PRETTY WOMAN- will you marry me??

Beauty has shaped history, politics and countries in ways unimaginable. Cleopatra, Helen of Troy and Marilyn Monroe are known till date for their exceedingly good looks. Hollywood make over movies turning ugly duckling into swan top the list of rom-coms.

One truth that guides human race since eternity is our desire to look beautiful. We groom ourselves to varying degrees to look good.

Grooming has a very direct role in evolution. In one of my earlier posts called "No country for the average man" I discussed in detail about our innate need to look our best. Biologically it boils down to our need to attract the most potential mate.

But what about beauty? Does that have a genetic basis? It sure must have. It is a physical attribute and like any other physical attribute it must be coded by some genes. However to unravel this mystery we need to extrapolate our journey from physical to psychological. Physical beauty is perceived by a psychological angle. Our brain tells us whether the person we are seeing is pretty or not. Hence to understand the biological basis of beauty we need to understand "perception of beauty".

What is it that comes across as beautiful to us? Is there an evolutionary role play here? Do our genes fool the brain into perceiving something as pretty? Is there a checklist to beauty?

Now I say that there must be some rules to beauty because a beautiful person is usually considered beautiful by majority. E.g. majority of us agree that Marilyn Monroe was pretty. This means that 99% of the “brains” perceive her as pretty. Biologically it indicates that "perception of beauty" pathway is somewhat ubiquitous. So what is this pathway then?

A lot of research has gone into how the brain responds to physical attractiveness. In an experiment where babies were shown faces, it was seen that babies spent more time gazing at pretty faces. Babies were a perfect model to study as they are not conditioned culturally. Also since only faces were being shown, no chance of subconscious input of information in form of olfactory pheromones was meddling with decision making. Hence, it was concluded that beauty in fact had an evolutionary basis as complete newborns could identify beautiful faces from a pool of faces shown to them with ranging level of attractiveness.

Structural decoding of these “pretty” faces identified by the babies has led to a whole new area of research called facial aesthetics. Last two decades has seen a great deal of study being done in this direction. So what is it that the babies liked in the beautiful faces?

Facial symmetry

Photo courtesy:  A.C.Little et al, Facial attractiveness: evolutionary based research

Which of the two faces you find more attractive above? a or b?

99% of us will call face “A” as more attractive. And that is because of facial symmetry. Face A is a vertically symmetric face i.e. if you draw a line through the nose of this face vertically to divide it into two halves; each half is a mirror image of the other. Non-scientifically speaking, the eyes are set equally apart from the nose, the nose is not tilted to one side and the lips are equidistant from the midline.

Face “B” is the same person. However, using computer graphics, his face has been skewed and made asymmetrical. On seeing closely, the nose is bent to one side, the eyes are not shaped or distanced equally from the nose and the right side of the lips is dragged out.

Though these changes seem subtle but our brain perceives them immediately and tells us that face “A” is more attractive.

Averageness

Going back to the baby gazing experiment, it was seen that babies stare more at composite of images rather than one face image. If a facial image was made by superimposing many faces, the babies stared at that resultant face more.

This is called averageness. It doesn’t mean the looks of the person is average. It means that facial structures that are an average of many faces are more attractive.

Photo courtesy:  A.C.Little et al, Facial attractiveness: evolutionary based research

Face “A” is made by superimposing three faces. Face “b” is made by superimposing shapes of nine faces. Hence, we find B more attractive than A. Face “c” is made by superimposing not only shapes but also facial color of nine faces. Hence it is the most beautiful among the three.

Secondary sexual characters

More feminine faces with smaller nose, narrower chin and high cheekbones give rise to a pretty face. Similarly in men, more masculine features like broader jawline and prominent brow ridge make for a more desirable man.

 Photo courtesy:  A.C.Little et al, Facial attractiveness: evolutionary based research

Face “b” has been made more feminine/masculine from their face “A” counterpart. It also shows that more feminine/masculine features are considered more beautiful in general.

These three rules are not to give rise to “Laws of Shallowness”.  Equation for beauty! How vain is that! However, these laws have evolutionary significance. That’s why the babies are choosing them.

Perfect genes give rise to perfect symmetry. Hence individuals with perfect symmetry have healthier and sturdier genes. This would mean that choosing such people as your mate would allow these sturdy genes to be passed onto your offspring.

Averageness of looks arises from the fact that the individual has almost all alleles of genes present in the population. S/He has the maximum chance of having genes of resistance to diseases and parasites prevalent in that population. Again, good choice for a mate.

Secondary characters like pinched nose or thinner chin arise in women due to higher estrogen level. And estrogen is directly proportional to the fecundity of the female. She is most likely to give you healthy offsprings. And many numbers of them! Good choice, once more!

