thewhitrbbit wrote:
Lintar wrote:
thewhitrbbit wrote:
It's all part of the survival of the fittest.
What is this supposed to mean?

Both sexes are biologically programmed to look for certain characteristics in mates. Many will say they ignore them, but 99% of them are damned liers.
Not all of the characteristics we're "programmed to look for" are physical, though. And some attractors are determined by our experiences (in those cases what's pre-programmed is the way in which certain traits become attractive or unattractive to us, rather than what those traits are). Some things also vary from person to person -- in some cases we look for traits complementary to our own, rather than everyone looking for exactly the same thing. Plus, the physical attraction matters more for the initial infatuation (which is gradually replaced by an emotional bond) than it does in the later phases of a relationship.
And on top of all of that, the whole system is imperfect... it's been refined through evolution, but evolution doesn't always select perfection. "Survival of the fittest" is a myth; it's more like "survival of the adequate". The inadequate doesn't survive, but "good enough" is, well, good enough. (Meaning we may be "programmed" to look for traits that are actually completely irrelevant and arbitrary sometimes, just because that attraction didn't kill us off in the past)