Reddit mentions of Sexual Selection and the Origins of Human Mating Systems

This is the source for my claim as to mate selection in reality not working like that: https://www.amazon.com/Sexual-Selection-Origins-Mating-Systems/dp/0199559430

it is far more complex than boiling it down to a numbers game based on arbitrary societal values for certain populations. Studies on China's dating scene are different again than the west. Also you just took said values from a different situation again and then applied that to the online scene. The online "dating" scene is largely a sex hookup thing for men which is where this large net of mostly right swipes comes from.

Off the top of my head, and I don't watch many vox videos, the Monogomy video under their Vox explained segment (may 23, 2018) was a stretch to the point of basically lying.

​

" in the source from which Vox sources its testicle size data, the volume Sexual Selection and the Origins of Human Mating Systems (2009), primatologist Alan F. Dixson argues against the ideas Ryan describes regarding sperm competition in humans. Dixson writes that, “the assumption that sperm competition has played a significant role in the evolution of the genus Homo is not supported by extensive comparative studies of the reproductive anatomy and behaviour of extant primates.”

​

Quillete actually did a breakdown of their video: https://quillette.com/2018/06/07/explaining-monogamy-vox/

And I originally read some others that mocked their reading of said studies about monogamy.

Oh dear god this is not what I became a doctor for, hell I'm a doctor doctor, but I'll give this a shot...

So Dixon (not Chuck) argues in "Sexual Selection and the Origins of Human Mating Systems" that penis size correlates with three things - 1) sperm delivery; 2) species size and 3) female reproductive anatomy. That is that the first job of the penis is to get sperm to where it needs to be. So a penis of the appropriate size has to be used. Too short and it doesn't penetrate too far into the vaginal canal. Too long and it misses the vaginal canal entirely.

The second determinant is the size of the species. Of the primates, humans don't really have much difference between average human penis size and our closest cousins the chimpanzees and bonobos. The average chipmanzee penis is around 15cm vs their average body size. Which is similar to humans. And neither chimpanzees nor humans have significantly larger or smaller penises compared to other great apes when accounting for body size.

Finally according to Dixon the penis has to actually fit. Too thin and it doesn't do anything. Too thick and it can't get in. Which Edward Bowman corroborates (sorry this link doesn't have the actual paper. If you really want it, I can grab it from the hospital library).

However, Dawkins and others quasi-refute these arguments. Instead signaling that size and penis anatomy may instead be health related. Lacking a baculum, a human penis relies on hydraulics. Specifically the cardiovascular system. A male unfit for mating - due to age, poor health, etc - will generally have erectile dysfunction. So they won't be capable of mating.

So what does this all have to do with penis size? Well, the overall trend that everyone seems to agree with is that species penis size is dependent not on anything the male has control of, but instead the female of the species. The penis has to fit and be useful for female genitals. If the female of the species doesn't have to pass a human baby through her cervix or vaginal canal, then both will shrink. The running hypothesis for why the human female cervix and vaginal canal is so large compared to other primates has to do with the overall average size of a human baby's head vs other primates. Large cervix means it can fit a large head through. During birth the cervix becomes wider and shorter to help push the head and body through when the uterus starts contractions. If Kryptonian women no longer have to give birth, then there's no reason for them to have larger vaginal canal or cervix. Which also means a larger penis, if for the purpose of sexual pleasure, is also unnecessary as a larger penis for Kryptonian women would be painful or just not fit at all.

So if you assume that Kryptonians have been using the codex for reproductive purposes enough that they've become evolutionarily dependent on it, then the entire species has bred themselves in the direction of smaller female genitals because the females no longer need to give birth. And the males would also need smaller genitals or they just wouldn't fit. I guess this also means all those Bruce/Clark and Tim/Kon writers need to rethink things?