sábado, 1 de setembro de 2012

O que sabemos do nosso passado


(...)

A surprising number of these mysteries concern female sexuality. The male orgasm, for example, serves a rather obvious seed-sowing function – but what is the point of its female equivalent? The popular hypothesis that such ecstasy enhances the likelihood of a subsequent pregnancy is, Barash informs us, entirely without evidence. The idea that it might motivate reluctant ladies also seems flawed: other animals don’t require an eruption of bliss in order to continue the family line. Perhaps it is simply a “non-adaptive by-product” – an incidental development to which evolution is indifferent?
Barash doesn’t think so, preferring to believe that it is more important than that. But in what way remains a riddle – and only one of many posed by the female body. Scientists cannot explain, for example, why women have prominent breasts even when they are not suckling children. Other mammals don’t. Yes, of course, men are drawn to these protruding sacks of fat – but why? No one knows, though theories abound.

(...)

(carregar nas passagens acima para ter acesso à totalidade do texto.)



Ensaio de Stephen Cave, no Financial Times, sobre as certezas e as dúvidas do nosso passado evolucionário. Aconselhado pelo Francisco José Viegas - não é ainda rotina imaginá-lo, em primeiro, como o nosso Secretário de Estado da Cultura, mas é bom revê-lo na blogosfera.



Hermenegildo Espinoza

Sem comentários:

Enviar um comentário