It’s what’s inside that counts
An article I read today (Facing Their Scars, and Finding Beauty) reminded me of a subject I have been meaning to tackle. We all know that physically attractive people find mates more easily. What would happen to people’s mating strategies if, in the event of a catastrophe such as a nuclear war, an entire population became physically disfigured? Assuming they still had the ability to procreate, would they be able to overcome the physical repulsion? The underlying question, of course, is how important are physical attributes versus social attributes. Kubrick touched upon the subject in Dr. Strangelove, with two characters discussing the rebuilding of the population in the aftermath of nuclear war:
General “Buck” Turgidson: Doctor, you mentioned the ratio of ten women to each man. Now, wouldn’t that necessitate the abandonment of the so-called monogamous sexual relationship, I mean, as far as men were concerned?
Dr. Strangelove: Regrettably, yes. But it is, you know, a sacrifice required for the future of the human race. I hasten to add that since each man will be required to do prodigious… service along these lines, the women will have to be selected for their sexual characteristics which will have to be of a highly stimulating nature.

Activity: Last 10 Weeks
on June 19th, 2006 at 21:50 Quote
Yeah right, but if one is to believe postmodernists, the “inside” is just another surface that one projects to the outside.
on June 22nd, 2006 at 22:30 Quote
Even then, the question remains. Some attributes matter more than others.