DiChristina, who has been serving as acting editor-in-chief since June, says,

I have two young daughters; one of them wants to be a scientist, and the other one wants to be the editor of Scientific American. I think anybody who is a position of leadership should feel a sense of responsibility. And I don't know if mine is any greater or less because I'm a first for the magazine. I know I'm very honored and grateful.

So will a female editor-in-chief cramp the style of Scientific American writer Jesse Bering, who once called out Jezebel commenters as an example of female bitchiness? Actually, his recent article on the female orgasm finds him on relatively good behavior. Bering still loves him a sex joke ("I wish there were a climax to the story, but as you see, the tale of the natural origins of female orgasm is a messy one."), but his analysis of various theories on the function or non-function of female sexual climax is generally pretty measured. Then again, there's this:

Twin-based evidence shows that orgasm frequency has a modest hereditable component. That is to say, uncomfortable as it may be to think of your flushed-faced grandmother writhing and moaning in ecstasy, there is a definite genetic contribution to female orgasm. (To help "unsee" these unsettling images shivering on the branches of your family tree, think on the bright side: female orgasms tend to decrease with age, so we're talking mostly about only young, still-hot grandmas.)

Jesse Bering, ladies and gentleman: perhaps battered, but not broken.

Scientific American Names First Female Editor-In-Chief [Mediabistro]
Reopening The Case Of The Female Orgasm [Scientific American]

Reading Bering's article feels a bit like watching monkeys masturbate at the zoo: you want to look away, but there is something grossly fascinating about the single-mindedness with which they play with themselves. It also brings me back to the first time I discovered balls, complete with the whole huh, those reaction. After years of hearing about how important they are - including many "you have no idea how much this hurts!" moments - the actual thing was, to be blunt, a little underwhelming. Bering even notes that, in contrast to the much-idolized penis, balls are sort of the ugly little brother. But still, he is fascinated with them. And, it seems, for good enough reason: unlike the penis, balls are complicated.

Drawing from an article published in this month's issue of Evolutionary Psychology, Bering answers many of his own questions about human testicles. First of all, why are balls so dangly? Apparently, it's not because women like it, although the authors of the recent testicle study do consider this idea:

Gallup and his coauthors jog through several possible theories of our species' testicular evolution by descent. One of the more fanciful accounts—and one ultimately discarded by the authors—is that scrotal testicles evolved in the same spirit as peacock feathers. That is to say, given the enormous disadvantage of having your entire genetic potential contained in a thin satchel of unprotected, delicate flesh and swinging several millimeters away from the rest of your body, perhaps scrotal testicles evolved as a sort of ornamental display communicating the genetic quality of the male... Although descended scrotal testicles do satisfy the obvious criterion of being counterintuitively costly, the authors conclude that handicapping is an unlikely explanation. If it were true, we would expect to see scrotal testicles becoming increasingly elaborate and dangly over the course of evolution, not to mention women should display a preference for males toting around the most ostentatious scrotal baggage.

Having settled that, we learn that the key to understanding balls lies in getting a grip on the "activation hypothesis." Bering describes the theory of descended testicles serving as a "cold storage" for sperm, which keep best at lower temperatures. The "activation" part occurs when heat from the vagina (or we suppose, any kind of body heat) fires up the sperm, getting it ready to make the mad dash toward reproduction. However, this is not the only time when the cremasteric muscle is active. The cremasteric muscle, for those of you unfamiliar with Matthew Barney, is the thing that draws the balls up and down, thus regulating their temperature through proximity to the body. Or, as Bering describes it:

Fortunately, human scrota don't just hang there holding our testicles and brewing our sperm, they also "actively" employ some interesting thermoregulatory tactics to protect and promote males' genetic interests. I place "actively" in scare quotes, of course, because although it would be rather odd to ascribe consciousness to human scrota, testicles do respond unintentionally to the reflexive actions of the cremasteric muscle. This muscle serves to retract the testicles so they are drawn up closer to the body when it gets too cold—just think cold shower—and also to relax them when it gets too hot. This up-and-down action happens on a moment-to-moment basis, thus male bodies continually optimize the gonadal climate for spermatogenesis and sperm storage. It's also why it's generally inadvisable for men to wear tight-fitting jeans or especially snug "tighty whities"—under these restrictive conditions the testicles are shoved up against the body and artificially warmed so that the cremasteric muscle cannot do its job properly. Another reason not to wear these things is that it's no longer 1988.

