balls

as you may know, i'm reading Jared Diamond's The Third Chimpanzee. so the shitty pictures that i show to you are from his book, just so you know
(his pictures aren't shitty, the quality of me taking them is).

before i mentioned that i knew or recognized everything Diamond was telling me.
now he's getting sexual, and it's something my professor lightly touched, mostly becuase he went over physical facts (other than apparent sexual dimorphism in bone structure, you can't conclude much of ancient man's organs/extremities that are bone-less).

so diamond goes to compare penis sizes of man's closely-related primate cousins. and i thought you might be interested.
he gives this picture (which i apologize for again, but i'll explain it).
it compares penis and ball size of chimps, man, orangutans, and gorilla (in that order). and at the top you can see the size of the woman that it's getting compared to.

without further ado.
we'll start with general body size.
male chimps are roughly the same as the female, male men are slightly larger, orangutans and gorillas dwarf their female counterparts.

but that's about all they got going for them.
check out the pecker size.
erect gorillas are 1.25", orangutans are 1.5", chimps are 3", and men lord over all other primates with an average of 5".
this selection for a gynormous unit baffles scientists since it's not really necessary, as gorillas get the job done with their nub.
and as the sight of the penis isn't really what turns a woman on, one explanation is just that it's just a display of dominance and status over other men, and it's not huge-being isn't really directed toward women.
who knows...

balls, nuts, berries.
just like their peters, gorillas and orangutans hold their head in shame.
their ball weight is just under 1.5 ounces, at their 450 lbs, that's kinda weak.
men's nuts weigh 1.5 ounces at half that body weight.
but here comes the big-swinger. chimps ball up at a hefty 4 ounces for a 100 lb. body.
damn their fat sack!

reasons:
gorillas and orangutans live in harems. males have something like 4 women living with them (poor bastards), so they have it easy when it comes to sex, they just poke em when they're ready. now and then they have to scare away the competition. but even with all the women, the male only gets his a few times a year.

man nuts are medium sized cuz, well, hopefully we do it more than a few times a year.

these big-ballin' chimps need the lead weights to gain reproductive success because they're so promiscuous. it's almost literally a constant orgy for these guys. they hop around from female to female as they present themselves in heat.
so with these guys, more sperm means more potency in assuring that one of the male's baby swimmers would fertilize the egg.

so how much fun do we primates have?
well. the average male coitus lasts 4 minutes.
gorillas and their sorry malehood last about as long as they are long, 1 minute.
chimps, who are constantly bumping uglies need to do so often to get their moment of zen that only lasts 7 seconds.
somehow the orangutan comes out on top (or bottom, or sideways). these guys seem to have snuck a peek at the kama sutra and have been known to do all the positions listed above as well as doing it while swinging in the trees.
their happy time last a quarter of an hour, 15 minutes. maybe its just to much work and distraction with all that swinging.
or maybe a 1.5 inch dong just takes a while to warm up to...

being fair, and moving on to females and their sexual peculiarities, we gots another picture.
this time female body size compared to males. of course it's the inverse as previously written.
but what we got for these females is the breast size.
as you can even see in this shitty picture, women funbags are an impressive feature compared to any other primate.
what the deal here may be that evolution in women has brought women to the point where they seem to be in constant estrus (availability to be fertilized).

so this confuses the fuck out of men, making them want to do it all the time.
the other primates show their availability with colors or puffiness, so sex is usually confined to this period of time.
the possible advantage for women to conseal their fertile period may be to keep the male around for extended periods of time.
men can't wander off and do their own thing and come back at the point where their woman goes into heat and have sex and fend off other possible competeing males for that short period.
this ambiguity also keeps the man around to insure his paternity. who would want to care for a kid that your rival fathered? fuck that!
i'm gunna look after my own genes.

so since a man was necessary in the rearing of human babies for food and other such commodities, this hidden ovulation kept men around much more.
clever girls...
so where other primates have almost a sure thing when it comes to fertilization of a female, men only have a 28% chance of conception, so they have to keep an eye out.
that makes for more fidelity in men, but a better chance for women to be promiscuous.
a test done in the 1940's where blood tests of babies, their mothers and fathers showed that 5 - 30% of the children born were "adulterously conceived".
sucks to be you, dad.
(this stat says nothing of male infidelity, other than the fact that some of that 5 - 30% may have been also married. male infidelity is probably more common than female infidelity just from the fact that males have the ability to be totally detached from the whole pregnancy process, leaving the seed and moving on.

this simple fact let one moroccan man sire 888 kids, while the record for one woman with the most kids passing through her vagina was a measly 69 kids.
(it was some russian woman who had 23 sets of triplets.

so this reading really puts a spin on my thoughts. diamond believes that extramarital sex is something that we homo sapiens have evolved to use behaviorally. whereas gibbons (another primate) are wholly monogamous, humans seem to yearn for what you have at home and a little more.
he says we are most closely related behaviorally to certain storks, where the males tend the nest while the female is out feeding. but while she's gone, he also runs around to nearby nests and inseminates the female before she's done laying all her eggs.

so how can i not get in trouble here with what i want to say?
humans have come up with this concept of morality... be monogamous.
but evolutionarily we're prone to spread the love in more than one place.
so is morality just a way of keeping life simplistic?
having more than one mate would really make for a crazy soap opera with people of such advanced cognitive abilities.
i don't know how the mormons did it, but it seems to have worked (in the sense of evolutionarily passing on one's genes). well. actually it seems like a bell curve.
a man with one spouse would have an average of 7 kids.
a man with two spice (spouses?) would have roughly 16 kids.
a man with three women would have 20 kids.
maybe the reason the amount of children falls from two to three mates is simply because a man can only have so much money, so he can't afford to have more than 20 or so kids.

well. that's my rant for this book so far.
any questions?