Skip to main content

Positive, Negative and Neutral Sexual Selection

Positive sexual selection is the most important and obvious type. It is positive because it involves the promotion and support of a characteristic, be it good looks or ambition, sense of humour or colour. Positive sexual selection is the driving force that results in variety of organisms, as well as the variety of what those organisms make, for example chocolate corn flakes or oats and fruit. This type of sexual selection is found in so many things, a popular example of which is teenage behaviour when teenagers feel the urge to pick things to support, be it a music genre, a sexual orientation, a fashion, a sport, or a club. Positive sexual selection is what fan clubs are made of.

Know when you see something on facebook and you MUST LIKE it? You absolutely must click like? The drive behind that urge is positive sexual selection. You like that and everyone must know. Not because you want them to like you, but because you want them to like that thing. This urge might seem superficial, but in fact it is very primal.

With positive sexual selection, comes negative sexual selection. I suppose this is easy to guess. Negative sexual selection can be exampled by hate groups, protests, and all the rants about how disgusting Marmite is. A very popular form of negative sexual selection is found in politics and religion. You're on a forum, and someone has said something you disagree with. You get a really hot unstoppable urge to argue with them; you don't even know them, but it doesn't matter because you think what they said is so unacceptable it must be challenged. Studies have shown that in fact negative sexual selection is stronger than positive sexual selection. For example, saying "STOP WAR" has more impact than saying "KEEP PEACE". This may be explained by the potential danger of not acting when faced when something threatening. That is, people see it more dangerous if the wrong party gets the vote, than beneficial if the right one does.

Neutral sexual selection is just that, neutral. Nothing good or bad will happen as a result of it. You don't care about your partner being taller or shorter than you because you don't see a benefit or downside to either. Shopping at ASDA or Sainsbury's makes no difference to you, and you don't think it makes a difference to anything else. Maybe even the parties make no difference to you, so voting is pointless.

And finally, why does Facebook not have a dislike button? As mentioned above, negative s.s. is stronger than positive s.s., so in the event of facebook adopting a dislike button, people would get more bothered about topics, posts and comments, which would spur arguments and hard feelings between members, potentially making the facebook experience worse, and leading to real life events facebook may be sued for. Imagine "Boy hangs himself after tens classmates "dislike" photo". To keep things light and... positive, facebook ensures that positive sexual selection (which people generally find enjoyable) dominates the experience, through the like button.

Check back next time for a new topic on alien life, Alien Life II, in which we're going to look at some of the evolutionary principles that sci-fi films such as Resident Evil and the Alien series have used in order to create their characters/monsters.


Popular posts from this blog

By-products of Evolution - why not everything has a purpose

Last time we looked at how certain major adaptations such as hair loss have enabled humans to survive over the millennia in different conditions, and when faced with competition from other species. Not everything about the human body has a specific purpose, though, in the sense that we expect it to. One example of such thing is the philtrum - that little channel leading from the base of your nose to the upper lip. Recent research suggests that this development dates back millions of years, and has been inherited from fish. Apparently, when human embryos develop their face in the womb, all parts of the forehead, mouth, etc come together and fuse where the philtrum is located.

Some adaptations, on the other hand, are no longer relevant not because of their nature, but because the environmental selection pressure for which they evolved has disappeared. For example, an East Asian's typical eyelid shape evolved as a result of higher light intensities in that area of the world, yet the …

The evolution of the human body

In order to be able to look at ourselves in the mirror and be able to answer the question "Why do I look like this?", we must look back to our ancestry and their lifestyle, over a very long period of time. For the purpose of this analysis, let's look at the human versus the neanderthal. Recently there have been found neanderthal genes within the human gene pool, but the two species are different enough to compare, yet not too different (human versus fly would be too different).

As you can see, the construction of the human pelvis and toes is different, and the human has less hair. This results in humans being able to run easily for long distances, in the detriment of short-distance running which we are worse at. We sweat better, so we can do more long-term effort. This feat is essential to better settlements, as we can discover a larger area with potentially better resources. It might seem counterproductive to not be able to run quickly for a short period, when it comes …

4 Reasons Google's Calico Won't "Solve Death"

The on-line world has been taken ablaze by Calico's bid to end ageing, and thus death itself, but is this what they will actually focus on, and will they achieve it?

The fact is ageing will be reversed, and death by "natural causes" will go with it. The questions are "When?" and "By whom?".

Until recently, not a lot was known about the approach Calico would take in this venture dubbed "moonshot thinking" - a term touted by Google as the source of all considerable human progress throughout history. This we don't doubt, but is this what Calico is all about?

CNN's Dan Primack has revealed details about Calico's plan, which hint at a less-than-moonshot thinking approach, and cast a serious question mark on its ability to deliver the punchy TIME headline. Here is why:

1. The man with the idea, Bill Maris, arrived at the conclusion that the root of all death-causing disease is simply ageing itself. Not only is this widely known in the ant…