I've been thinking and, after two minutes of thought and three glasses of wine, I've come to a conclusion. Most sociologists attribute many of man's actions to one of three basic motivations: food, shelter or procreation. Basically, we're hungry? We eat, and find a way to make that happen. We're tired? We sleep, and find a way to make that happen. Same goes for sex.
But what has long been attributed to sexual attraction - a fit body, a sound mind and an ability to provide for and nurture potential offspring - is outdated. I'm here to propose that what we find so physically desirable in the opposite sex - a lean, muscular physique - is not necessarily the visual evidence of a person who us capable of providing for a family and/or protecting the potential household from harm.
In fact, I believe the embodiment of these physical attributes represents a much more desirable characteristic than merely providing for a family unit that may or may not result from a physical union with this person. Fit people are capable of having sex. And lots of it. And we're basely attracted to those who have the muscular structure that shows off their virility.
I'm not saying that the two ideas aren't correlated. I'm just saying that, after yesterday's extensive research on the subject, sex is quite the workout. I ran an Olympic triathlon last weekend but, after the seven bouts of sex I had yesterday on a "sick day" from work, my glutes have never felt better.
So ladies, when you feel as though your biological clock is ticking and you find yourself attracted to a lean, tight, muscular form - go for it with piece of mind. Your biological instincts aren't urging you toward this person because you're looking for a good, strong provider and you need to mate and settle down. It's Mother Nature whispering in your ear: "this man knows how to fuck. And how."