Mixing
Why would post-apocalyptic men be twice larger than women?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
I'm creating a post-apocalyptic world several centuries into the future. After the nuclear war whatever is left of the humanity has regressed into the dark age.
Society:
The offspring of those few who survived the radiation and the following nuclear winter live in small tribes. They sometimes cooperate, and sometimes compete with other tribes. Humans are few in numbers.
Technology:
Technology regressed to the dark ages. The survivors hate technology and blame it for the fall. Anyone caught trying to learn or recover the before-the-fall knowledge is ostracized or put to death.
Whatever is left from the destroyed civilization has been overtaken by the mother nature like in Life After People. Rotting machines are mostly used for scrap metals by village blacksmiths.
Food:
Food production is limited to small scale horticulture and herding. Hunting and fishing are very important food sources since there are many animals and very few humans.
Radiation
Many places are highly radioactive and must be avoided. Some are mildly radioactive and people pass through them quickly if they are forced to. There are many dangerous mutated animals. Humans who show signs of mutations are killed.
Climate
The climate is much colder; with earth just recovering from ice age. Humanity must rely on many food sources, since climate is very unpredictable.
In my story average man is twice larger than average women. While the differences in modern world are 10-15kg, the average 25 year old woman in my setting weighs around 65kg, while the average 25 year old man is around 130kg. Obesity is unheard of. Men are bulky; not like modern body builders but like people who gained their muscles from a lifetime of hard work.
Is there a way to explain why dimorphism increased dramatically without resorting to genetic engineering or radioactive mutations?
science-based biology post-apocalypse
edited 17 mins ago
Keeta
1,02628
asked 1 hour ago
NewDawn
63
New contributor
NewDawn is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
I'm creating a post-apocalyptic world several centuries into the future. After the nuclear war whatever is left of the humanity has regressed into the dark age.
Society:
The offspring of those few who survived the radiation and the following nuclear winter live in small tribes. They sometimes cooperate, and sometimes compete with other tribes. Humans are few in numbers.
Technology:
Technology regressed to the dark ages. The survivors hate technology and blame it for the fall. Anyone caught trying to learn or recover the before-the-fall knowledge is ostracized or put to death.
Whatever is left from the destroyed civilization has been overtaken by the mother nature like in Life After People. Rotting machines are mostly used for scrap metals by village blacksmiths.
Food:
Food production is limited to small scale horticulture and herding. Hunting and fishing are very important food sources since there are many animals and very few humans.
Radiation
Many places are highly radioactive and must be avoided. Some are mildly radioactive and people pass through them quickly if they are forced to. There are many dangerous mutated animals. Humans who show signs of mutations are killed.
Climate
The climate is much colder; with earth just recovering from ice age. Humanity must rely on many food sources, since climate is very unpredictable.
In my story average man is twice larger than average women. While the differences in modern world are 10-15kg, the average 25 year old woman in my setting weighs around 65kg, while the average 25 year old man is around 130kg. Obesity is unheard of. Men are bulky; not like modern body builders but like people who gained their muscles from a lifetime of hard work.
Is there a way to explain why dimorphism increased dramatically without resorting to genetic engineering or radioactive mutations?
science-based biology post-apocalypse
edited 17 mins ago
Keeta
1,02628
asked 1 hour ago
NewDawn
63
New contributor
NewDawn is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
The list you linked to is misleading, because it gives averages for populations including very young people -- the datasets in the list give averages for people 15 to 20 years old (depending on country) and older. (At 15 years of age the difference in weight should be minimal, if any. Also, there is very little value in averaging the weight of 15 year and 40 year old people.) The difference in body weight between human males and human females tends to increase with age. Maybe twice as heavy is a bit far fetched, but one and a half times as heavy is well within reasonable range.
– AlexP
1 hour ago
@AlexP I've limited my question to 20 year old, which I consider fully grown human , is that enough to clarify the question? I choose twice as heavy, since that is the largest difference I've found in large mammals i.e. polar bears. More would be better if its plausible.
– NewDawn
1 hour ago
@NewDawn big people keep on growing into their early twenties, and keep on adding weight for many more years. It's why the worst professional (American) football team is better than the best college football teams.
– RonJohn
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
I'm creating a post-apocalyptic world several centuries into the future. After the nuclear war whatever is left of the humanity has regressed into the dark age.
Society:
The offspring of those few who survived the radiation and the following nuclear winter live in small tribes. They sometimes cooperate, and sometimes compete with other tribes. Humans are few in numbers.
Technology:
Technology regressed to the dark ages. The survivors hate technology and blame it for the fall. Anyone caught trying to learn or recover the before-the-fall knowledge is ostracized or put to death.
