Food babies

Insight into vegan menopause.
“Drinking whole fat milk and eating ice cream appears to be better for women trying to become pregnant than a diet consisting of low-fat dairy products such as skim milk and yogurt, according to new research published in Human Reproduction journal. Researchers in the United States have found a link between a low-fat dairy diet and increased risk of anovulatory infertility.”
You don’t have to tell me twice to eat ice cream, mate.
“Further, lactose (the main carbohydrate in milk and dairy products) may not affect fertility within the usual range of intake levels in humans.”
Good to know.
“Consumption of iron supplements and nonheme iron from other sources may decrease the risk of ovulatory infertility.”
Yes, my favourite iron supplement is called steak. Recommend.
Especially with three times “too much” garlic butter.
“Folic acid appeared to explain part of the association between multivitamin supplement use and risk of ovulatory infertility.”
Sorry but I don’t trust Crunchy Nut cornflakes with the fate of my future children’s health.
“Dairy consumption was not significantly correlated with PCOS. However, after adjustment for confounders, there was an direct relationship between milk consumption and risk of PCOS.”

“the results showed that the intake amounts of Ca, Mg, D vitamin, dairy, fruits and nuts and seeds were remarkably low among the women with PCOS.”

What are they living on, Oreos?

“some evidence on the decreased amount of adiponectine, calcium, D vitamin in the patients suffering from PCOS with having a higher thyroglobulin”

Vegans.

“Numerous studies have demonstrated the association between the diet and its components and risk factors developing various diseases.[] However, previous studies did not address the relationship between nutrition choices and type of diet chosen by the patients.[]”
“According to existing data, women trying to achieve pregnancy are encouraged to increase consumption of whole grains, omega-3 fatty acids, fish, and soy and to reduce consumption of trans fats and red meat. In addition, a daily multivitamin that contains folic acid before and during pregnancy may not only prevent birth defects, but also improve the chance of achieving and maintaining a pregnancy. In contrast, there is limited evidence supporting an association betweenvitamin D and human fecundity outcomes despite promising evidence from nonhuman studies.
Yeah because that’s relevant.
Questions for future research included the roles of other types of fat (especially omega-6 and monounsaturated fats) and protein (especially white meat and seafood) on female fertility; particular attention should also be paid to exposure to environmental contaminants in foods. Although much work remains, this review accrued best available evidence to provide practical dietary recommendations for women trying to conceive.”
Bolded valuable parts.
“One approach to minimize the impact of anovulation on fertility is supplementation with progesterone during recruitment, selection and final stages of development of the preovulatory follicle. It is suggested that a minimum of 2.0 ng/mL of progesterone is needed during growth of the preovulatory follicle to achieve P/AI similar to that of cows growing the preovulatory follicle during diestrus.”
But one of the Pills is that….
Does taking that Pill increase odds of pregnancy?
Big if true.
The literature on the relationship between diet and human fertility has greatly expanded over the last decade, resulting in the identification of a few clear patterns. Intake of supplemental folic acid, particularly at doses higher than those recommended for the prevention of neural tube defects, has been consistently related to lower frequency of infertility, lower risk of pregnancy loss, and greater success in infertility treatment. On the other hand and despite promising evidence from animal models, vitamin D does not appear to exert an important role in human fertility in the absence of deficiency.
But most people are deficient….
That’s like saying you can stand outside normally -except when there’s a hurricane.
And there’s currently a hurricane.
Antioxidant supplementation does not appear to offer any benefits to women undergoing infertility treatment, but it appears to be beneficial when it is the male partner who is supplemented.
Duh.
Reduce genetic load.
However, the available evidence does not allow discerning which specific antioxidants, or at which doses, are responsible for this benefit. Long-chain omega-3 fatty acids appear to improve female fertility, although it remains unclear to what extent contamination of shared food sources, such as fish with high levels of environmental toxicants, can dampen this benefit.
Comforting.
Eat this mercury (sushi fad) it’s good for your baby!
Lastly, adherence to healthy diets favoring seafood, poultry, whole grainsfruits, and vegetables are related to better fertility in women and better semen quality in men.
Could you be a little more specific?
You just named, like, most food.
They’re paid with our taxes, daylight robbery.
The cumulative evidence has also piled against popular hypotheses.
I doubt that.
Sounds like someone wants a juicy research grant.
Dairy and soy, once proposed as reproductive toxicants, have not been consistently related to poor fertility.
Because you refuse to test them separately.
If only a group ate one and not t’uther.
CONSISTENTLY.
In fact, soy and soy supplements appear to exert a beneficial effect among women undergoing infertility treatment.
Many have low estrogen, next!
Giving people with scurvy vitamin C helps! Next!
Similarly, because data from large, high-quality studies continue to accumulate, the evidence of a potentially deleterious effect of moderate alcohol and caffeine intake on the ability to become pregnant seems less solid than it once did.
But potentially, if you can’t put down the coffee or wine, Barbara, maybe you shouldn’t be having kids? Same goes for men without the energy. Now. Without kids.
Why do narcs consider children a human right?
Sort your energy level out BEFORE kids, at least?
While a complete picture of the role of nutrition on fertility is far from complete, much progress has been made. The most salient gaps in the current evidence include jointly considering female and male diets and testing the most consistent findings in randomized trials.
Fuck, men influence pregnancy? What witchcraft is this?
Their only biological contribution is determined by things that occurred in the years before conception?
Say it isn’t so.
What term could possibly exist to describe this Darwinian fitness between men?
Hold men responsible for their bad habits affecting their innocent child’s health outcomes and literal lifespan and I might be impressed.
Posting will be patchy because of my feelings.

