So, a few days ago, a new research paper on The Evolution of Ejaculation Strategies was tossed off, wiped clean and mailed to American Naturalist for publication in September. The paper has some very interesting observations to make about the ejaculatory habits of certain species of animals, specifically the domestic fowl and the Arctic charr (pictured below). In a nutshell, when the more attractive males of each species mate, they do so often, and they apportion fewer sperm to each partner in order ‘to maximise their chances of producing offspring across a range of sexual partners’. Conversely, mating much less frequently, the less attractive males may choose to allocate more sperm to each union, thus increasing their chances of becoming a daddy. And that, so far, is about as far as they’ve got. Sam Tazzyman is one of the authors of the paper and a member of CoMPLEX, which, standing as it does for the Centre for Mathematics and Physics in the Life Sciences and Experimental Biology, is one of the worst acronyms in the history of science. Tazzyman hopes to give over further study to trying to discover whether this in any way affects female behaviour. Deep down he knows it probably doesn’t, but a man’s got to make a living. The problem with this study – if you’re an editor of a tabloid, for example – is that it has absolutely no application to human society. Tazzyman is quite clear about this: ‘How this work applies to humans and other primates is not yet known.’ But then again, if you are the editor of a tabloid, you’re also professionally obliged to never let the facts stand in the way of a story. Aah, a textbook example of how to turn a fairly dull scientific finding into a slightly prurient human interest story. The article begins, ‘Uglier men with fewer notches on their belts are likely to be more productive between the sheets, it is claimed.’ Yes, claimed by you, you ignorant hack! The main problems with this giant leap from charr and fowl to modern man are as follows...
Tuesday, 14 July 2009
The Evolution of Ejaculation Strategies :: The Truth About Fowl and Charr and How It Probably Has Absolutely No Bearing on Human Relations
...
My God, what are they? If you would like to read the rest of this awesome and educational article, Stan recommends you go here and purchase a copy of The Little Book of Shame. Not only does it contain the article you're currently reading, it also contains around 50 others, and all for the incredible price of whatever price it happens to be at the moment. You lucky thing you.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
13 comments:
The sad thing is, although you are of course right in general about discernment and all that stuff...
There will be women out there so desperate for a baby that they're blind to all other factors, and they'll be clutching right now at this straw. Surfing the internet even, for "ugly blokes".
Better dig out your chastity belt.
CoMPLEX may be one of the worst acronyms and poor old Sam Tazzyman has one of the most amusing surnames. They make a lovely pair.
Why (oh why) do people ALWAYS assume ALL women want babies? I am a woman. I have never wanted a baby. I will never want a baby. Pregnancy makes me feel nauseous and the smell of baby powder makes me ill. New babies make me run in the opposite direction.
I am not alone. There are lots of women like me. We are the happy child-free.
Please, some women are just looking for a good bloke to talk to, regardless of harmonious facial arrangements or sperm quality...
Lose or loose sperm? What's the reply number for the ad? Has potential.
AnnAnon
BS, you reckon? Wow. You don't have much faith in humanity, do you? You're probably right though.
Yeah, AD, I quite agree. Sam Tazzyman, Sam Tazzyman, the ever so slightly jazzy man.
Whoa, Shima. Calm yourself down, petal. You know what you need, don't you?
AA, loose, the verb to loose, as in 'set free' or 'release'. 'Loose the hounds, Hawkins!' That kind of thing.
Also, how did they judge the attractiveness of the fish involved in the study?
If anyone makes a pun on the word 'scale' I will sob.
"I, for example, have not had sexual intercourse in over six months, but I’m prepared to wager that in that period, I’ve produced and disseminated twice as much procreative milk as –"
And you know the two best things about masturbation...
1)You don´t have to look your best.
2)You don´t have to talk to yourself afterwards.
:)
This line: My sperm’s been like gruel dregs ever since I got broadband - just made me spit tea on my keyboard! Good thing it wasn't wine - hate wasting wine!
Whore Their Mimsy To The Nearest Gargoyle...
Not my absolute favourite Jethro Tull album from the early 70s, but it has its moments.
"You don't have much faith in humanity, do you?"
Only some women. In general, like I said, discernment, yadda yadda. But, you know. Some people.
And ALL people, when really desperate in some direction or other, will start being a bit... less sensible than otherwise. Desperation has certainly made me do stupid things. Many times. Oh dear.
But of course, many women don't want babies at all. And all power to their elbows. I jealous.
"My sperm’s been like gruel dregs ever since I got broadband"
I like this too, but am intrigued. Does low-quality porn generate low-quality sperm? Seriously. I need to know.
Keen as I am to be heavily pregnant in time for my PhD viva (thus encouraging the sympathy vote) I'm not sure I've quite reached the stage of allowing myself to be impregnated by an ugly fish. Although given the current state of affairs, it's either the immaculate conception or relying on my own wit.
I think I'll take the fish.
or "ever so slightly jizzy man" might be more appropriate.
I'm with 'Shimacat'....but regardless of intent I laughed like a drain at all this! ;o)
Post a Comment