Human devolution through natural selection?

Reading the Shiva Swarodaya while preparing my lunch one day during my first year at University I was surprised to find a section on captivating women (with yogic seduction rather than force). The World Health Organisation identifies this social health need as “d770 Intimate relationships”[1]. My experience of tantric yoga led me to predict that use of Swara yoga to seduce women would probably be akin to using a nuclear weapon for duck hunting in terms the time and energy taken to perfect the technique (develop the weapon) and its potency when deployed. An easier option would be to ask my female flatmate Amy as she cooked pancakes.

“Tell her what she wants to hear” was her response. Do women really prefer to be lied to? Bitter experience leads me to believe the answer is “yes”[2]. The truth may be for example, most heterosexual men do not really care much about what their girlfriends are wearing[3]; it is what is underneath that counts. If a heterosexual man tells you your new hairstyle is great or he likes your new dress, except for in exceptional circumstances he may be being insincere just to illicit a favourable emotional response from you. It might make you feel good when people say nice things about you, but is that really more valuable to you than sincerity? This led me to reflect on possible effects of romantic foolishness on the human genome. What is going to happen if liars are favoured by selection pressure? No wonder we have evolved into a species of liars!

The resultant horrors are globally plain to see. There are even books and courses for men nowadays to teach them how to conceal their true intentions to manipulate female sexual desire[4]. The reverse seems to have been true for a little longer[5]. Combining these two factors it would seem that selection pressure is currently geared towards the evolution of a species of lying fools.

Obviously this note is tongue in cheek and completely disregards nurture, but we learn from our parents. What will we learn if their relationships are built on deceit? What will we then teach our children? This anti-romantic nature of this reflection may seem ugly, but please do not shoot the messenger. As long as selection pressure favours the images portrayed by the Paris Hiltons, Britney Spears and Russel Brands of the world Utopia will be no closer.

I once believed that vulgar displays of wealth or power were the key determinants of male heterosexual competition[6]. According to the ayurvedic model of human occupation such approaches to life are incompatible with long-term happiness or survival[7]. The same can be said of lying and the pursuit of desires. As a follower of yoga I have had to leave it all behind. Insincerity and competition are out of the question, so I accepted my place on the scrap-heap of romance. I was rewarded with my ideal woman. Karma works!

V

References:

1. World Health Organisation (2001) CHAPTER 7 INTERPERSONAL INTERACTIONS AND RELATIONSHIPS, ICF http://www.who.int/classifications/icfbrowser/

2. Venth (2007) Gender role blurring: has it reduced or increased occupational risk? http://www.metaot.com/blogs/venth-3

3. Roseby A. (date lost) Oh brother! Tesco Magazine: 48

4. Clink T. (2004) The Layguide, New York: Citadel Press

5. Fein E., Schneider S. (1995) The Rules. Time-tested secrets for capturing the heart of Mr Right, London: Thorsons

6. Cox T. (2002) Is there really such a big difference between a gold-digger and a sex worker? Not always. Sunday Times Style 29/12/2002:24-25

7. Mailoo V.J. (2007) The Ayurvedic Model of Human Occupation. Asian Journal of Occupational Therapy 6(1):1-13 http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/asiajot/6/1/1/_pdf