>>27205115No I dont. I'd actually like you to explain it to me using certified sources in AMA reference style.
>>27205161Modern day societal engineering has changed roles to a degree, yes, but for the most part, most of what is desirable for humans ultimately comes down to women looking for men who are strong and resourceful enough to provide and care for them and their children, whereas men look for women who are healthy and look suitable for giving birth to and raising many children.
This is why fat-genes are around because for the longest time, being fat indicated that not only did you have a large amount of food (meaning you could share some), but that you were also well-off and could afford to take care of your companion. Women with big tits and big hips were seen as attractive because it signaled that they were good at birthing and raising kids, and women who were pale and thin were seen as sickly and incapable of raising or birthing children safely.
Now in nature, it is up to the female to care for the young, so this means that the male has to go out and acquire food. For a species like humans, this means that the males eventually adapted to the hunter lifestyle and those individuals who had the current traits of "masculinity" were those who were most successful acquiring food. Women, meanwhile, developed skills for raising and caring for young, but also for the gathering tasks since that was something the women could do since it was safer than hunting and still acquire food for the group. So women adapted along those lines as well.
It's why men have more muscle tone, women have more %body fat, and why women also have improved empathy compared to men since they had to interact with other humans more than men did and the best caretakers were the most empathetic and passed those genes on.