Whatever is left from the destroyed civilization has been overtaken by the mother nature like in Life After People. Rotting machines are mostly used for scrap metals by village blacksmiths.
Food:
Food production is limited to small scale horticulture and herding. Hunting and fishing are very important food sources since there are many animals and very few humans.
Radiation
Many places are highly radioactive and must be avoided. Some are mildly radioactive and people pass through them quickly if they are forced to. There are many dangerous mutated animals. Humans who show signs of mutations are killed.
Climate
The climate is much colder; with earth just recovering from ice age. Humanity must rely on many food sources, since climate is very unpredictable.
In my story average man is twice larger than average women. While the differences in modern world are 10-15kg, the average 25 year old woman in my setting weighs around 65kg, while the average 25 year old man is around 130kg. Obesity is unheard of. Men are bulky; not like modern body builders but like people who gained their muscles from a lifetime of hard work.
Is there a way to explain why dimorphism increased dramatically without resorting to genetic engineering or radioactive mutations?
science-based biology post-apocalypse
edited 17 mins ago
Keeta
1,02628
asked 1 hour ago
NewDawn
63
New contributor
NewDawn is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
I'm creating a post-apocalyptic world several centuries into the future. After the nuclear war whatever is left of the humanity has regressed into the dark age.
Society:
The offspring of those few who survived the radiation and the following nuclear winter live in small tribes. They sometimes cooperate, and sometimes compete with other tribes. Humans are few in numbers.
Technology:
Technology regressed to the dark ages. The survivors hate technology and blame it for the fall. Anyone caught trying to learn or recover the before-the-fall knowledge is ostracized or put to death.
Whatever is left from the destroyed civilization has been overtaken by the mother nature like in Life After People. Rotting machines are mostly used for scrap metals by village blacksmiths.
Food:
Food production is limited to small scale horticulture and herding. Hunting and fishing are very important food sources since there are many animals and very few humans.
Radiation
Many places are highly radioactive and must be avoided. Some are mildly radioactive and people pass through them quickly if they are forced to. There are many dangerous mutated animals. Humans who show signs of mutations are killed.
Climate
The climate is much colder; with earth just recovering from ice age. Humanity must rely on many food sources, since climate is very unpredictable.
In my story average man is twice larger than average women. While the differences in modern world are 10-15kg, the average 25 year old woman in my setting weighs around 65kg, while the average 25 year old man is around 130kg. Obesity is unheard of. Men are bulky; not like modern body builders but like people who gained their muscles from a lifetime of hard work.
Is there a way to explain why dimorphism increased dramatically without resorting to genetic engineering or radioactive mutations?
science-based biology post-apocalypse
science-based biology post-apocalypse
edited 17 mins ago
Keeta
1,02628
asked 1 hour ago
NewDawn
63
New contributor
NewDawn is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited 17 mins ago
Keeta
1,02628
asked 1 hour ago
NewDawn
63
New contributor
NewDawn is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited 17 mins ago
Keeta
1,02628
edited 17 mins ago
Keeta
1,02628
edited 17 mins ago
Keeta
1,02628
1,02628
asked 1 hour ago
NewDawn
63
New contributor
NewDawn is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 1 hour ago
NewDawn
63
asked 1 hour ago
NewDawn
63
63
New contributor
NewDawn is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
NewDawn is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
NewDawn is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
The list you linked to is misleading, because it gives averages for populations including very young people -- the datasets in the list give averages for people 15 to 20 years old (depending on country) and older. (At 15 years of age the difference in weight should be minimal, if any. Also, there is very little value in averaging the weight of 15 year and 40 year old people.) The difference in body weight between human males and human females tends to increase with age. Maybe twice as heavy is a bit far fetched, but one and a half times as heavy is well within reasonable range.
– AlexP
1 hour ago
@AlexP I've limited my question to 20 year old, which I consider fully grown human , is that enough to clarify the question? I choose twice as heavy, since that is the largest difference I've found in large mammals i.e. polar bears. More would be better if its plausible.
– NewDawn
1 hour ago
@NewDawn big people keep on growing into their early twenties, and keep on adding weight for many more years. It's why the worst professional (American) football team is better than the best college football teams.
– RonJohn
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
The list you linked to is misleading, because it gives averages for populations including very young people -- the datasets in the list give averages for people 15 to 20 years old (depending on country) and older. (At 15 years of age the difference in weight should be minimal, if any. Also, there is very little value in averaging the weight of 15 year and 40 year old people.) The difference in body weight between human males and human females tends to increase with age. Maybe twice as heavy is a bit far fetched, but one and a half times as heavy is well within reasonable range.
– AlexP
1 hour ago
@AlexP I've limited my question to 20 year old, which I consider fully grown human , is that enough to clarify the question? I choose twice as heavy, since that is the largest difference I've found in large mammals i.e. polar bears. More would be better if its plausible.
