omg why do white ppl love cheese so mu-

w3-4r3-th3-f1r3:

speculative-evolution:

kanirou-crosshack:

bemusedlybespectacled:

wyomingsmustache:

100-manslayer:

trained-chimpanzee:

image

I actually didnt know that

The answer is apparently “because we’re actually able to eat it”

Fun fact: white people (specifically Northern European white people) have a genetic mutation that allows them to digest lactose even after weaning, which is abnormal for all mammals and also most humans. It’s theorized that because Northern Europe doesn’t get a lot of sun, an alternative source of vitamin D (like milk) would be a useful trait. It’s a very recent mutation that would only have happened after humans started domesticating animals like cows and goats.

oh no, my bizarre moment has come, cause lactose tolerance is actually A Thing I Know About because it’s played a fascinating role in human evolution for thousands of years. This chart displays some of the broad trends, but it’s giving near continental averages, which doesn’t showcase how this kind of thing really breaks down and some of the surprising exceptions. 

Lactose tolerance is the majority trait for only a very few population groups: North Europeans (and therefore populations that draw heavily from that stock, such as America,) nomadic central Eurasians, and sub-Saharan pastoralist Africans, but that latter group is often overlooked. The vast majority of Africans cannot process lactose, but certain people groups whose lifestyles have revolved around cattle for thousands of years will have 80% and even approaching 100% lactose tolerance rates. They’d be spots of dark green amidst a sea of orange and burgundy on the above chart. 

Our hunter-gatherer ancestors were almost entirely lactose intolerant, that is definitely the biological norm (and people groups who maintained that lifestyle, such as Native Americans, remained as such – along with groups who transitioned to sedentary agricultural lifestyles, but I’ll get into that). As such, lactose tolerance is an adaptive trait that only became prevalent in environments that exerted strong selective pressure for it. So, cows were domesticated some 10,000 odd years ago in the Middle East (and some have contended for an independent domestication event in Africa as well). In either case, cattle quickly spread across the continent and we know there was milking and cheese production at least 6,000 years ago in both the Nile and Mesopotamia. While cow meat would have been enjoyed by all, in agricultural societies milk and cheese would have been options, but hardly staples as there were plenty of other things to eat as well, and therefore there would have been no selective pressure for processing lactose. Also, sedentary societies had ways of processing milk and cheese that allowed lactose intolerant people to drink/eat dairy products. Fermenting milk or aging cheese breaks down lactose, making it a non issue once ingested. This is why fermented milk may seem utterly foul to many Westerners, but is extremely common in other parts of the world. But, fermentation and aging requires time, and the ability to store things in a single location for weeks or even months. Sedentary societies adapted the milk to fit their biology, but nomadic societies did the reverse.

There are still mobile pastoralist societies in Africa today, and there have been for thousands and thousands of years. For many of them, cows are not one of many dietary options, they are the single dietary staple around which their lifestyle revolves. Biologically, this means you gotta get with the program if you wanna survive. For most mobile tribes, fermentation and aging weren’t options, so there would have been strong selective pressure favoring those who could drink milk straight outta the cow, as they would have had an additional, highly nutritious food source available to them. Milk also allowed for a marked shortening of the weaning process, transitioning children from breastmilk to cow’s milk, which would again be advantageous for groups where both the men and women work and are always on the move. Over generations these populations specialized into essentially cow-based lifestyles, creating a survival niche highly advantageous to them, and fast forward thousands of years and there are groups in Africa with near ubiquitous lactose tolerance, while the rest of the continent (and the world really) is nearly entirely intolerant. 

Many of these same factors would have influenced the central Eurasian populations, which is why Mongolians and other descendants of nomadic steppe peoples are largely lactose tolerant, as mare’s milk would have been a dietary staple (though they also developed efficient ways to ferment it). 

North Europeans developed lactose tolerance in response to deficiencies in certain nutrients. The northern climate limited Vitamin D production, and the agricultural products available to them were often low on calcium and protein, and so dairy farming developed alongside agriculture to create a more rounded diet (and this was limited to Northern Europeans, as Mediterranean peoples such as the Romans wrote about their great confusion at the northern barbarians’ ability to drink fresh milk)

And I promise all of this is fascinating because the ability to process lactose evolved independently in several different population groups and in response to different factors: lifestyles revolving around cows, lifestyles revolving around horses, deficiencies in climate and agriculture. Besides providing insight into human history and biology, lactose tolerance is also a great example of convergent evolution, where different genetic populations in different environments produce similar results. 

And uh, that’s my rant about the role of milk and lactose tolerance in human evolution. 

Beautifully written, very concise and informative. Good stuff. Interesting stuff. Thanks for your input.

This explains a lot about my family, actually.

therearecertainshadesoflimelight:

melly-oppy:

kalinara:

therearecertainshadesoflimelight:

hautepreneur:

therearecertainshadesoflimelight:

generouskingdomface:

stinson-png:

“Girls want a Superman, but they walk past a Clark Kent every day”

You fuckin CLOWNS think you’re a CLARK KENT? Not on my fuckin watch. You dumb, headass motherfuckers are barely a Guy Gardner and you think you’re a CLARK KENT? The amount of disrespect is unreal.

And here it is, a mad cunt openly recognizing she’s alone sand and angry

oh feminists, never change

But that’s the point, you moron. We aren’t alone. Clark Kent AKA fucking SUPERMAN married one of US. Clark Kent’s dream girl ::was:: a “nasty woman” *TM feminist who was angry about patriarchy and if she was real right now would be no doubt spending her days railing on Donald Trump and going to protests and he would be right there with her. The most handsome, wonderful man in fiction has been in love with kind of woman you hate for 80 years years because, unlike you, Clark Kent actually respects women and is a good person. Which is why he’s not alone. He’s happily married and has a child.

That’s why this post got 17,000 notes in 24 hours. Because men like you who literally call women “cunts” actually think you identify with Clark fucking Kent! That he’s your namesake. You honestly think that Clark Kent—the man who told Pulitzer Prize winner LOIS LANE that he would love her “until the end of time” would agree with you. You are getting laughed at by 17,000 women because you have the audacity to think you are Superman when you are actually the villain in this story. You are Lex Luthor. Meanwhile, women like us aren’t alone unless we choose to be. We are quite literally validated by SUPERMAN. Which is why he’s awesome and you are not.

There are so many hurt man feelings in the notes. 😯😂😂

Hurt male feelings bc these morons have been going through life thinking they are Clark fucking Kent while simultaneously calling women bitches and cunts proving that not only are they delusional but they don’t even understand the Superman myth. Thanks for the entertainment, guys.

I have to say while I agree with so much of these posts, I think the OP is doing a disservice to Guy Gardner.

At his very worst (and most brain damaged), Guy Gardner tried like hell to be a good man to the girl he loved.  He fucked up a lot, was crude, insensitive, and a jerk, but we saw him do his damnedest to treat her well.  We saw him comfort her after a hero’s death, hold in his temper when being extensively mocked because she was having fun, and other small and large gestures to show how much he cared.  He tried to change for her and he worked damn hard at it.

He even learned her language, during a time when he was mocked for not being able to complete a child’s crossword puzzle.  And after she died, he kept trying to be a better person and be worthy of her.

The men that the OP discuss are absolutely not Clark Kents.  But they’re also not Guy Gardners.  Because Guy Gardners fucking try.

I love how this is not only a feminist post but also shows that girls make better comic geeks than the misogynistic men who fail to drag them.

I have legit no problem saying that every woman I know understands Clark Kent better than most of the men.

Women make better Superman fans than most men do. When he’s written well, he belongs in our space. There. I said it.