First  Prev  1  2  3  4  Next  Last
Men as an afterthought?
949 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Sweating it here...
Offline
Posted 1/1/08
I kinda always wondered if men were just an afterthought on the path of evolution. For instance, females seem to be techincally the ones that are self sufficient, they can reproduce, feed their young, and even fend for themselves since they have a similar body type t men. Also to note, that men were born with these useless nipples. They dont really do anything, nothing comes out of it, why is it there? I would much likely believe that man was first if for example something manly came out of our nipples, like Beer or Gatorade or even ammo( lets really hope not) . Another point to consider in this question is the clitoris, which is analogus to the penis, which came first? If i look at it from this view, it seems that women came first since the penis does nothing but is a DNA deilvery system, futher boosting the fact that women actually "really" come first.

Anyone else here thinks that women were the ones that really came first? Or do u believe in parallel evolution, such that we both man and woman evolved to what we are today at the same time?
4512 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
116 / F / SMILY♥LAND
Offline
Posted 1/1/08
Are you... sexist?
949 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Sweating it here...
Offline
Posted 1/1/08

n_n303 wrote:

i believe in parallel evolution. Where both man and woman evolved at the same time... but hey! beer comming out of a guys nipple would be cool XD


Yes, Yes that would, at least untill your drunk college friends started to suck on it...


Mumii wrote:

Are you... sexist?


Just to clear things up, no i am not. I honestly dont really care. I am pretty much just curious on what people would think on the subject.
4512 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
116 / F / SMILY♥LAND
Offline
Posted 1/1/08

FateT wrote:


Mumii wrote:

Are you... sexist?


Just to clear things up, no i am not. I honestly dont really care. I am pretty much just curious on what people would think on the subject.


Oh, okay. I think they both came out the same time because... yeah... The male helps the female with the reproduction. >.<
9614 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25
Offline
Posted 1/1/08
maybe women did come first...i never really though about it...
3077 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / F / USA
Offline
Posted 1/1/08
hmmm..i haven't really thought about that...maybe i'll agree with the parallel evolution
2923 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M
Offline
Posted 1/1/08
I like to believe that the mammalian ancestors were bisexual creatures, like some plants. And the the differentiation in gender only came about due to specialization.




FateT wrote:

... if for example something manly came out of our nipples, like... or even ammo .



like Tank Girl??

Posted 1/1/08

FateT wrote:

I kinda always wondered if men were just an afterthought on the path of evolution. For instance, females seem to be techincally the ones that are self sufficient, they can reproduce, feed their young, and even fend for themselves since they have a similar body type t men. Also to note, that men were born with these useless nipples. They dont really do anything, nothing comes out of it, why is it there? I would much likely believe that man was first if for example something manly came out of our nipples, like Beer or Gatorade or even ammo( lets really hope not) . Another point to consider in this question is the clitoris, which is analogus to the penis, which came first? If i look at it from this view, it seems that women came first since the penis does nothing but is a DNA deilvery system, futher boosting the fact that women actually "really" come first.

Anyone else here thinks that women were the ones that really came first? Or do u believe in parallel evolution, such that we both man and woman evolved to what we are today at the same time?

judging from this post you sound like a red sock feminist, Why should the mens penis be considered as doing nothing while nipples does something else? I can give you the reason why the penis is like it is, but it'll be too graphic to be pg-13 so send me a pm if you really want to know.
we probably evolved quite evenly and we may also have been sexsless like worms, and then evolved from that, the shared things is most likely from that, the things we do have is things that we don't need, but it doesn't make us die so the genes are stopped.
No need to care what comes first and last, that's only a thing fanatics care about,
37756 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / アメリカ
Offline
Posted 1/1/08
... this is stupid. neither man nor woman came first but at the same time. if you say one came before the other than how did they repopulate. a woman cant give birth without the male and visa versa
468 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M / San Jose California
Offline
Posted 1/1/08

FateT wrote:

I kinda always wondered if men were just an afterthought on the path of evolution. For instance, females seem to be techincally the ones that are self sufficient, they can reproduce, feed their young, and even fend for themselves since they have a similar body type t men. Also to note, that men were born with these useless nipples. They dont really do anything, nothing comes out of it, why is it there? I would much likely believe that man was first if for example something manly came out of our nipples, like Beer or Gatorade or even ammo( lets really hope not) . Another point to consider in this question is the clitoris, which is analogus to the penis, which came first? If i look at it from this view, it seems that women came first since the penis does nothing but is a DNA deilvery system, futher boosting the fact that women actually "really" come first.