– NewDawn
1 hour ago
@NewDawn big people keep on growing into their early twenties, and keep on adding weight for many more years. It's why the worst professional (American) football team is better than the best college football teams.
– RonJohn
1 hour ago
The list you linked to is misleading, because it gives averages for populations including very young people -- the datasets in the list give averages for people 15 to 20 years old (depending on country) and older. (At 15 years of age the difference in weight should be minimal, if any. Also, there is very little value in averaging the weight of 15 year and 40 year old people.) The difference in body weight between human males and human females tends to increase with age. Maybe twice as heavy is a bit far fetched, but one and a half times as heavy is well within reasonable range.
– AlexP
1 hour ago
The list you linked to is misleading, because it gives averages for populations including very young people -- the datasets in the list give averages for people 15 to 20 years old (depending on country) and older. (At 15 years of age the difference in weight should be minimal, if any. Also, there is very little value in averaging the weight of 15 year and 40 year old people.) The difference in body weight between human males and human females tends to increase with age. Maybe twice as heavy is a bit far fetched, but one and a half times as heavy is well within reasonable range.
– AlexP
1 hour ago
@AlexP I've limited my question to 20 year old, which I consider fully grown human , is that enough to clarify the question? I choose twice as heavy, since that is the largest difference I've found in large mammals i.e. polar bears. More would be better if its plausible.
– NewDawn
1 hour ago
@AlexP I've limited my question to 20 year old, which I consider fully grown human , is that enough to clarify the question? I choose twice as heavy, since that is the largest difference I've found in large mammals i.e. polar bears. More would be better if its plausible.
– NewDawn
1 hour ago
@NewDawn big people keep on growing into their early twenties, and keep on adding weight for many more years. It's why the worst professional (American) football team is better than the best college football teams.
– RonJohn
1 hour ago
@NewDawn big people keep on growing into their early twenties, and keep on adding weight for many more years. It's why the worst professional (American) football team is better than the best college football teams.
– RonJohn
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
up vote
4
down vote
In my story average man is twice larger then average women. While the differences in modern world are 10-15kg, average women in my setting weighs around 65 kg, while man are around 130 kg.
That's B-I-G big.
Obesity is unheard of. Man are bulky, not like modern body builders, but like people who gained their muscles from lifetime of hard work.
That's not what people look like after years of manual labor, and when food is scarce from a "climate (which) is much colder then now".
Is there a way to explain why dimorphism increased dramatically without resorting to genetic engineering or radioactive mutations?
Possibly, if the only human survivors happened to be descended from American professional football players (specifically interior linemen).
Practically, no.
answered 1 hour ago
RonJohn
13.2k12661
But founder effect would make both sexes larger. I need to somehow increase the dimorphism. How about man doing hunting and herding, women doing horticulture? Or fighting (each other, enemy tribes, mutants, dangerous animals) whatever.
– NewDawn
1 hour ago
1
@NewDawn Besides the genetics to give you the potential to be very tall and muscular, you need a lot of food and the time to build your muscles. Hunting, herding and agriculture just doesn't give you that.
– RonJohn
1 hour ago
@NewDawn there's nothing stopping you, though, from handwaving all that away and just having males be big.
– RonJohn
56 mins ago
1
@NewDawn: also worth remembering: Evolution doesn’t care what you do. Just because different sexes are given different roles doesn’t necessarily mean your genetic code is going to care in the long run.
– Joe Bloggs
53 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
They may have Gigantism due to mutations caused by the radiation. There are some mutations that can cause Gigantism from early age, resulting in a much bigger and bulkier body in adulthood. If the anterior pituitary gland is damaged by a tumor, the body basically never stops growing.
But this mutation is not limited to men, so you would have at least some women with the mutation and some men without it. Or you need to come up with a clever explaination why women with this mutation and men without it don't survive, thereby driving evolution towards your goal.
There are several problems with this, though. Excess im Human Growth Hormone (which causes Gigantism) often leads to muscle weakness rather than strong muscles. It's also accompanied by Acromegaly, causing joint pain, high blood pressure, impaired vision, Diabetes and reduced sexual function.
One of the most popular people with Gigantism is "André the Giant", who was a professional wrestler.
answered 52 mins ago
Elmy
6,4891930
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
Sexual dimorphism as you've described could easily occur within a few generations, by males having to fight for access to the females. Weaker, smaller males will quickly be killed off, and larger stronger males will be the only ones able to pass on their genes to the next generation.
Being larger would provide no reproductive advantage for females though, so they would stay pretty much the same size.
answered 1 hour ago
user1751825
1614
2
That’s not how genetics works. The genes for ‘bigger, stronger’ are not necessarily linked to sex, so it’s more likely you’d just see both sexes increasing in size if there’s no advantage/disadvantage to the females being larger.