Waist-Hip Ratio and female beauty

The sexual dimorphism for this metric is obviously lowest on Asians.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8366421

Evidence is presented showing that body fat distribution as measured by waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) is correlated with youthfulness, reproductive endocrinologic status, and long-term health risk in women. Three studies show that men judge women with low WHR as attractive. Study 1 documents that minor changes in WHRs of Miss America winners and Playboy playmates have occurred over the past 30-60 years. Study 2 shows that college-age men find female figures with low WHR more attractive, healthier, and of greater reproductive value than figures with a higher WHR. In Study 3, 25- to 85-year-old men were found to prefer female figures with lower WHR and assign them higher ratings of attractiveness and reproductive potential. It is suggested that WHR represents an important bodily feature associated with physical attractiveness as well as with health and reproductive potential. A hypothesis is proposed to explain how WHR influences female attractiveness and its role in mate selection.

Hello sexual selection, tied intimately to natural selection.

PDF here: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/05d6/0e201efb208e8561641d13df30fc6ba3bc1a.pdf

also connected to “desire and capability for having childrenp7 or 299.

so K-type women may have better WHR.

Normal weight women have the most positive attributes associated.

Overweight category was universally unattractive.
It’d be nice to see a male study on this. I think Western women would want more children if fewer men were obese.

Why Asians are considered youthful but not sexy (they’d usually fall in the underweight group):

The variables of attractiveness, sexiness, and good health were located close to each other, suggesting that subjects perceived them to be closely related.

Attributes of desire and capability for having children were located close to each other in the solution space but farther from attractiveness, sexiness, and good health, implying that subjects did not perceive a great similarity between these two sets of attributes.

Finally, the attribute of youthfulness was located alone and away from both sets of other attributes. Thus, subjects apparently did not perceive youthfulness to be related to any other measured attributes of good health, sexiness, attractiveness, and desire and capability for having children.

So there’s that. Nobody’s jealous.

Figure N7 was located closer to attractiveness, sexiness, and good health as well as desire and capability for having children than any other Figure.

Normal weight for frame (and race) + most nubile WHR would make sense.
More of those genes survived.

Figure N9 was located closest to desire and capability for having children, whereas Figure N8 was located between Figure N7 and Figure N9. The figure N10 was grouped along with overweight figures, which were not perceived to be closely associated with any of the attributes under investigation. Underweight female figures, U7 and U8, were associated only with youthfulness. However, underweight figures with high WHR (U9 and U10) were perceived as neither youthful nor healthy, in spite of the fact that their depicted body weight was quite similar to figures with lower WHR.

Women with an atrocious WHR (boy hips, no waist) and under or overweight for their skeleton are objectively unattractive from an evolutionary standpoint. This would apply whether it’s a Jap, a Ruskie or an American.

Stop calling sexy science ‘racist’ because it doesn’t share your fetish.

