The Biology of Love—Not

There is no question that awareness of the often unconscious nature of genetic control is the key toward understanding the forces that each gender is subject to when seeking love and happiness.

Whether men admit it or not, nature seems to have programmed them to desire sexually reserved women as prospects for marriage. They may want to date the other kind, but the girl they can???t get off their mind, is likely the one who is not easy to get.

Radical feminists, with their advocacy of sexual liberation have done women a major disservice. When women today complain that men seem unable to commit, one needs to tell them that: ???they certainly can, but maybe not with you.??? Somehow, someway, men???s genes are looking after their interests and investments, and eagerness on the part of a woman is pushing all the wrong buttons. Clearly sexual eagerness on the female???s part is not always correlated with latter infidelity, but natural selection plays the odds. Somehow, something deep within him is saying that marriage just doesn???t feel right with this accommodating girl. But that other one who is aloof, mysterious, difficult to attain, somehow he can???t get her out of his head; and if there is a chance he might lose her to another man, he hasn???t got a chance of escaping the spell.

This is a worthless op-ed piece, not news or science or fact. Given a choice, a 25 hot young woman will take a 40 something professional over a 27 YO male ONLY if he's in shape. The money is just a bonus, and besides a hookup it's doomed from the start. Young chics flirt with the idea but it's an exception and not the norm for American women to seek out men twice their age. In Latin America, however, it is a completely different story. This story is apropos to America and ONLY America....the rest of the world does things differently and it has nothing to do with DNA.

Plus note one other interesting concept that was omitted for this ridiculous piece.

Culture might make a 20 year old girl become involved with a wealthy old man, but biology will have her in bed with her tennis instructor behind said wealthy mans back.

The scinence in this article is so terrible that it is provacative. Even if the stripper is not emmitting any sex signals (and see the comment above that would indicate that Begley ignored portions of the study), the fact that she is dancing in a more sexy manner when she is ovulating is also a product of evolutionary biology, just on the female side instead of the male side.

The idea that evolution would make the average 25 year old female seek out a male in his 50's is stupid. The 25 year old does not just want a male with status and assets, she wants a partner who can help her raise her children. 200 years ago, the average lifespan of most men was about 33. Evolutionary progress is expressed in mellenia, not decades. So women would certainly not be evolutionaryly programmed to seek to mate with a man who was dead or almost dead.

The average 50 year old man has already had his children, so obviously he is not looking to start a new family. He wants a 40 year old because they have simlar maturity levels and life experiences that he has. If he does want to start a family, you can bet he will be looking in the 25-35 crowd, if not younger.

I could go on, but I will not. Suffice it to say that NEWSWEEK should immediately pull this shabby excuse for an article.

If you build something over a period of time (evolution) aren't you still the creator?? Why can't both ideas live together? Since when is it all or none? God or science. i like to see it as God and science is his lyrical masterpiece.

The thing is, the ideas set forth in this article aren't aimed at rendering the evolutionary explanations obsolete. Rather, they 'vaguely' point out that such approaches can't obviously account for people's choices today. As this should have been the point the author was trying to make, well, she is just thumbing her nose at the evolutionary stance. I think opposing something as broad as evolution takes a much more serious style.

Art is stupid to some but thank God we have theaters and museams and parks and monuments and bentleys rolling and enzos screaming and sirens like Natasha Bedingfield on MTV - God has blessed America and i hope heaven looks alot like this place too. Ms Begley thank you for helping to keep it light and give another piece of art to explore as we go about our daily grind and seek to find some R and R on a Saturday or Sunday side.

This is one of the dumber articles by Ms Begley who seems to excel in dumb articles

This is one of the dumber articles written by Ms Begley ho seems to excel in dumb articles

"All male species are simple, "anything to get laid) we just make it look complex because we have so much anthropocentric baggage traits and artifacts that we carry around."

Funny. i could commentate more with you but need to keep it above board for the sake of ladies. Funny though. Shout out to Alisha Keys - that is some total package - oh yea baby - God knows how to make a masterpiece.

Comment: Interesting observations, nice try, but to quote Buller, of NIU, to question "evolutionary explanations for complex behavior" and think that men, attracted to ovulating females, is complex is like saying that the urge to urinate is too simple to drive; finding a restroom, find the proper one, open the door, check that it is the proper one, fumble withe the zipper, fish through two layers of clothing, (perhaps more complex for te female) pull it out, judge distance, take aim, summon up required pressure, (keep eyes to self), blast away, check for further streams, (self snsing remaining bladder urge, sphincter control, etc. reverse "fishing excercise (two layers ald all that) sense and pull flush handle, make decision about washing hands, wash hands, dry hands, exit "complexly". Yes, a simple biological urge can trigger some pretty complex behaviors. Furthermore (1) There are many similar studies,(this has been going on for at least 30 years) done with photographs of ovulating females, menstruating females, or females in between (word?), and the same with the women behind glass (i.e. no pheremones) and the results were just the same. and (2) males are really, really simple creatures, do you really think that something as simple as slightly engorged lips (whence collegin injections) big boobs (silicone), good hips (read great butt), and skin glow or great hair (not to mention pheremones) doesn't get us excited?? All male species are simple, "anything to get laid) we just make it look complex because we have so much anthropocentric baggage traits and artifacts that we carry around.

Anthropos 1

Fun points. i always like the picture of a stripper being painted. what a creation the female body!! But to pay that kind of $ you must be insane and to have no happy ending you are a punk. Sorry i know it is the in thing to do but if you have every ventured into one of those durty house of tricks you would know that it is a big TEASE. So back to the scientific stuff when a girl is menstrating she is usually not in the most up to teasing mood and may have swollen glands, hormones off-balance etc, which is why women are stronger than men, because they are tested every month while we go along on easy street. Go Hillary!!! But men are pigs and as member of the pig group i recommend staying away from those places. They degrage women, exploit people, get people intoxicated and run their credit card into the thousands FOR WHAT!!! You still have to go home and find a real relationship, but then why even go in the first place. Be satisfied with your wife, girl or whatever and if you find yourself getting crazy you know what to do and dont believe the SCIENTIST who tells you about ocular disorders - that is another lie. Peace out and many happy endings.