– Joe Bloggs
51 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
Is there a way to explain why dimorphism increased dramatically without resorting to genetic engineering or radioactive mutations?
First off, there is no such thing as radioactive mutations. A mutation may be caused by radiation, but it will be no different from a change in the same gene caused by chance or engineering. Just as if I commit a typo here that gets corrected, the text is no different if it is edited by you or me.
Now, the change may be part cultural, part selection.
Start with a template where, given a 20th century wstern lifestyle, healthy people would average 80-100 kilograms. Why? Because these people were selected by evolution after the apocalypse, for whatever reason. Say, if you have to wrestle against bears here and there, or if the only clean water you can get is alcoholic, more body mass helps you.
Next, all men are either into phisiculturalism by themselves, or forced into it. They've found a way to produce steroidal anabolizants with lower technology (I've seen anedoctal evidence for it, though I lack a source now, so handwave this away) and they eat and exercise a lot. Meanwhile, women are starved. Thus men acquire more mass than what would be a natural average, while women acquire less.
This food division is outright cruel, but is a thing in undeveloped countries. There is an educational cartoon from India which, in one episode, teaches people that giving girls smaller food portions is wrong. As far as I know, this custom has not died out yet.
Alternatively, a random insertion mutation that adds growth-relates genes to the Y chromossome could do the trick. However, such mutations may cause the Y to have more sites where it can try and switch genes with the X during replication. This would cause an absurd number of mutations, mostly the kind where fetuses are not even viable anymore, so birth rates would be low. In the very least, unless there is a very favorable tradeoff going on, this kind of thing tends to be removed from the gene pool by natural selection.
answered 58 mins ago
Renan
35.4k1184183
add a comment |Â
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
4
down vote
In my story average man is twice larger then average women. While the differences in modern world are 10-15kg, average women in my setting weighs around 65 kg, while man are around 130 kg.
That's B-I-G big.
Obesity is unheard of. Man are bulky, not like modern body builders, but like people who gained their muscles from lifetime of hard work.
That's not what people look like after years of manual labor, and when food is scarce from a "climate (which) is much colder then now".
Is there a way to explain why dimorphism increased dramatically without resorting to genetic engineering or radioactive mutations?
Possibly, if the only human survivors happened to be descended from American professional football players (specifically interior linemen).
Practically, no.
answered 1 hour ago
RonJohn
13.2k12661
But founder effect would make both sexes larger. I need to somehow increase the dimorphism. How about man doing hunting and herding, women doing horticulture? Or fighting (each other, enemy tribes, mutants, dangerous animals) whatever.
– NewDawn
1 hour ago
1
@NewDawn Besides the genetics to give you the potential to be very tall and muscular, you need a lot of food and the time to build your muscles. Hunting, herding and agriculture just doesn't give you that.
– RonJohn
1 hour ago
@NewDawn there's nothing stopping you, though, from handwaving all that away and just having males be big.
– RonJohn
56 mins ago
1
@NewDawn: also worth remembering: Evolution doesn’t care what you do. Just because different sexes are given different roles doesn’t necessarily mean your genetic code is going to care in the long run.
– Joe Bloggs
53 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
In my story average man is twice larger then average women. While the differences in modern world are 10-15kg, average women in my setting weighs around 65 kg, while man are around 130 kg.
That's B-I-G big.
Obesity is unheard of. Man are bulky, not like modern body builders, but like people who gained their muscles from lifetime of hard work.
That's not what people look like after years of manual labor, and when food is scarce from a "climate (which) is much colder then now".
Is there a way to explain why dimorphism increased dramatically without resorting to genetic engineering or radioactive mutations?
Possibly, if the only human survivors happened to be descended from American professional football players (specifically interior linemen).
Practically, no.
answered 1 hour ago
RonJohn
13.2k12661
But founder effect would make both sexes larger. I need to somehow increase the dimorphism. How about man doing hunting and herding, women doing horticulture? Or fighting (each other, enemy tribes, mutants, dangerous animals) whatever.
– NewDawn
1 hour ago
1
@NewDawn Besides the genetics to give you the potential to be very tall and muscular, you need a lot of food and the time to build your muscles. Hunting, herding and agriculture just doesn't give you that.
– RonJohn
1 hour ago
@NewDawn there's nothing stopping you, though, from handwaving all that away and just having males be big.
– RonJohn
56 mins ago
1
@NewDawn: also worth remembering: Evolution doesn’t care what you do. Just because different sexes are given different roles doesn’t necessarily mean your genetic code is going to care in the long run.
