sex evolved long before humans did. it happened probably about a billion years ago, gradually. meiosis, sexual dimorphism and genetic sex determination are all different and independent aspects of sex. the existence of human sexes only seems like a problem if you think that all of this had to appear at once.
2007-09-28 12:04:23
·
answer #1
·
answered by vorenhutz 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
There are greater consequences for a woman if she gets pregnant than there is for a man if he gets a woman pregnant. Males can just walk away after sex but females have to bear the cost of pregnancy for 9 months along with the responsibility of then helping that child grow up so they've evolved to be more selective about who they choose to mate with. Same applies to a lot of other species. Plus the fact that female eggs are larger and less abundant than male sperm which means the female of the species is bringing more to the table from the very start and so it forces the males to display valuable qualities in other ways in order to then be selected as a viable mating partner. Males impress Females select ..generally anyway..
2016-05-21 01:09:58
·
answer #2
·
answered by maryanne 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
The human race has always had separate genders, only lower animals reproduce asexually. All vertebrates (fish amphibians reptiles birds and mammals) have separate male and female genders. Even most insects do as well. It came about because it creates more genetic variety - something that a more complicated animal needs, rather than something that just divides and produces clones of itself.
In what type of animal it first happened, I do not know. It must have been a rather primitive sort - pond-life perhaps.
2007-09-28 11:48:23
·
answer #3
·
answered by Citizen Justin 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
This is a question you should be asking in the biology section, not the R&S section. But I'll play along.
Yes, humans have always had males and females. Our biological ancestors, going way back, reproduced sexually. This goes all the way back to the first species who reproduced sexually instead of asexually.
2007-09-28 11:43:39
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
2⤋
If you could reproduce asexually, then you wouldn't be considered a human being.
yes, there have always been male and female.
2007-09-28 11:46:28
·
answer #5
·
answered by allusian_fields 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
this is a joke right?
if you actually want a serious answer, here's part of it: any kind of human that could reproduce asexually would not be considered a homo sapiens, it would be too different.
so the answer is a big YEAH.
2007-09-28 11:45:16
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Given that no closely related primates show anything but XY genetic determination of sexuality, it is highly unlikely that anything other than strict male/female reproduction has been in place longer than anything that qualifies as human.
2007-09-28 11:48:36
·
answer #7
·
answered by novangelis 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
"So God created man in His image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. Then God blessed them, and God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it; HAVE DOMINION OVER the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over EVERY LIVING THING that moves on the earth." Gen. 1:27,28
2007-09-28 11:49:29
·
answer #8
·
answered by byHisgrace 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes but what's interesting is that theoretically human parthenogenesis (asexual reproduction) is possible.
2007-09-28 11:48:27
·
answer #9
·
answered by Demetri w 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
the human species, yes. go back far enough on the evolutionary tree however and you will probably find species that were a-sexual.
2007-09-28 11:45:09
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