Curiously, replacing motherx with fatherx and vice versa in your argument results in one that is just as (in)valid and just as (un)persuasive. Selection of a "pretty" male is as likely to add "beauty" to a lineage as selection of a "pretty" female ... unless you could demonstrate that female beauty traits are only found on the X chromosome and would somehow be unavailable to males (good luck with that) ... of course the existence of "pretty" traits in men invalidates this.
Selection appears to be both male and female, as both sexes have traits that have been affected by selection by the other sex. This is not explained by either all (only) male or all (only) female selection
Sexual selection is still operating ... btw ... on both sexes. Changes are still occurring.
You also really need to consider what is being selected and why ...
quote:The Oldest Homo Sapiens: Fossils Push Human Emergence Back To 195,000 Years Ago
Feb. 28, 2005 — When the bones of two early humans were found in 1967 near Kibish, Ethiopia, they were thought to be 130,000 years old. A few years ago, researchers found 154,000- to 160,000-year-old human bones at Herto, Ethiopia. Now, a new study of the 1967 fossil site indicates the earliest known members of our species, Homo sapiens, roamed Africa about 195,000 years ago.
Brown says that pushing the emergence of Homo sapiens from about 160,000 years ago back to about 195,000 years ago "is significant because the cultural aspects of humanity in most cases appear much later in the record – only 50,000 years ago – which would mean 150,000 years of Homo sapiens without cultural stuff, such as evidence of eating fish, of harpoons, anything to do with music (flutes and that sort of thing), needles, even tools. ...
Fleagle adds: "There is a huge debate in the archeological literature regarding the first appearance of modern aspects of behavior such as bone carving for religious reasons, or tools (harpoons and things), ornamentation (bead jewelry and such), drawn images, arrowheads. They only appear as a coherent package about 50,000 years ago, and the first modern humans that left Africa between 50,000 and 40,000 years ago seem to have had the full set. As modern human anatomy is documented at earlier and earlier sites, it becomes evident that there was a great time gap between the appearance of the modern skeleton and 'modern behavior.'" ...
quote: ... "With these new crania," he added, "we can now see what our direct ancestors looked like." ...
In my learning mode, ... Perhaps my hypothesis might have been more credible if I had placed MotherOne some time earlier when she would have been one of the species which later led to both humans and chimpanzees - from my limited memory, was it homo erectus?.
Homo erectus may be a side branch like Neanderthals (Homo neander) and our previous ancestors appear to be Homo ergaster ...
I must emphasize that my hypothesis was based on a single unbroken lineage from MotherOne to Miss World. ...
there is a single unbroken lineage from primordial ooze to each living creature and many extinct ones.
... I believe that in the enormous time between the births of these two women, huge changes occurred in their relative appearance and it is interesting to conjecture what could have caused the changes.
Other than superficial differences the major measurable change from Homo sapiens of 195,000 years ago to Homo sapiens sapiens (us) is an increase in brain size (selection is still ongoing - see M and N below).
For more distant changes you need to go further back in time (which also means more time for evolution to operate).
(A) Pan troglodytes, chimpanzee, modern (B) Australopithecus africanus, STS 5, 2.6 My (C) Australopithecus africanus, STS 71, 2.5 My (D) Homo habilis, KNM-ER 1813, 1.9 My (E) Homo habilis, OH24, 1.8 My (F) Homo rudolfensis, KNM-ER 1470, 1.8 My (G) Homo erectus, Dmanisi cranium D2700, 1.75 My (H) Homo ergaster (early H. erectus), KNM-ER 3733, 1.75 My (I) Homo heidelbergensis, "Rhodesia man," 300,000 - 125,000 y (J) Homo sapiens neanderthalensis, La Ferrassie 1, 70,000 y (K) Homo sapiens neanderthalensis, La Chappelle-aux-Saints, 60,000 y (L) Homo sapiens neanderthalensis, Le Moustier, 45,000 y (M) Homo sapiens sapiens, Cro-Magnon I, 30,000 y (N) Homo sapiens sapiens, modern
(note that the first skull is a modern chimpanzee and that changes to the skeletons are not shown).
When we became more civilized, when food supplies were established and living conditions were not geared mainly to survival, then Motherx may have had time and inclination to devote to other things ...
It wasn't until about 10,000 years ago when the agricultural revolution made surplus food available in sufficient quantities that leisure time for other pursuits became possible.
The emergence of culture apparently only started some 50,000 years ago, when dolls and flutes are found.
It is kind of difficult to ascertain from skeletons what people looked like, however we do see that the early doll figurines of "earth mother" showed a wide waist and large breasts.
The Venus of Dolní Věstonice, one of the earliest known depictions of the human body, dates to approximately 29,000–25,000 BC (Gravettian culture of the Upper Paleolithic era)
Again this shows sexual selection ...
Please be aware that I am searching for a reasonable explanation of the change. Let me know if you have your own explanation.
Sexual selection in general, and Fischerian runaway sexual selection in particular are more than sufficient to explain the evolution of humans from early ape ancestors.
Beauty is how sexual selection affects us, it is not an aspect of our species that is special compared to other species -- each species would have a concept of "beauty" that would be based on selection for mating.
... Recent discoveries have shown that people were carving abstract images, creating pigments and making jewellery in southern Africa almost as early as 100,000 years ago.
Good to know. I thought th 50k seemed off, but it was noted in two sources I looked at.
Controversial evidence that Neanderthals had artistic traditions may mean we have the push the advent of modern-like culture back a lot further than that.
Which is part of the controversy on whether there was any "social" interaction between Cro-magnon and Neanders. As I recall a flute and a doll were involved in the controversy being found in what appeared to be Neander burial.
... An outstanding competition for females is the “Miss World” competition for beautiful women from around the world. The winner of a Miss World competition must be considered near the pinnacle of female beauty.
quote:VALENCIA, Venezuela — Frustrated with the modest sales at his small mannequin factory, Eliezer Álvarez made a simple observation: Venezuelan women were increasingly using plastic surgery to transform their bodies, yet the mannequins in clothing stores did not reflect these new, often extreme proportions.
So he went back to his workshop and created the kind of woman he thought the public wanted — one with a bulging bosom and cantilevered buttocks, a wasp waist and long legs, a fiberglass fantasy, Venezuelan style.
The shape was augmented, and so were sales. Now his mannequins, and others like them, have become the standard in stores across Venezuela, ...
This demonstrates (to me) that the perceived "ideal" beauty is outside the available genotypes, and this demonstrates (to me) that we are seeing Fisherian Runaway Sexual Selection. Note that both sexes are involved with pursuing this perceived "ideal" -- men, by finding the women attractive, and women, by altering their appearance to be closer to this "ideal" ...