So, as in all my posts, I rest my case again. All social beliefs (good or evil) are a result of our genes controlling us to give rise to healthy offspring. And beauty, which most morals speak against, is one such thing.

Billions of dollars worth cosmetic industry is thriving on it. The fashion industry is making fortunes off it and so is Bollywood and Hollywood.

I find it best not to fight my evolution. So I will not live in a genetic gut feeling vacuum. However, though I cant control what my genes wish me to pass on to my offspring, I do have control over one very important aspect of evolution. Thought evolution.

Recently a lot of research has gone into the psychology of personality attractiveness for mate selection. A person whose personality we find magnetic seems to be our choice of mate selection. The classical beauty might force us to croon our neck for a minute extra to get his/her glimpse in a subway but the longer terms selection of a mate has many psychological aspects to it.

Personality, self-esteem, happy temperament play equally important roles in humans’ mate selection. And the good news is that recent scientific studies have shown preliminary data on how attributes like a smiling face are translated by our genes are “good future parent”. Hence what i can surely do is focus on my daughter's personality development, intellectual skills, self esteem and happiness quotient

Thus, while on one hand I do support the anti- Fair and Lovely cream campaign; I feel genetically you cant deny what beauty does to you. Hence no matter how evolved you might feel you are socially; the matrimonial will still read “Gori, beautiful, and thin” for a very long time to come!

THE TRUTH ABOUT BOOBS AND DICKS

What is the real big deal about gender? As innocently as my 3 year old daughter asked me this morning, "Mom, why am i a girl and not a boy? What is boy?” it sent me down a labyrinth of thoughts while driving her to school.

Really- what is this whole thing about girls and boys? We are marketed so distinctly since childhood that we sometimes forget we are part of the same human race. Pink burst is all a baby girl sees from her toddler cot while blue makes up boys’ clothes pretty much for his entire lifetime. Business houses seem to have given ample thought to gender type but we, as a society, have never taken this seriously.

So what is it that makes boys boys and girls girls? You must be wondering how a major in biology has missed out the obvious breasts and penis distinction. Be rest assured I do know and remember that. But is that it? Are we just a race made up of boobs and dicks?

Its a given that there are physical characteristics that define the two genders distinctly. Males have heavy musculature, facial hair and coarser voice. Females have breasts, lesser facial hair and a higher pitch voice. Such physical distinctions, called secondary sexual characteristics, are there in few other species apart from humans but not all .A female lion and male lion are physically distinguishable but you cant tell a male elephant from a female by just looking at their face. Hence, secondary sex characteristics are not the defining factors of gender. 

Of course in Disney movies, the most defining sexual features are long eyelashes. The elephant with over sized long fluttering eyelashes is the female. But lets leave Disney with a justified license to exaggerate and entertain.

So if secondary sexual characteristics are not able to define  males and females clearly, what can? Primary sex organs like penis and vagina are definitive distinctions of gender. All females have a vagina and reproductive organs like uterus and ovaries while males have penis and scrotal sacs. Compared to secondary sexual characteristics, primary characteristics are more marked.

But then what about transgenders? Or the third sex? Individuals whose secondary sexual characters do not correspond with the genitals they have. Of course this is a very broad and loose definition of transgenders/intersex individuals.

                                                Hermaphrodite by Nadar, 1860

There are a plethora of varied conditions that define various ambiguities seen in terms of gender determination. To understand anything about gender even slightly, we need to familiarize ourselves with two simple terms- phenotype and genotype.

Phenotype is outward physical traits while genotype is the genetic information. Eg: A XY genotype is an individual having X and Y sex chromosomes. His phenotype is facial hair, heavy musculature, penis, scrotal sacs etc. Similarly an individual with XX genotype has two X sex chromosomes and her phenotype is lean structure, less facial hair, vagina, breasts etc.

And the most important point here to remember is that genotype determines phenotype but phenotype can never determine genotype.

The genetic information is hard wired and defines the physical traits. Hence, XY genotype has body hair. If, hypothetically, I alter my XY genotype to XX; then my phenotype will change to less body hair.

But altering phenotype cannot change the genetic information. Hence, men who get body hair waxed are still as much male as any other XY genotype (and I hear SRK sigh in relief!!)

So we have established that the truth about boobs and dicks is in the genetic information- genotype. XX is female and XY is male. Right?

Just give me a moment to go and do my evil laughter…………

NO ITS NOT!! Or in Sheldon Cooper language- BAZINGA!

Have I been messing around with you till now? No not at all. Everything I have said till now is 100% scientifically accurate. But Nature, unlike Science, is not so simple!

