I was driving the other day and put to thought a natural phenomenon that I can't seem to find much information on. I noticed that a huge majority of milf types have feminine looking sons. My friends and I always joked about not marrying a woman that is too attractive out of fear of having "justin bieber" sons.

This got me to thinking. After a little google search, I wasn't able to come up with much on the subject besides the fact that women with higher estrogen levels tend to be more prone to having daughters although the science wasn't conclusive given the smallish study group and other environmental factors that cannot easily be calculated into the equation.

So I am here now on the RP asking y'all what y'all know about the subject matter. What do you guys know about the role of the male's genetics vs the female's genetics in gene pairing in procreation? Would a woman with more masculine features/higher levels of "male hormones" have higher odds of creating more genetically formidable, masculine sons? Would a woman with more feminine features/higher levels of "female hormones" create more feminine daughters and feminine sons? Which gender's role has a larger role in the genetic outcome of the son? Which for the daughter? In other words, what do y'all know about genetic strategy in mate selection?

As men that have swallowed the pill, I hope we can all agree that we should at the minimum know what type of mate will increase the odds of having the most dominant, testosterone driven sons (masculine jaw lines, prevalent brow ridges, ect.) that we can get. This post is not made with the underlying message that feminine looking men can't be alphas. This post is not made to say that only men with highest testosterone can become alphas. This post is not in disagreement with the fact that any man can be a man regardless of genetics and achieve alpha. But to think that genes don't play a role in the SMP is frankly naive and stupid. Naturals, or Chad Thundercocks, if you will, exist for a reason. Please discuss.