I’ve been thinking a lot lately about the idea — often expounded upon in evolutionary psychology — that our actions are subconsciously motivated by the interests of our genes. The idea is that individuals who engage in behaviors which promote survival and reproduction stand a better chance of passing their genes on than those that don’t.

You often see this talked about in discussions about attraction. Attraction is a mysterious force in the human psyche. We feel it intensely, but it’s hard to explain why we feel it, or what we’re even feeling. We know we’re attracted to Scarlett Johansson, but why her? And why not Margaret Thatcher?

The generally accepted idea is that features which indicate health — symmetry, youth, a healthy glow, wide birthing hips in women etc. — attract us, while unhealthy features do not. Thus, men are more attracted to supermodels than ugglos who look like they could drop off at any second.

But this doesn’t quite make sense. Sure, the odds are that a child you create with some bowser may not last long in this world, but that child has a greater chance of passing on your genes they had no child at all. As a man, you’re better off being motivated to nail what you can get, then declaring certain women off limits.

And, when you think about it, that is how a lot of men act. You hit on all the fine women until the clubs close, and, if at that point you’re empty-handed, you take home the nebbish librarian with acne.

Ha. We rule!