Surpise surpise! Sex determination is one of the traits that is not completely defined by our genes! XX genotype may have male primary/sexual characters and vice versa.

Its not enough to be genotypically male or female!! Before you feel that your biology teacher lied to you all this while- let me clarify your dilemma.

Sex determination happens in the womb. Yes neighbor aunty, please don’t consider this blasphemous, but once your daughter in law has conceived, its impossible to change the sex of that fetus!

As I was saying, the genotype of the fetus is determined the minute sperm and ova fuse. If sperm carrying Y chromosome fuses with ova (ova always have X chromosomes) then the genotype of fetus is XY and if a sperm carrying X chromosome fuses with the ova the genotype is XX. Note that I am still not labeling the fetus as girl or boy.

Once conceived something fascinating happens to fetus between 8-12 weeks of gestation. The XY fetus starts exhibiting secondary sexual characteristics like testes and ovary formation is seen in XX fetus.

And this is where our key players of sex determination enter- HORMONES.

All fetuses (XX or XY) have something called a Mullerian duct. In normal female fetus, the Mullerian duct system develops into the uterus etc. However in XY fetus, to prevent this duct to form into uterus a hormone called  Müllerian duct-inhibiting hormone (MIH)is secreted around 12^th week of gestation and that causes this duct system to regress.

Similarly hormones called Androgens cause the development of the Wolffian duct system in fetus later in gestation, which goes on to develop into male sexual organs.

It is very clear that XY fetus that lack MIH will not be able to prevent the Mullerian duct system to differentiate into  female sex organs and will thus have uterus, ovaries etc. On the other hand, excessive secretion of androgens and male hormones called virilising hormones in a XX fetus can lead to formation of male sex organs.

These are extensively studied and documented conditions.

CAH (Congential Adrenal Hyperplasia): An XX fetus that has excess of virilising hormones develops sexual organs of a male.

AIS (Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome): An XY fetus does not respond to androgen and hence fails to develop the male sexual organs in the womb fully.

These are of course just two of the many conditions related to sex determination and they too have been explained extremely simply. There are ranges and spectrums of each condition and need detailed research to understand each.

We have boiled the whole mystery down to genotype, hormones and phenotypes. All of these have to be “in sync” to give rise to the socially accepted male and females. Any one of the players go wary and we have intersex conditions.

So again Neighbour Aunty, doing all the puja and mantras in the sixth month of pregnancy on your daughter in law as the priest has suggested will not change the sex of your grandchild. At the most you will have a very hairy grand-daughter or an effeminate grandson. Im sure you want neither!

Ignorant to the complex interplay of genes and chemicals, a huge chunk of society in Asia is still biased towards the male child. And this attitude is the root cause of all the gender inequality we see that finally leads us to be subjugated to non-tasteful Deepika Padukone videos.

All my posts earlier point out that all our societal evils arise from the minor ignorance of the fact that we are nothing but biochemical entities. We tend to give ourselves too much of credit, I think. What is a male? XY chromosome with Androgen and testosterone. Why is that more coveted than XX chromosome with Estrogen and Progesterone is a question that even Nature must be puzzled at! Iam not even going into ethics and consequences. Iam talking of plain biochemistry. We are humans. The fact that we carry 26 chromosomes should any day hold more value than the constitution of just one of its chromosomes.

A very cute creature called Meerkats seem to have come up with a ingenious solution to this gender debate actually. Though males and females are marked out clearly, their duties are not. Everyday some male stay back to babysit with the females while some go for food hunting. Research have shown that males who decide to stay back are those that have woken up with higher level of a hormone called “prolactin” while those with lower level go to forage for food. Even pup feeding roles are determined on the spot depending on hormones level.

So simple! You wake up each morning and go for roles as per the blood hormone levels. That is one evolved society I must say. Because they know that they are slaves to their hormones.

The Meerkats have the “balls” to accept what humans cant. If only we accept ourselves as nothing but mere hormones, suddenly this chauvinism and empowerment debate will seem redundant. Because then we will realize that being male or female is a fascinating tale of genetic information being decoded, hormones being released, protein being formed and a phenotype being developed in the nine months of gestation. Both processes (of determining male or female sex )-so complex and intricate, yet the point is that they are not the same. If one process fails to be different than the other it leads to intersex conditions. So what is this big fight about equality? Males and females are different. Biologically they are as incomparable as apples and oranges. Why cant we celebrate their uniqueness instead of fighting for equality? 

 A child does not choose its genotype. Similarly it doesn’t choose for its hormones to switch off or on. Nature does it at its own course and we are nowhere near unfolding the mystery of how this complex interplay of genotype, hormones and phenotype comes into place so accurately and correctly most of the time in the developing embryo. When we don’t control what makes us boys and girls, then who are we to decide which is “Superior”?