This chart drags you harder than I ever could.

Your Asian girlfriend with the boy hips is approximately as attractive to the world as the average WHR white fat chick. That’s your level, accept it.

It’s also a fact we cannot accurately perceive attractiveness of the racial outgroup as well as our own, so an awareness of ingroup flaws changes nothing.

Most modern women straight up don’t look healthy, whether they’re American, European or, yes, Asian.

Stop trying to make boy hips = sexy happen. It’s not going to happen.

Look at the damn gradient on that underweight thing. The solution to fat women isn’t anorexia. That also suggests bad genes. In fact, at least the fat percentage on slightly overweight 0.7 WHR women suggests femininity and fertility.

“Overall, it seems that subjects inferred reproductive capability from body fat”

What does a foetus feed from?

“Thus, it seems that although WHR is related to health and attractiveness, body weight is perceived to be related to reproductive capability”

Obviously.

“As a group, underweight figures were assigned the lowest reproductive capability, followed by overweight figures and then normal weight figures.”

Suck on that, soyboys.

You actually tend to downgrade. That’s why the Democrat-voting soyboys all want an Asian girlfriend and expressly don’t want kids with it.

“Overall, it appears that both fatness and thinness are perceived as unattractive, and such figures are not perceived as having especially high reproductive potential. “

Not womanly. Remember that word? This:

Not girly, not sexy, not cute, not hot. Womanly.

You can’t discuss women in a reproductive, evolutionary context without it.

Thus, consistent with the present findings, men did not find thin or underweight figures attractive.

If you only care for other male opinions.

There is some evidence that suggests that being extremely underweight or overweight can have adverse effects on female reproductive functions.

Ya don’t say?

A critical body mass has been shown to be significantly related to the onset of menstrual cycle and its maintenance (Frisch & McCarthur, 1974), although recent evidence (DeRidder et al., 1990) suggests that it is the body fat distribution, rather than body fat mass or body weight, that is related to early pubertal development.

Distribution varies by race.

Africans are the most pronounced in women then Europeans shapely but delicate then Asians last – no shape, very yang flesh (broad but flat or full in the middle like cortisol fat) and almost nothing to distribute.

Am I imagining all of this?

Underweight females (15% below ideal body weight) have been reported to have a higher incidence of oligomenorrhea (menses 35 days or more apart) and amenorrhea and to have a higher prevalence of ovu-latory infertility than normal weight females (Green, Weiss, & Daling, 1986).

Underweight women also give birth to infants who are small and growth delayed, and such infants often have permanently impaired intellectual and physical development (Supy, Steer, McCusker, Steele, & Jacobs, 1988).

Menstrual dysfunction and ovulatory infertility also occur more often in females who are 20% above ideal body weight (Green et al., 1986). Morbid obesity in females with high WHR has been shown to increase the degree of androgenicity (increased percentage of free testosterone) and associated menstrual and ovulatory problems (Kirschner & Samojilik, 1991). Thus, the reproductive success of a woman may be low in spite of a high level of fat deposits if the regional distribution of fat is not appropriate, that is, gynoid.

=Womanly.

Finally, the finding that underweight figures were assigned high rankings for youthfulness but not for attractiveness (or other attributes related to reproductive potential) is difficult to reconcile with some evolutionarily based mate selection hypotheses.

Normal men aren’t pedos.

Youthfulness and health have been proprosed as absolute criteria for female attractiveness (Symons, 1987).

Stick with health.

Health has good or bad, you have no negative way to assess youth e.g. immature.

Features of physical appearance associated with youth supposedly provide the strongest and most reliable cues for female reproductive potential. The present finding illustrates that the relationship of youthfulness and attractiveness is quite complex.

Not really.

A woman who is judged to be attractive is also found to be youthful; however, youthfulness alone does not make a woman attractive. Apparently, youthfulness is a necessary, but not a sufficient condition, for determination of female physical attractiveness.

crazed pointing-

also, don’t try to chalk this up to taste:

“Furthermore, if the ideal of female attractiveness is arbitrary and ever changing, no evidence of transgenerational stability in the meaning of WHR should be found, as older men are more likely to be exposed to different ideals of attractiveness than are younger men.”

but

“Older men did not associate health with underweight figures, including those with lower WHR.”