– Joe Bloggs
53 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
up vote
4
down vote
In my story average man is twice larger then average women. While the differences in modern world are 10-15kg, average women in my setting weighs around 65 kg, while man are around 130 kg.
That's B-I-G big.
Obesity is unheard of. Man are bulky, not like modern body builders, but like people who gained their muscles from lifetime of hard work.
That's not what people look like after years of manual labor, and when food is scarce from a "climate (which) is much colder then now".
Is there a way to explain why dimorphism increased dramatically without resorting to genetic engineering or radioactive mutations?
Possibly, if the only human survivors happened to be descended from American professional football players (specifically interior linemen).
Practically, no.
answered 1 hour ago
RonJohn
13.2k12661
In my story average man is twice larger then average women. While the differences in modern world are 10-15kg, average women in my setting weighs around 65 kg, while man are around 130 kg.
That's B-I-G big.
Obesity is unheard of. Man are bulky, not like modern body builders, but like people who gained their muscles from lifetime of hard work.
That's not what people look like after years of manual labor, and when food is scarce from a "climate (which) is much colder then now".
Is there a way to explain why dimorphism increased dramatically without resorting to genetic engineering or radioactive mutations?
Possibly, if the only human survivors happened to be descended from American professional football players (specifically interior linemen).
Practically, no.
answered 1 hour ago
RonJohn
13.2k12661
answered 1 hour ago
RonJohn
13.2k12661
answered 1 hour ago
RonJohn
13.2k12661
answered 1 hour ago
RonJohn
13.2k12661
13.2k12661
But founder effect would make both sexes larger. I need to somehow increase the dimorphism. How about man doing hunting and herding, women doing horticulture? Or fighting (each other, enemy tribes, mutants, dangerous animals) whatever.
– NewDawn
1 hour ago
1
@NewDawn Besides the genetics to give you the potential to be very tall and muscular, you need a lot of food and the time to build your muscles. Hunting, herding and agriculture just doesn't give you that.
– RonJohn
1 hour ago
@NewDawn there's nothing stopping you, though, from handwaving all that away and just having males be big.
– RonJohn
56 mins ago
1
@NewDawn: also worth remembering: Evolution doesn’t care what you do. Just because different sexes are given different roles doesn’t necessarily mean your genetic code is going to care in the long run.
– Joe Bloggs
53 mins ago
add a comment |Â
But founder effect would make both sexes larger. I need to somehow increase the dimorphism. How about man doing hunting and herding, women doing horticulture? Or fighting (each other, enemy tribes, mutants, dangerous animals) whatever.
– NewDawn
1 hour ago
1
@NewDawn Besides the genetics to give you the potential to be very tall and muscular, you need a lot of food and the time to build your muscles. Hunting, herding and agriculture just doesn't give you that.
– RonJohn
1 hour ago
@NewDawn there's nothing stopping you, though, from handwaving all that away and just having males be big.
– RonJohn
56 mins ago
1
@NewDawn: also worth remembering: Evolution doesn’t care what you do. Just because different sexes are given different roles doesn’t necessarily mean your genetic code is going to care in the long run.
– Joe Bloggs
53 mins ago
But founder effect would make both sexes larger. I need to somehow increase the dimorphism. How about man doing hunting and herding, women doing horticulture? Or fighting (each other, enemy tribes, mutants, dangerous animals) whatever.
– NewDawn
1 hour ago
But founder effect would make both sexes larger. I need to somehow increase the dimorphism. How about man doing hunting and herding, women doing horticulture? Or fighting (each other, enemy tribes, mutants, dangerous animals) whatever.
– NewDawn
1 hour ago
1
1
@NewDawn Besides the genetics to give you the potential to be very tall and muscular, you need a lot of food and the time to build your muscles. Hunting, herding and agriculture just doesn't give you that.
– RonJohn
1 hour ago
@NewDawn Besides the genetics to give you the potential to be very tall and muscular, you need a lot of food and the time to build your muscles. Hunting, herding and agriculture just doesn't give you that.
– RonJohn
1 hour ago
@NewDawn there's nothing stopping you, though, from handwaving all that away and just having males be big.
– RonJohn
56 mins ago
@NewDawn there's nothing stopping you, though, from handwaving all that away and just having males be big.
– RonJohn
56 mins ago
1
1
@NewDawn: also worth remembering: Evolution doesn’t care what you do. Just because different sexes are given different roles doesn’t necessarily mean your genetic code is going to care in the long run.
– Joe Bloggs
53 mins ago
@NewDawn: also worth remembering: Evolution doesn’t care what you do. Just because different sexes are given different roles doesn’t necessarily mean your genetic code is going to care in the long run.
– Joe Bloggs
53 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
They may have Gigantism due to mutations caused by the radiation. There are some mutations that can cause Gigantism from early age, resulting in a much bigger and bulkier body in adulthood. If the anterior pituitary gland is damaged by a tumor, the body basically never stops growing.