Aside from the fashion advice, I think the most important thing we should take away from this is that while balls may not be conscious, they are very smart. They're so smart that they work independently:

In fact, the temperature regulating function governed by the cremasteric muscle can account even for the most lopsided, one-testicle-above-the-other, waffling asymmetries in testes positioning. According to a 2008 report in Medical Hypotheses by anatomist Stany Lobo from the Saba University School of Medicine, Netherlands Antilles, each testicle continuously migrates in its own orbit as a way of maximizing the available scrotal surface area that is subjected to heat dissipation and cooling. Like ambient heat generated by individual solar panels, when it comes to spermatic temperatures, the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. With a keen enough eye, presumably one could master the art of " reading" testicle alignment, using the scrotum as a makeshift room thermometer. But that's just me speculating.

The activation hypothesis also explains some other ball-related mysteries, like why we enjoy having sex at night. Again, this has to do with temperature. The cooler air at night make it easier for men to maintain "optimal testicular adjustments." Plus, since women tend to pass out after late-night sex, and thus remain stationary, the recently released semen have better chances of reaching their goal.

Finally, we get to the issue of pain. Why does getting kicked in the balls hurt so much more than, say, getting kicked in the shins?

If you're male, the reason that you probably wince when you hear the word "squash" or "rupture" paired with "testicle" but not with, say, "arm" or "spleen" is because testicles are disproportionately more vital to your reproductive success than these other body parts are. I, for one, had to pause to cover myself just by typing those former words together. It's not that those other body parts aren't adaptively important, but variation in pain sensitivity across different bodily regions, according to this view, reflects the vulnerability and importance different adaptations play in your reproductive success. Male ancestors who learned to protect their gonads would have left more descendants—and pain is a pretty good motivator for promoting preemptive defensive action. Or, to think about it another way, any male in the ancestral past that was oblivious to or, gulp, enjoyed testicular insult would have been quickly weeded out of the gene pool.

Interestingly, the cremasteric muscle also plays a part here. When the balls are threatened by a nearby stimuli (a pinprick to the thigh, for example) they are pulled up towards the body. This protective feature also kicks into play during sex, in order to shield them from "possible damage to too-loose testicles resulting from vigorous thrusting during intercourse." Huh. Well that doesn't sound at all pleasant, but there it is. And with that image, let's return to our regularly scheduled program of ball busting and vagina-centric news. At least until Bering publishes another article - maybe next time we'll learn all about the anus.

Why Do Human Testicles Hang Like That? [Scientific American]

Related: Science Scribe Writes Masturbatory Missive About Human Penises

• Leighton Meester made the September cover of Harper's Bazaar, and inside the magazine printed digitally-altered photos of the actress, intended to show how she will age. At 23, Meester is already a supporter of Botox. [WWD]

