Trusted, Automoderated users
25,837
edits
Good genes hypothesis: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→Other modern promoters
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
==Other modern promoters== | ==Other modern promoters== | ||
The good genes hypothesis is also promoted by modern (but not traditional) American eugenicists such as [[Edward Dutton]]. They will claim, for example, that female preference for symmetrical faces is an honest signal of genetic fitness, simply because it is a preference today. They contradict themselves though by also implying that incels are overlooked | The good genes hypothesis is also promoted by modern (but not traditional) American eugenicists such as [[Edward Dutton]]. They will claim, for example, that female preference for symmetrical faces is an honest signal of genetic fitness, simply because it is a preference today. They contradict themselves though by also implying that incels are overlooked irrationally by women. | ||
Some, but not all, feminists also promote the good genes hypothesis by insinuating that sexual selection outside of patriarchy is a moral and rational sorter of good and bad genes. Feminists more often take issue with Darwin in general though,<ref>https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/woman-who-tried-take-down-darwin-180967146/</ref> so these overtures are infrequent and often passively expressed in arguments, if at all. | Some, but not all, feminists also promote the good genes hypothesis by insinuating that sexual selection outside of patriarchy is a moral and rational sorter of good and bad genes. Feminists more often take issue with Darwin in general though,<ref>https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/woman-who-tried-take-down-darwin-180967146/</ref> so these overtures are infrequent and often passively expressed in arguments, if at all. | ||