TLDR: Pedos are wrong. Underweight, waistless wonders are not attractive.

Study 2, rubbing salt in that fact.

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0009042

Optimal Waist-to-Hip Ratios in Women Activate Neural Reward Centers in Men

Secondary sexual characteristics convey information about reproductive potential. In the same way that facial symmetry and masculinity, and shoulder-to-hip ratio convey information about reproductive/genetic quality in males, waist-to-hip-ratio (WHR) is a phenotypic cue to fertility, fecundity, neurodevelopmental resources in offspring, and overall health, and is indicative of “good genes” in women. Here, using fMRI, we found that males show activation in brain reward centers in response to naked female bodies when surgically altered to express an optimal (∼0.7) WHR with redistributed body fat, but relatively unaffected body mass index (BMI). Relative to presurgical bodies, brain activation to postsurgical bodies was observed in bilateral orbital frontal cortex. While changes in BMI only revealed activation in visual brain substrates, changes in WHR revealed activation in the anterior cingulate cortex, an area associated with reward processing and decision-making. When regressing ratings of attractiveness on brain activation, we observed activation in forebrain substrates, notably the nucleus accumbens, a forebrain nucleus highly involved in reward processes.

These findings suggest that an hourglass figure (i.e., an optimal WHR) activates brain centers that drive appetitive sociality/attention toward females that represent the highest-quality reproductive partners. This is the first description of a neural correlate implicating WHR as a putative honest biological signal of female reproductive viability and its effects on men’s neurological processing.

Quality.

Study 3

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0018506X08002298

Men report stronger attraction to femininity in women’s faces when their testosterone levels are high

Many studies have shown that women’s judgments of men’s attractiveness are affected by changes in levels of sex hormones. However, no studies have tested for associations between changes in levels of sex hormones and men’s judgments of women’s attractiveness. To investigate this issue, we compared men’s attractiveness judgments of feminized and masculinized women’s and men’s faces in test sessions where salivary testosterone was high and test sessions where salivary testosterone was relatively low.

This is why we need studies on men too.

Men reported stronger attraction to femininity in women’s faces in test sessions where salivary testosterone was high than in test sessions where salivary testosterone was low. This effect was found to be specific to judgments of opposite-sex faces. The strength of men’s reported attraction to femininity in men’s faces did not differ between high and low testosterone test sessions, suggesting that the effect of testosterone that we observed for judgments of women’s faces was not due to a general response bias. Collectively, these findings suggest that changes in testosterone levels contribute to the strength of men’s reported attraction to femininity in women’s faces and complement previous findings showing that testosterone modulates men’s interest in sexual stimuli.

Study 4

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886906004995

Beauty is in the eye of the plastic surgeon: Waist–hip ratio (WHR) and women’s attractiveness

Attractiveness conveys reliable information about a woman’s age, health, and fertility. Body fat distribution, as measured by waist-to-hip ratio (WHR), is a reliable cue to a woman’s age, health, and fertility, and affects judgment of women’s attractiveness. WHR is positively correlated with overall body weight or body mass index (BMI). Some researchers have argued that BMI, rather than WHR, affects judgments of female attractiveness. To evaluate the role of WHR, independent of BMI, we secured photographs of pre- and post-operative women who have undergone micro-fat grafting surgery. In this surgery, surgeons harvest fat tissue from the waist region and implant it on the buttocks. Post-operatively, all women have a lower WHR but some gain weight whereas others lose body weight. Results indicate that participants judge post-operative photographs as more attractive than pre-operative photographs, independent of post-operative changes in body weight or BMI. These results indicate that WHR is a key feature of women’s attractiveness.

Duh.

Let’s look historically. Study 5

https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/72/6/1436/4729453

Trends in waist-to-hip ratio and its determinants in adults in Finland from 1987 to 1997

Background: Although abdominal obesity has been shown to be an important risk factor for cardiovascular disease and a variety of other diseases, secular changes in fat distribution in populations have rarely been documented.

Objective: Our objective was to assess trends in waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) in the Finnish population during a 10-y period. In addition, we investigated the associations of WHR with body mass index (BMI), age, education, and lifestyle factors.

