fatkidlovescake

Regardless of any way you want to word it, humans are still animals. The difference between animals and humans is that humans have the rationing capacity (allowed by the large beautiful brains evolution provided us) to rise above that. I'm not comparing only comparing humans to bluegill sunfish, I am also contrasting them. As stated, sexual treachery is more hidden in humans, as fertilization takes place internally, not externally. And the drifter fish wouldn't be considered rapist if this translated legitimately into human terms, they would however be considered (and I hate this term but can think of no alternative) dead beat dads. See, the bluegill females know of the drifters, they live in the same ecosystem, in very close proximity, so they know, instinctively and by observation, that even though they lie their eggs for a certain genetic male, all of the eggs may not be their "dream-man's" offspring. Still, they are offspring all the same, thus the cycle of reproduction has been satisfied, for all three parties involved.

But we are not bluegill sunfish, and the cycle of reproduction would be more simple if we were, because all risks are known by all parties, and there is no willing deceit or ill intentions. It is understood that all parties have the same mutual incentive (babies) and that they will all, as individuals assert their genes as they have been programmed to. That's were the divine and eloquent difference is. Humans have the ability to make a personal choice (much like the one you states) that is not only based on instinct but also on other influences. Such as individual environment, personal taste and preference, and the nurturing complex. If you would have been raised by a different family, or would have had different experiences than you did in your life, your potential mate pool would probably be quite a bit different than it is. Not to mention if she likes the same football team or movie genre you do, it allows for a sturdier foundation of common likes, thus a more attractive mate.

And I feel that somewhat we are heading into a discussion of human monogamy as well, and that itself is perceptive. Many people believe that monogamy is actually a socially instilled myth, and therefore not part of evolution, because evolution happens at far too slow of rate to have any relation to social or political norms. I, personally haven't made any real decision about how I feel about monogamy. Though, like the majority of my ancestors, and yours, I have lived a mostly monogamous lifestyle. It's been in our social programming or conditioning for so long, it is what is accepted, and many would say, "Why fix something that isn't broken?" Still, with the number of divorce, dissertation, and single parent systems in our species, maybe something isn't broken, just loose, or out of place.

So much to discuss. I love conversation, thanks for your thoughts.
I also posted this on my blog, considering it wasn't entirely relevant to yours
Cheers!