From: ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Humans as Physical Creatures.
Date: 29 Sep 92 16:07:30 GMT
Article-I.D.: convex.ewright.717782850
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In <z=+p+zb@lynx.unm.edu> blowfish@carina.unm.edu (rON.) writes:

>In article <ewright.717639272@convex.convex.com> ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright) writes:

>Good riposte :)
>The whole point, though, was to show that We Humans >do< take physical
>appearance seriously. In fact, it has only been in the very recent that
>human culture has taken a turn away from making distinctions based on
>physical appearance- this is called, here in the US at least, "Political
>Correctness".

Huh?  It was just a year or two ago that George Bush appointed Arnold
Schwarzenegger as US fitness "czar."  I don't recall anyone saying that
was politically incorrect.  You don't really believe that Bush chose
Arnold S. over some crawny doctor because of his *mind* do you?


>And again, I'm going to disagree. A question- are you planning on having sexual
>relations any time in your life? Not a put-down- a serious question. If you
>are (or have), then physical characteristics are going to play quite an
>important role, since sex is a physical act. This is part of why people asked
>if you were gay- (again, not a put-down, a serious point) it is a physical
>characteristic if your sexual partner has a penis or a vagina- and if you
>are a heterosexual male, it is going to be reasonably 'important' that your
>sexual partner has the proper plumbing. :)

Sigh.  I wondered how soon someone was going to bring that up again.
I've never said that there aren't physical characteristics that are
important.  Yes, that's one of them.  She also has to have a pulse.
That's a physical characteristic.  It would also help if she lived
somewhere reasonably close by, instead of in the mountains of Tibet.
Location is another physical characteristic.  But I wasn't talking
about any of these things.

I was talking about physical appearance.  "Looks," ya dig?


>While its true that most >insects< use phernomes to attract mates, Mammals,
>in general, don't have that sensitive of an olfactory system to distinguish
>smells like that.

Mammals don't use pheromones, eh?  They're olfactory systems are not
sensitive enough?  Obviously, you've never owned a tomcat.  Does the
term "spraying" ring a bell?  Have you ever wondered why dogs sniff
each other's private parts?

Some researchers have even isolated pheromone-like chemicals from humans,
and at least one perfume company has marketed a product based on them.


>In Mammals that are closer to mankind- apes for example, physical character-
>istics play a very large role in mate selection. 

Read the quote from Wilson's book once again.  The selection
characteristics used by the hominids that man descended from
were hunting skills, political leadership, and toolmaking. If
apes have different criteria, it is not directly relevent.  Since
humans are not descended from apes, we could not have inherited
it from them.
 

>Have I compromised anything by enchancing my appearance or improving my
>non-physical characteristics? No. In fact, I feel better about myself-
>feel better physcially (as well as the added bonuses of being somewhat
>fit, but we'll not talk about that here). I haven't compromised a thing to
>the societal bastards (as I call 'em) who, as you put it (paraphrased, now :)
>'make sure the hunk always gets the girl'.

No, not a thing -- except ceding them the right to set the standards
for how you should run your body.
Newsgroups: soc.singles