Design: Three independent cross-sectional surveys were carried out at 5-y intervals between 1987 and 1997. Altogether, 15096 randomly selected men and women aged 25–64 y participated in these surveys.

Results: The WHR increased in both men and women during the 10-y period (P< 0.0001). In men, the strongest upward trend took place in the first 5-y period and then seemed to plateau; in women, the WHR continued to increase into the 1990s. In both sexes, the most prominent increase was observed in subjects aged ≥45 y. The WHR increased in all education-level groups, the lowest WHR being among those with the highest education. Age (18% in men, 12% in women) and BMI (33% in men, 25% in women) accounted for most of the variation in WHR, whereas only 3% was explained by education and lifestyle factors.

Conclusions: Abdominal obesity is a growing problem in Finland, especially in persons aged ≥45 y. These adverse changes in body shape continued to take place, particularly in women, in the 1990s.

Something in the food?

More history, prehistoric. Study 6

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0123284

Preferred Women’s Waist-to-Hip Ratio Variation over the Last 2,500 Years

The ratio between the body circumference at the waist and the hips (or WHR) is a secondary sexual trait that is unique to humans and is well known to influence men’s mate preferences. Because a woman’s WHR also provides information about her age, health and fertility, men’s preference concerning this physical feature may possibly be a cognitive adaptation selected in the human lineage. However, it is unclear whether the preferred WHR in western countries reflects a universal ideal, as geographic variation in non-western areas has been found, and discordances about its temporal consistency remain in the literature. We analyzed the WHR of women considered as ideally beautiful who were depicted in western artworks from 500 BCE to the present. These vestiges of the past feminine ideal were then compared to more recent symbols of beauty: Playboy models and winners of several Miss pageants from 1920 to 2014. We found that the ideal WHR has changed over time in western societies: it was constant during almost a millennium in antiquity (from 500 BCE to 400 CE) and has decreased from the 15th century to the present. Then, based on Playboy models and Miss pageants winners, this decrease appears to slow down or even reverse during the second half of the 20th century. The universality of an ideal WHR is thus challenged, and historical changes in western societies could have caused these variations in men’s preferences. The potential adaptive explanations for these results are discussed.

Should’ve controlled for race.

Why not look at male WHR? Plus sperm health? Found:

https://www.drelist.com/blog/bmi-waist-circumference-semen-quality/

  • The volume of ejaculate decreases in a linear fashion with increasing BMI (suggesting an inverse relationship).
  • The sperm quality and viability declines with increasing waist circumference.
  • Investigators also discovered that quality of semen decreases (such as sperm viability, motility, semen volume) with increasing body size; however, no relationship was observed between sperm DNA fragmentation index and physical activity or obesity.

Latter requires time.

Various research and clinical studies suggests that subfertility in men is multifactorial i.e. several factors can impact the quality of reproductive health.

  • Abnormal sperm production: Study conducted by Jensen and associates (2) suggested that abnormal BMI is very strongly linked to impaired sperm production. One of the many reasons is, abnormal metabolism of testosterone (which plays a key role in the production of healthy and viable sperms).
  • Abdominal obesity and risk of metabolic disorders: According to a new study reported in the Human Reproduction (3), investigators provided statistical evidence that abnormal BMI and abdominal obesity is very strongly linked to a number of health issues (such as cardiovascular dysfunction, atherosclerosis, type 2 diabetes, hypertension and others). Needless to say that these health issues have a deleterious effect on the sexual health regardless of the body-mass index (or BMI).
  • Obesity, physical activity and testosterone: Testosterone levels tends to decline in males who have a sedentary lifestyle. Various research and clinical studies indicates that aerobic activity or exercise can improve testosterone metabolism in males significantly.

1. Eisenberg, M. L., Kim, S., Chen, Z., Sundaram, R., Schisterman, E. F., & Louis, G. M. B. (2014). The relationship between male BMI and waist circumference on semen quality: data from the LIFE study. Human Reproduction, 29(2), 193-200.

2. Jensen, T. K., Andersson, A. M., Jørgensen, N., Andersen, A. G., Carlsen, E., & Skakkebæk, N. E. (2004). Body mass index in relation to semen quality and reproductive hormones among 1,558 Danish men. Fertility and sterility, 82(4), 863-870.

