair copulation partners (with whom he has sex once each) in order to be able to expect to produce one child (number of potential conception = .99). A man can produce roughly the same number of children with one sexual partner with whom he has regular sex (twice a week) (number of potential conception = .96). It would be very difficult for a man to have more than 30 extra-pair copulation partners in a year, especially in the ancestral environment, where our ancestors lived in a small band of about 150 genetically related individuals (men, women, and children). It would, therefore, be nearly impossible for a physically attractive man to match the reproductive success of a physically attractive woman through only short-term mating. Hence physical attractiveness is more beneficial to girls than to boys. Physical attractiveness of the NCDS respondents is measured at age 7 by their teachers, who choose up to three adjectives from a highly eclectic list of five to describe the children physically: “attractive,” “unattractive,” “looks underfed,” “abnormal feature,” and “scruffy & dirty.” The child is coded as attractive if it is described at all as “attractive,” and it is coded as “unattractive” if it is described at all as “unattractive.” Then, the sex of the respondent’s first child is measured 40 years later, at age 47. As you can see in the following graph, British children who are described by their teachers as “attractive” at age 7 are less likely to have a son as their first child 40 years later than those who are not so described. The proportion of sons among the “attractive” NCDS respondents is .50491, whereas the same proportion among everyone else is .52029.

What zodiac signs are impatient?

The Most Impatient Zodiac Sign, According to Astrologers Libra. Pisces. Gemini. Capricorn. Leo. Aries. Sep 10, 2022

Last updated Sep 23, 2022

How do you touch a boy while hugging?

Wrap one hand behind his back, just above his butt. Place the other hand around his neck so that your fingers rest where his neck meets his...

Last updated Apr 21, 2022

Promotion

The following graph shows that British children who are described by their teachers as “unattractive” at age 7 are more likely to have a son as their first child 40 years later than those who are not so described. The proportion of sons among the “unattractive” NCDS respondents is .52320, whereas the same proportion among everyone else is .50518. Multiple binary logistic regression analysis shows that being physically attractive statistically significantly increases the odds of having a daughter as the first child, net of sex, age at first child, education, social class, earnings, height, and weight. Being physically attractive at age 7 increases the odds of having a daughter by 23 percent or decreases the odds of having a son by 19 percent. Similarly, net of the same control variables, being physically unattractive at age 7 decreases the odds of having a daughter by 20 percent or increases the odds of having a son by 25 percent. The hypothetical average attractive NCDS respondent (who has sample mean values on all of the control variables included in the regression equation) has a probability of having a daughter of p = .50127. In contrast, the hypothetical average unattractive NCDS respondent has a probability of having a daughter of p = .56285. It appears that natural selection does help individual genes to spread, by subtly biasing the offspring sex ratio so that beautiful people, who can benefit from having a daughter, do indeed have slightly more daughters than ugly people, who cannot so benefit.

psychologytoday.com - Beautiful People Have More Daughters | Psychology Today

Is it true if you are thinking about someone they are thinking about you?

There is a rumor that thinking about someone means that they were thinking about you, first, but unfortunately it's just that – a rumor. The thing...

Last updated Nov 2, 2022

What is love in full word?

As stated above, the most common full form of LOVE is 'Long-lasting Original Valuable Emotions'.

Last updated Jan 7, 2021

Promotion

Who are narcissist attracted to?

In fact, narcissists are often attracted to strong, confident, and self-assured women. While this may seem counterintuitive, it is important to...

Last updated Sep 14, 2019

Promotion

Can trees talk to each other?

Trees share water and nutrients through the networks, and also use them to communicate. They send distress signals about drought and disease, for...

Last updated Feb 19, 2021