In about 100 years, women will have evolved into having no leg, armpit, or upper lip hair, and perfectly plucked eyebrows. amirite?

So jealous of future women..

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Nothing really to be jealous of; it doesn't make any sense. Shaving hair and plucking eyebrows is something you do, yourself, externally. Likewise It's like saying that if everyone gets tattoos, people will be born with tattoos in the future. .. However--if you purge all the women with bushy hair...

by Anonymous 13 years ago

i HOPE so...

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Actually, this is invalid, even according to the theory of evolution. But, I get the joke. And it's not that funny...

by Anonymous 13 years ago

shut up Meg

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Meg...?

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Ever watch family guy?

by Anonymous 13 years ago

No, but that is quite possibly the most irrelevant thing anyone can say.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

It's actually quite relevant. "Shut up Meg," is a reference from the show. You were being compared to the most hated character on the show.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Well that's pathetic, if people must, as you would say, "result" to cartoon references. Also, since you're, as you claim, incredible at analysis, shouldn't you know that I wasn't being compared to Meg? It's obvious. Surely you know that, with your superior rationalizing skills.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Maybe you're stupid, or a troll. I don't know, it doesn't matter. If someone tells you, "Shut up Meg," they are comparing you to her. They are calling you annoying and they want you to shut up. You'd know that if you watched show, but I'm sure you don't since the show doesn't agree with all the shit you believe.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Actually, I don't agree with blatant vulgarity and blasphemy, but props to you for lacking morals. Not really. It's just a saying. Do people in the show say "shut up, Meg?" Well, then it isn't a comparison, so much as a quotation.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

I don't even watch the show, and I got that it was a comparison. Let it go and move on.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

As long as something doesn't hurt someone, it's morally okay. Family Guy hurts no one but fictional characters. Meg is often times told to shut up because she is annoying and hated. If someone tells you to shut up and calls you Meg you are being compared to her.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Uh... No. It's not a comparison, it's a saying. I don't see how you don't see this. He's quoting what they commonly say. In no way does it imply I'm a middle-aged woman.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Meg is the 17 year old daughter. When you were called Meg, you were not being called a 17 year old girl, but rather an annoying person who no one likes. You'd understand that if you weren't too holy to watch the show.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Lol. I thought Meg was the wife. I honestly don't care at all, though. It's pathetic.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

It's not pathetic, you've just got a stick shoved so far up your ass it's coming out your mouth.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Way to "result to insults" after your incapabability to devise a decent rebuttal.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

I'm just using your tactics back on you.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

By "resulting to insults?" No, I actually answer the question, mixing in insults. You just insult.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

I really hope so...

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Evolution gets rid of traits that discourage survival. But that'd be nice.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

But evolution also takes on adaptations to new enviroment. And if women used these adaptation for courting, then it seems legitimate to me.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

You don't know anything about evolution. It doesn't matter WHAT traits they are, or what they do. It's whether or not they get passed down. And eventually, if it's a crux for survival, the entire population with obtain those traits. Now, the women WON'T get the traits, because a: very very few women exemplify one or more of these traits listed naturally, and B: men won't only mate with women exemplifying all these traits naturally. Golly learn your own theory.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

He's actually right. I don't know any women who naturally have no body hair, or any men who only mate with women who naturally have no body hair. So not only is there no gene that could make this happen, there are also no mating patterns that could make this happen. And even if there were, I'm pretty sure it would take longer than 100 years.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Thank you.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Yeah, it's theoretically (almost) impossible, I mean, the only way I would think it could happen is with natural selection, where men won't sleep with women who naturally have less hair and hairy women will be extinct. But no, I really don't think it can happen through evolution in 100 years.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

no, they're not going to evolve. it starts with a genetic mutation that exists before birth. so unless some lady is born with no leg and armpit hairs and perfectly shaped eyebrows and has a TON of kids that continue to pass down the mutation, then, no, it's not going to happen.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

We all know it's not going to happen, but it's nice to hope.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

You never asked a question for me to answer so I just jumped right to insults.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

You never asked a question for me to answer so I just jumped right to insults.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

All of you are dumb.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

wow, way to give scrantoncity fuel for his "lol scientists dont know evolution" fire. >.<

by Anonymous 13 years ago