Are Men More 'Evolved' Than Women? - Lemondrop.com Men more evolved than woman? Who knew??? I'm kidding, or am i?
"More evolved" is loaded terminology and it's not strictly accurate. On one chromosome, out of 46-odd total (23 chromosome pairs), specifically the Y chromosome, there's a higher rate of mutation for some reason. And having a higher rate of change doesn't make you "more" evolved. If that were the case then all those mutations from Hiroshima and Nagasaki must be pretty damn evolved compared to normal humans, right? Changing faster or slower doesn't make something more or less evolved; it makes it change faster or slower.
I know I know, trust me I'm not sexist at all, I just found the name of the article fascinating and thought I'd share. Theres alot of stupid men, I'd say something like 90% of the world is quite ignorant in the sense of all the fields we have. Most people are only good at one thing
tell that to all the species that died out because they couldn't "change" fast enough. Don't worry I do know that no matter what there are plenty of idiots on both sides interesting stuff
I don't necessarily think the Y-chromosome is more evolved just because it has a lot more mutations on it. However, being more mutated than the X-chromosome makes it less prone to some diseases and probably more prone to others than women would be since we have 2 X-chromosomes and one can be considered a carrier. So really the Y-chromosome can go either way, as an advantage or a hindrance depending on your body's chemical make-up. I know that they are still finding more mutations/genes on the Y-chromosome whereas before, it was just considered useless and only determining gender. However, just because a dude has a more evolved chromosome than women do does NOT mean he is smarter than a woman. You can be the most muscular/physically/reproductively fit motherfucker alive and still be dumber than a pile of rocks. That's just my view anyways *shrugs*.
males dont evolve any faster than females. thats just nonsense. what is evolution? a single mutation, as pointed out by others already, is not evolution. if this mutation is carried onto the progeny, and subsequent generations carry the trait, then one could argue evolution has occured. However, this would require both a male and a female (for reproduction), and the resulting "evolved" progeny would just as likely be female as male. so, in that sense, humans evolve at the same rate for both males and females, its just that often more evolutionary change is derived from the male genome.