3. Hammiche, F., Laven, J. S., Twigt, J. M., Boellaard, W. P., Steegers, E. A., & Steegers-Theunissen, R. P. (2012). Body mass index and central adiposity are associated with sperm quality in men of subfertile couples. Human reproduction, 27(8), 2365-2372.

Yet they don’t tell men this information.

Back to women

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24789138

Cross-cultural variation in men’s preference for sexual dimorphism in women’s faces.

Both attractiveness judgements and mate preferences vary considerably cross-culturally.

Racially.

We investigated whether men’s preference for femininity in women’s faces varies between 28 countries with diverse health conditions by analysing responses of 1972 heterosexual participants. Although men in all countries preferred feminized over masculinized female faces, we found substantial differences between countries in the magnitude of men’s preferences. Using an average femininity preference for each country, we found men’s facial femininity preferences correlated positively with the health of the nation, which explained 50.4% of the variation among countries. The weakest preferences for femininity were found in Nepal and strongest in Japan. As high femininity in women is associated with lower success in competition for resources and lower dominance, it is possible that in harsher environments, men prefer cues to resource holding potential over high fecundity.

Asia is weird for dimorphism studies.

Hence the focus on health.

While the economy is bad, it isn’t surprising men prefer manly looking women.

It’s temporary. There’ll be a flood of divorces as the economy improves. Men will suddenly see how mannish the wife has been and be repulsed. Menopause also makes women look more mannish, including higher WHR. So much for a youth argument there.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5177465/pdf/nihms827194.pdf

Factors Underlying the Temporal Increase in Maternal Mortality in the United States

They don’t say more non-white mothers or more mixed race babies, so it’s wrong. They guess.

Female fertility doesn’t encourage cheating

Moving on to correct an old, old error. I’m sick of seeing it. I went out of my way to find the citation to do this.

There’s one study still going round, being cited, that is absolute bull.

No, women aren’t likelier to cheat when fertile. What sort of Lilith shit is this?

Quite the opposite.

http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/comm/haselton/webdocs/EHB.pdf
It’s been debunked, for many years.

If you can’t read/understand beyond the abstract.

“Women’s desire for their own partners did not differ significantly between high and low fertility sessions”.

This happened when they actually tested what was only suggested (to get published) in the previous study, that has never been replicated.

If anything high fertility makes her more interested in her mate, which matches literally all the evobio on the topic, including Trivers and the fact that overwhelmingly most fathers are the biological fathers of their children. The exception is a forced match (arranged marriage) to an inferior male, see last post on ugly men. Sexual selection will occur in women, before or after nuptials, get used to it. Naturally, men denying that looks have anything to do with sexual attraction (LOL) will continue to ignore the most important variable in Darwinian theories – your genes.

Where you can go back to Peterson’s bollocks and choke on all his little blue pills.

Scientists still complain and explain away the clitoris

It isn’t a vestige, it’s more developed than the penis. Look it up.
Not everything is about your dick. Really.

Think of the stereotype of trolling - white straight male aka Patriarchy. Did they appropriate the term?
http://bigthink.com/philip-perry/researchers-reveal-an-evolutionary-basis-for-the-female-orgasm

So jealous.
I’ve spoken to plenty of men with heavy jealousy over not having one, it’s silly. It’s almost as bad as womb envy.

There’s no need for the male orgasm either, it certainly isn’t needed to finish or impregnate. Women aren’t rushing to say it’s purely about them, get over yourself. Feminists have a valid point on this topic, it’s essentially saying our biology is an accident although we were here first. Biologically.

“From here, Wagner and colleagues deduced that the female orgasm must have been an important part of reproduction in early humans. Before spontaneous ovulation, the human clitoris may have been placed inside the vagina”

WTF face

I am embarrassed on their behalf. For them. It’s a system, light up one, other can be too. Without direct contact. Bear in mind, most of it’s still internal – wrapped around the vagina. We haz MRIs, guys.
Naturally according to Darwin there is ALWAYS a biological reason aka the purpose of biology.
You don’t get to assume there isn’t and work from there, evolution is established. You need to prove there ISN’T. Otherwise, reject male orgasms too. Sounds kinda insulting, huh? Maybe your wife only says she doesn’t believe in them too?