But this mutation is not limited to men, so you would have at least some women with the mutation and some men without it. Or you need to come up with a clever explaination why women with this mutation and men without it don't survive, thereby driving evolution towards your goal.
There are several problems with this, though. Excess im Human Growth Hormone (which causes Gigantism) often leads to muscle weakness rather than strong muscles. It's also accompanied by Acromegaly, causing joint pain, high blood pressure, impaired vision, Diabetes and reduced sexual function.
One of the most popular people with Gigantism is "André the Giant", who was a professional wrestler.
answered 52 mins ago
Elmy
6,4891930
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
They may have Gigantism due to mutations caused by the radiation. There are some mutations that can cause Gigantism from early age, resulting in a much bigger and bulkier body in adulthood. If the anterior pituitary gland is damaged by a tumor, the body basically never stops growing.
But this mutation is not limited to men, so you would have at least some women with the mutation and some men without it. Or you need to come up with a clever explaination why women with this mutation and men without it don't survive, thereby driving evolution towards your goal.
There are several problems with this, though. Excess im Human Growth Hormone (which causes Gigantism) often leads to muscle weakness rather than strong muscles. It's also accompanied by Acromegaly, causing joint pain, high blood pressure, impaired vision, Diabetes and reduced sexual function.
One of the most popular people with Gigantism is "André the Giant", who was a professional wrestler.
answered 52 mins ago
Elmy
6,4891930
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
They may have Gigantism due to mutations caused by the radiation. There are some mutations that can cause Gigantism from early age, resulting in a much bigger and bulkier body in adulthood. If the anterior pituitary gland is damaged by a tumor, the body basically never stops growing.
But this mutation is not limited to men, so you would have at least some women with the mutation and some men without it. Or you need to come up with a clever explaination why women with this mutation and men without it don't survive, thereby driving evolution towards your goal.
There are several problems with this, though. Excess im Human Growth Hormone (which causes Gigantism) often leads to muscle weakness rather than strong muscles. It's also accompanied by Acromegaly, causing joint pain, high blood pressure, impaired vision, Diabetes and reduced sexual function.
One of the most popular people with Gigantism is "André the Giant", who was a professional wrestler.
answered 52 mins ago
Elmy
6,4891930
They may have Gigantism due to mutations caused by the radiation. There are some mutations that can cause Gigantism from early age, resulting in a much bigger and bulkier body in adulthood. If the anterior pituitary gland is damaged by a tumor, the body basically never stops growing.
But this mutation is not limited to men, so you would have at least some women with the mutation and some men without it. Or you need to come up with a clever explaination why women with this mutation and men without it don't survive, thereby driving evolution towards your goal.
There are several problems with this, though. Excess im Human Growth Hormone (which causes Gigantism) often leads to muscle weakness rather than strong muscles. It's also accompanied by Acromegaly, causing joint pain, high blood pressure, impaired vision, Diabetes and reduced sexual function.
One of the most popular people with Gigantism is "André the Giant", who was a professional wrestler.
answered 52 mins ago
Elmy
6,4891930
edited 46 mins ago
answered 52 mins ago
Elmy
6,4891930
answered 52 mins ago
Elmy
6,4891930
answered 52 mins ago
Elmy
6,4891930
6,4891930
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
Sexual dimorphism as you've described could easily occur within a few generations, by males having to fight for access to the females. Weaker, smaller males will quickly be killed off, and larger stronger males will be the only ones able to pass on their genes to the next generation.
Being larger would provide no reproductive advantage for females though, so they would stay pretty much the same size.
answered 1 hour ago
user1751825
1614
2
That’s not how genetics works. The genes for ‘bigger, stronger’ are not necessarily linked to sex, so it’s more likely you’d just see both sexes increasing in size if there’s no advantage/disadvantage to the females being larger.
– Joe Bloggs
51 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
Sexual dimorphism as you've described could easily occur within a few generations, by males having to fight for access to the females. Weaker, smaller males will quickly be killed off, and larger stronger males will be the only ones able to pass on their genes to the next generation.
Being larger would provide no reproductive advantage for females though, so they would stay pretty much the same size.
answered 1 hour ago
user1751825
1614
2
That’s not how genetics works. The genes for ‘bigger, stronger’ are not necessarily linked to sex, so it’s more likely you’d just see both sexes increasing in size if there’s no advantage/disadvantage to the females being larger.
– Joe Bloggs
51 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
Sexual dimorphism as you've described could easily occur within a few generations, by males having to fight for access to the females. Weaker, smaller males will quickly be killed off, and larger stronger males will be the only ones able to pass on their genes to the next generation.