Anyone else here thinks that women were the ones that really came first? Or do u believe in parallel evolution, such that we both man and woman evolved to what we are today at the same time?


its parallel they would both have to codevolp from the same species, women rely on men to give birth. to put it simply (like in south park) a couple of retarded monkeys were born, those retarded monkeys created a population and became normal. then they had retarded babies, and so on and so forth until you get early humankind...also genetically creatures have to have similiar enough dna to be able to have children and such that are capable of reproducing. too much variance in genetic code and you cant have a self sufficent population.. so man and women had to coevolve. furthermore and this is probably gonna annoy some one, but men and women are not equal. Men are superior to Women in some ways. Like wise Women are superior to Men in some ways(sorry im caping so ppl read the whole thing) Men have more capability with physical strength, women are more organized and better at finesse. women make better fighter pilots then men...men make better soldiers then women. There are always exceptions to these natural laws....but there are differences between men and women and that means they have different abilities.
3066 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Midwest of The U.S
Offline
Posted 1/1/08
I don't really care I love my rod and it loves me. lol oh yeah and I love the humans that don't have rods either i.e girls. Anyway we need both sexes because sex keeps our genes diverse. I advocate the red queen theory more. It's supposed to explain why there is no one sex. For instance there like aren't a helluva lot of hermaphrodite species because even the defectives can reproduce. So if there are two sexes that would mean that some sort of competition would have to be made to compete for passing on there genes since we can't do it ourselves. So men have to do something to get women to want them. and those men will only go for the fittest women you know. So like I'm just saying that both are needed.
949 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Sweating it here...
Offline
Posted 1/1/08
I glad to see some intelligent discussions here!
So after reading your responses do you mean that both man and woman came from some sort of an androgenous form that had both (probally undeveloped) womans and mans parts? Since, if that is true, that would explain quite a lot of my questions. Such as the nipples and the penis.
468 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M / San Jose California
Offline
Posted 1/1/08

FateT wrote:

I glad to see some intelligent discussions here!
So after reading your responses do you mean that both man and woman came from some sort of an androgenous form that had both (probally undeveloped) womans and mans parts? Since, if that is true, that would explain quite a lot of my questions. Such as the nipples and the penis.

pretty much. a lot of people think we evolved from some kind of monkeynoid(monkeys :D) thing. so if you look at monkeys as an ancestor they have both males and females...so yeah there you have it. oh and just an interesting fact some people also believe that dogs/dolphins are related through evolution...thats an older theory though no idea how much head way was made on that
Posted 1/1/08
Women always cum first
2923 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M
Offline
Posted 1/1/08

FateT wrote:

I glad to see some intelligent discussions here!
So after reading your responses do you mean that both man and woman came from some sort of an androgenous form that had both (probally undeveloped) womans and mans parts? Since, if that is true, that would explain quite a lot of my questions. Such as the nipples and the penis.


Yea. If the mammalian ancestors were indeed bisexual (not androgenous; androgenous means "not clear"), then there wasn't a need for either male or female genitalia. However, specialization is important as well as sexual reproduction so that there will be a transfer of genes and no homogeneity. This is critical as a defense mechanism against diseases and therefore, for long term survival. That is why crossbreeding is important.

Just an added fact: there are theories that say that the human nipples were just remnants of an earlier form. As mammals, we had, like cows still do, 8 mammalian nodes, but only 2 remain.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.