The natural reason, the obvious answer?
Female mate choice. Like basically all the social species. Not male. The woman has the choice, same as now.
Also known as the theory of Sexual Selection.
Shocking, I know.
It rewards women prior to the carrying and dying in childbirth thing. That’s why the clitoris, fools.

If anything, the male orgasm is a vestige of the female, based on the way Y chromosomes shape development of the fetus from female. But hey, why science, huh?

It also tops up the hormone levels in the reproductive system just in time for the sperm to arrive.

Obvious timing is obvious.

Black menarche related to fecundity

So there may be a good evolutionary reason for r-type behaviours.
They do tend to have more children the earlier they hit puberty, BUT this isn’t good for the individual girl.

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/19485565.1978.9988327

This paper examines the relationship between age at menarche and fertility from two perspectives. Age at menarche is regarded as a crude indicator of the timing of fecundity that may affect the timing of conception among those sexually active; and age at menarche is regarded as a crude indicator of the timing of sexual maturation that may influence the timing of socio‐sexual behavior, namely dating and sexual intercourse. The data are drawn from a survey of New York City women who recently had their first child. The findings suggest that age at menarche as an indicator of fecundity is not a good predictor of the timing of the first birth, when controlling for age at first sexual intercourse. Looking only at initial noncontraceptors, however, we find the relationship is stronger. Age at menarche, viewed as an indicator of the timing of sexual maturation, does seem to have some influence on the timing of dating, but only for Blacks. For both races, age at first date is related to age at first sexual intercourse.

Let your kids ‘date’, don’t act shocked when there are STDs and teenage pregnancies. If they’re so ‘mature’ they can live alone before doing that stuff. Paying for their own stuff.

While overall age of menarche doesn’t impact fertility or menopause, it can affect cancer or heart disease risk profiles, too premature or late, respectively.

https://www.bustle.com/articles/109646-does-the-age-you-get-your-first-period-impact-your-fertility

http://fusion.net/story/171930/early-puberty-period-age-matters-breast-cancer/

In the mid-19th Century, the average age of menarche in the U.S. was around 17 years old (though given that slavery wasn’t outlawed until 1865, that data was not likely entirely representative). By 2002, it had dropped to 12.6 years old, according to the CDC, and by 2010, to 12.5 years old.

Telling little girls to masturbate in Sex Ed class (yes, they do) to ‘explore their bodies’ (orgasm) is probably triggering puberty in that system and menarche earlier, since the body assumes you’re having sex, also giving them a higher breast cancer risk. Thanks, feminism. You’re giving people cancer.

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=bI-Jau14aLAC&pg=PA115&lpg=PA115&dq=masturbation+earlier+menarche#v=onepage&q=masturbation%20earlier%20menarche&f=false

Androgens are triggered and depending on individual sensitivity, this can trigger premature puberty.

Telling little kids to masturbate is grooming in my opinion, and should be illegal.
In fact, pedophiles tell kids to do that, the rest is just context.
The worst behaviours of the worst r-types make total sense when you realize they don’t have morals, they want to access the children of Ks and turn them into their own kind.

The people all about sociology are suddenly blaming genetics when it comes to menarche? Anybody else find that odd?

As it is, women shouldn’t be having children before 20, it isn’t physically or psychologically good for us.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/234128861_Age_at_menarche_motherhood_and_fertility_among_women_in_Thiruvananthapuram_Kerala

It is recommended that even if early marriages are preferred and adopted as cultural norms, they be discouraged to bear child before the age of 20 years.

But that’s actually good for women (and bad for r-types running Sexual ‘Health’ classes) so don’t expect to hear it.

Recommendations include encouragement of girls’ education, which has many
advantages including the prospects of a better marriage, improved child-rearing, corrected
role of women in the community, financial rewards and improved standard of living for the
family as well as delay of child bearing.
There are literally no downsides to being K-selected.
It’s better for society. (This includes men).
The guys in the manosphere who argue that Muh Evolution said it isn’t pedophilia because ‘if it bleeds, it breeds’ are scientifically illiterate. Or just pedophiles, going by Occam’s Razor.
These data quite clearly highlight the need for effective measures for increasing the waiting time for motherhood after attaining puberty among females and these effective strategies should be implemented in the context of their socio-economic, cultural and demographic backgrounds.