Being larger would provide no reproductive advantage for females though, so they would stay pretty much the same size.
answered 1 hour ago
user1751825
1614
Sexual dimorphism as you've described could easily occur within a few generations, by males having to fight for access to the females. Weaker, smaller males will quickly be killed off, and larger stronger males will be the only ones able to pass on their genes to the next generation.
Being larger would provide no reproductive advantage for females though, so they would stay pretty much the same size.
answered 1 hour ago
user1751825
1614
answered 1 hour ago
user1751825
1614
answered 1 hour ago
user1751825
1614
answered 1 hour ago
user1751825
1614
1614
2
That’s not how genetics works. The genes for ‘bigger, stronger’ are not necessarily linked to sex, so it’s more likely you’d just see both sexes increasing in size if there’s no advantage/disadvantage to the females being larger.
– Joe Bloggs
51 mins ago
add a comment |Â
2
That’s not how genetics works. The genes for ‘bigger, stronger’ are not necessarily linked to sex, so it’s more likely you’d just see both sexes increasing in size if there’s no advantage/disadvantage to the females being larger.
– Joe Bloggs
51 mins ago
2
2
That’s not how genetics works. The genes for ‘bigger, stronger’ are not necessarily linked to sex, so it’s more likely you’d just see both sexes increasing in size if there’s no advantage/disadvantage to the females being larger.
– Joe Bloggs
51 mins ago
That’s not how genetics works. The genes for ‘bigger, stronger’ are not necessarily linked to sex, so it’s more likely you’d just see both sexes increasing in size if there’s no advantage/disadvantage to the females being larger.
– Joe Bloggs
51 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
Is there a way to explain why dimorphism increased dramatically without resorting to genetic engineering or radioactive mutations?
First off, there is no such thing as radioactive mutations. A mutation may be caused by radiation, but it will be no different from a change in the same gene caused by chance or engineering. Just as if I commit a typo here that gets corrected, the text is no different if it is edited by you or me.
Now, the change may be part cultural, part selection.
Start with a template where, given a 20th century wstern lifestyle, healthy people would average 80-100 kilograms. Why? Because these people were selected by evolution after the apocalypse, for whatever reason. Say, if you have to wrestle against bears here and there, or if the only clean water you can get is alcoholic, more body mass helps you.
Next, all men are either into phisiculturalism by themselves, or forced into it. They've found a way to produce steroidal anabolizants with lower technology (I've seen anedoctal evidence for it, though I lack a source now, so handwave this away) and they eat and exercise a lot. Meanwhile, women are starved. Thus men acquire more mass than what would be a natural average, while women acquire less.
This food division is outright cruel, but is a thing in undeveloped countries. There is an educational cartoon from India which, in one episode, teaches people that giving girls smaller food portions is wrong. As far as I know, this custom has not died out yet.
Alternatively, a random insertion mutation that adds growth-relates genes to the Y chromossome could do the trick. However, such mutations may cause the Y to have more sites where it can try and switch genes with the X during replication. This would cause an absurd number of mutations, mostly the kind where fetuses are not even viable anymore, so birth rates would be low. In the very least, unless there is a very favorable tradeoff going on, this kind of thing tends to be removed from the gene pool by natural selection.
answered 58 mins ago
Renan
35.4k1184183
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
Is there a way to explain why dimorphism increased dramatically without resorting to genetic engineering or radioactive mutations?
First off, there is no such thing as radioactive mutations. A mutation may be caused by radiation, but it will be no different from a change in the same gene caused by chance or engineering. Just as if I commit a typo here that gets corrected, the text is no different if it is edited by you or me.
Now, the change may be part cultural, part selection.
Start with a template where, given a 20th century wstern lifestyle, healthy people would average 80-100 kilograms. Why? Because these people were selected by evolution after the apocalypse, for whatever reason. Say, if you have to wrestle against bears here and there, or if the only clean water you can get is alcoholic, more body mass helps you.
Next, all men are either into phisiculturalism by themselves, or forced into it. They've found a way to produce steroidal anabolizants with lower technology (I've seen anedoctal evidence for it, though I lack a source now, so handwave this away) and they eat and exercise a lot. Meanwhile, women are starved. Thus men acquire more mass than what would be a natural average, while women acquire less.
This food division is outright cruel, but is a thing in undeveloped countries. There is an educational cartoon from India which, in one episode, teaches people that giving girls smaller food portions is wrong. As far as I know, this custom has not died out yet.
