/lit/ - Literature

>>17973427
The evolutionist pseud-eugenics belief in the all-positive "functionality" of sexual attractiveness is very strange, yet I see it every time the subject is mentioned.
Sexual attractiveness has almost fuck all to do with any "functional" aspect. It is often absurd. At best it is "functional" or adapted to conditions completely removed from those of civilization, like women preferring criminals or men with sadistic traits which might have been useful in 50k BC but have been dysgenic since the Neolithic.
Human women sexual selection is just as random as the birds of paradise where males have developed those useless flashy colored wings that makes them easier preys and impede travel.
Male attraction isn't that much better but women do the large majority of the sexual selection even in rapey societies.

>>15506511
Not knowing this classic.
Best boy got rejected by elephemoids.