So Dear Deepika and Vogue, its really not our choice after all! When it comes to being a boy or girl or intersex, I would be  proud of my uniqueness and go with Lady Gaga on this one- I WAS BORN THIS WAY!

HOME IS WHERE MY PEE IS!

Come to think of it now...the title really plugs well into the CLEAN INDIA mission currently being run by the government. But alas! Mr Goswami, I dont have a headstrong opinion about everything under the sun.

My little fairytale world is knit around the one thing that makes me dream- SCIENCE and its link to the social make-up we see today. I am a staunch believer in "We are nothing but biochemical reactions" theory.

I think, hence I am. And how do I think- biochemicals. I love, hence I survive. Sorry to break the news SRK fans but love is also just biochemicals reacting. I reproduce, hence I evolve. Well no doubt that reproduction is all biochemicals too- from conception to delivery and beyond!

The debate in recent time about an infamous BBC documentary had many charged up Indians criticizing this heinous act by the British. We gave them 200 years- like that wasnt enough! Articles were written, blogs were published and walls were sprayed with comments. And the mascot of  unknowing Foot-in-Mouth Dr Dawkins was an overnight sensation. His tags now included rude, brash, arrogant and insensitive apart from the already existing highlight in his resume- atheist; which is already a dreaded word in the holy society today. With this debate, it seemed like he had earned another feather in his KuKluxKlanish hat.

But am I in favor of the documentary or not, you ask? Because thats the whole point, right? To choose sides.

However, that is not what got me thinking in the first place. The way this debate hijacked all sorts of media with opinions flying in all directions made me feel sorry. Not for Indians or the British but for the silent death of the actual disturbing facts.

A rape is commited every 29 minutes in India, a dowry death every 77 minutes and about 70% of women in India are victims of some form of violence- emotional, physical and mental. These figures are enough to question the “civilized” part of the civil society that we live in. Yet the drama that unfolded was about why was a Britisher allowed to interview an Indian inmate, why were facts being shown in a light to malign India and why did they not highlight the rape incidence in the west which, apparently, is much higher than India.

Really??!! THAT’S the point in the whole documentary?

Its like if some unknown lady on the bus pointed out to me that my kajal is smeared and my answer to her would be, “Oh! But you are so ugly too!”

Its really that crazy when we think logically. Or is it?

Probably not.

Actually, what happened in reaction to the documentary is something very innate, natural and core to our evolutionary make up. Its called Territory marking.

Many species in the wild mark their territory by spraying scent mostly by urinating in the territor. Basically by leaving their scent in that territory they are informing other animals that that piece of land belongs to them and their clan. It is a behavior seen across species ranging from fish, birds, lemurs, wolves to tigers.

Understanding territory marking will make many of our acts in our everday social life suddenly acquire more meaning and hence, make sense.

There are some facts to bring forth before we proceed to understand our innate need for territory marking

·        Territory marking is usually conspecific: Territory is marked by individuals of a specie to inform other individuals of the SAME specie. A male tiger sprays urine on the trees in his territory to tell other male tigers who may happen to venture in that area that this territory belongs to me, Iam the protector of my clan and you better find some other place for your clan as the resources, food and nesting sites are already taken. Basically its calling dibs on that area!

·        Territory once marked is defended against: Once the alpha male (ie the leader male of the clan) marks his territory, he shall defend it vehemently in case it is challenged by anyone. Battles over territory in the animal kingdom range from behavior aggression, visual intimidation to actual duels to death.

·        Territory marking is largely scent based: Marking of a territory is largely done by urinating or by secretory glands that eject out scent that holds information about the specie, sex, dominance etc of the sprayer.

Now take what you have learnt and plug it into our overzealous reaction to the BBC documentary.

We are programmed to defend our territory. It is this hardwired evolutionary behavior that came out in form of those ugly messages painted across many FB walls.

The issue was not what was being portrayed. Rather, it was an foreign member of our specie (British) challenging the social make up of our territory (India). India- a territory already scent marked by the inhabitants (quite literally actually!!). It was this biologically innate need to attack an intruder inside a scent marked territory that came out as opinions and anger across the country.

So the next time Dad lectures you about wasting time rooting for India in the World Cup instead of studying for your exams, you know how to explain it to him.

And Dr Dawkins, you are my literary hero and shall always be. Please don’t mind what my fellow Indians are saying. You know, its just that we get touchy about comments on India because that’s where we pee. And the evolutionary biologist in you knows very well….HOME IS WHERE MY PEE IS!