Alternatively, a random insertion mutation that adds growth-relates genes to the Y chromossome could do the trick. However, such mutations may cause the Y to have more sites where it can try and switch genes with the X during replication. This would cause an absurd number of mutations, mostly the kind where fetuses are not even viable anymore, so birth rates would be low. In the very least, unless there is a very favorable tradeoff going on, this kind of thing tends to be removed from the gene pool by natural selection.
answered 58 mins ago
Renan
35.4k1184183
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
Is there a way to explain why dimorphism increased dramatically without resorting to genetic engineering or radioactive mutations?
First off, there is no such thing as radioactive mutations. A mutation may be caused by radiation, but it will be no different from a change in the same gene caused by chance or engineering. Just as if I commit a typo here that gets corrected, the text is no different if it is edited by you or me.
Now, the change may be part cultural, part selection.
Start with a template where, given a 20th century wstern lifestyle, healthy people would average 80-100 kilograms. Why? Because these people were selected by evolution after the apocalypse, for whatever reason. Say, if you have to wrestle against bears here and there, or if the only clean water you can get is alcoholic, more body mass helps you.
Next, all men are either into phisiculturalism by themselves, or forced into it. They've found a way to produce steroidal anabolizants with lower technology (I've seen anedoctal evidence for it, though I lack a source now, so handwave this away) and they eat and exercise a lot. Meanwhile, women are starved. Thus men acquire more mass than what would be a natural average, while women acquire less.
This food division is outright cruel, but is a thing in undeveloped countries. There is an educational cartoon from India which, in one episode, teaches people that giving girls smaller food portions is wrong. As far as I know, this custom has not died out yet.
Alternatively, a random insertion mutation that adds growth-relates genes to the Y chromossome could do the trick. However, such mutations may cause the Y to have more sites where it can try and switch genes with the X during replication. This would cause an absurd number of mutations, mostly the kind where fetuses are not even viable anymore, so birth rates would be low. In the very least, unless there is a very favorable tradeoff going on, this kind of thing tends to be removed from the gene pool by natural selection.
answered 58 mins ago
Renan
35.4k1184183
Is there a way to explain why dimorphism increased dramatically without resorting to genetic engineering or radioactive mutations?
First off, there is no such thing as radioactive mutations. A mutation may be caused by radiation, but it will be no different from a change in the same gene caused by chance or engineering. Just as if I commit a typo here that gets corrected, the text is no different if it is edited by you or me.
Now, the change may be part cultural, part selection.
Start with a template where, given a 20th century wstern lifestyle, healthy people would average 80-100 kilograms. Why? Because these people were selected by evolution after the apocalypse, for whatever reason. Say, if you have to wrestle against bears here and there, or if the only clean water you can get is alcoholic, more body mass helps you.
Next, all men are either into phisiculturalism by themselves, or forced into it. They've found a way to produce steroidal anabolizants with lower technology (I've seen anedoctal evidence for it, though I lack a source now, so handwave this away) and they eat and exercise a lot. Meanwhile, women are starved. Thus men acquire more mass than what would be a natural average, while women acquire less.
This food division is outright cruel, but is a thing in undeveloped countries. There is an educational cartoon from India which, in one episode, teaches people that giving girls smaller food portions is wrong. As far as I know, this custom has not died out yet.
Alternatively, a random insertion mutation that adds growth-relates genes to the Y chromossome could do the trick. However, such mutations may cause the Y to have more sites where it can try and switch genes with the X during replication. This would cause an absurd number of mutations, mostly the kind where fetuses are not even viable anymore, so birth rates would be low. In the very least, unless there is a very favorable tradeoff going on, this kind of thing tends to be removed from the gene pool by natural selection.
answered 58 mins ago
Renan
35.4k1184183
edited 50 mins ago
answered 58 mins ago
Renan
35.4k1184183
answered 58 mins ago
Renan
35.4k1184183
answered 58 mins ago
Renan
35.4k1184183
35.4k1184183
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
NewDawn is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
NewDawn is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
NewDawn is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
NewDawn is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f127118%2fwhy-would-post-apocalyptic-men-be-twice-larger-than-women%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
The list you linked to is misleading, because it gives averages for populations including very young people -- the datasets in the list give averages for people 15 to 20 years old (depending on country) and older. (At 15 years of age the difference in weight should be minimal, if any. Also, there is very little value in averaging the weight of 15 year and 40 year old people.) The difference in body weight between human males and human females tends to increase with age. Maybe twice as heavy is a bit far fetched, but one and a half times as heavy is well within reasonable range.
– AlexP
1 hour ago
@AlexP I've limited my question to 20 year old, which I consider fully grown human , is that enough to clarify the question? I choose twice as heavy, since that is the largest difference I've found in large mammals i.e. polar bears. More would be better if its plausible.
– NewDawn
1 hour ago
@NewDawn big people keep on growing into their early twenties, and keep on adding weight for many more years. It's why the worst professional (American) football team is better than the best college football teams.
– RonJohn
1 hour ago