• Three little words: Rodarte for Target. This December. Fashionistas all over this country are going to be wetting themselves and there aren't even any pictures yet. [WWD]
• In terms of irrepressibly stupid shit, $450 Louis Vuitton chopsticks pretty much takes the sushi. [FWD]
• Nicole Richie, on her new maternity line for A Pea In The Pod: "You really feel like you have to change your whole wardrobe. And that's the last thing a woman wants to go through. So I really tried to make this line to get women excited about wearing clothes." [People]
• Somebody put photos of Alexander McQueen's former London home on the Internet. Creepy. [SB]
• Add this to the mounting pile of reasons to give London Fashion Week a look this season: a photographic exhibition dedicated to Twiggy will open on September 19, the same day as the shows, at the National Portrait Gallery. Twiggy turns 60 this year. [Telegraph]
• 18-year-old American model Ali Stephens, who still dreams of being a marine biologist, struggles to balance her education with her work schedule. "Being in school got hard because I was never there. I switched to online schooling, but that didn't work either because I never had time to do it. When I was working I couldn't do it, and when I wasn't working, I just wanted to relax. It was hard to motivate. So right now I'm studying for my GED. I'm going to take it before fashion week." [W]
• Milla Jovovich, on life's greatest pleasure, reading: "Recently I read all Edith Wharton's classics and I re-read all of Dickens. I love books about turn-of-the-century New York. I just finished Maggie: A Girl Of The Streets by Stephen Crane. I had a phase of reading books about 'new physics' and I love to read Scientific American and New Scientist magazines. I read so much I am like a zombie in the morning." [Daily Mail]
• Princess Grace of Monaco and Cartier are getting stars on the Rodeo Drive Walk of Style. [WWD]
• Roberto Cavalli, you tease! The Italian designer, who for most of this year has toyed with the idea of selling a stake in his fashion house, and released many contradictory statements on the subject, finally committed to sell — but he has now allowed talks to break down with Clessidra SpA. The private equity firm that had wanted to buy a 30% stake in his company was apparently disappointed by the designer's reluctance to negotiate on his high price. [WWD]
• Tommy and Dee Hilfiger are now parents to a baby boy, Sebastian Thomas, born yesterday. Congratulations to them. [WWD]
• Katie Grand's second issue of Love magazine features Miley Cyrus and the Jonas Brothers. What? [Fashionologie]
• Kanye West is in New York today to fête Casio G-shock watches. The brand is launching new timepieces designed by Redman, Mister Cartoon, and Todd Jordan — but none from Kanye, yet. [WWD]
• Although the African Growth and Opportunity Act, signed into law by President Clinton in 2000, was intended to offer certain sub-Saharan African companies a break on U.S. trade tariffs to encourage African countries to diversify their economies and manufacturing bases, nearly a decade on, 92% of trade done under the act is in petroleum products. And in Kenya, where apparel manufacture had been a growth industry until this recession began, most of the factories that produce clothing for export under the act are owned by American and Chinese companies. Kenya's apparel sector still employs 26,000 people, and their working conditions are governed by the act, which sets limits on work hours, mandates overtime payments, and bans child labor. [LATimes]
• Urban Outfitters' $24 knockoff of the 3 Moon Wolf tee is imported — but we'll wager not from Kenya. Which means that the t-shirt makers, New Hampshire company The Mountain, and the original artist, Antonia Neshev, probably aren't being paid for their work. Urban Outfitters rips off pretty much everyone, but it's sad to see them kicking around a company that uses environmentally-friendly inks and provides on-site daycare for its employees. Strangely, Urban Outfitters seems to be banking both on the shirt's notoriety, and on its customers not being able to use a computer to navigate to the Amazon sales page, where the original 3 Wolf Moon tee is for sale starting at just $11. [FishbowlLA]
• Iconix Brand Group, which owns everything from Candie's to Badgley Mischka, reports a 32% rise in second quarter profit, to $19.3 million. [Crains]
• Polo Ralph Lauren's first quarter profit dropped 19%. [WSJ]
• Gucci is going to open a traveling pop-up store, to hopefully sell some sneakers Mark Ronson designed at Art Basel Miami and other wealthy world hotspots. [WWD]
• Torrid's holding a model search — so if you or someone you know is a size 12-26 and really, really, ridiculously good-looking, send in some pictures! Deadline's Friday, so act quick. [Torrid]

These "personalized viewpoints" of beauty are what seemingly makes the world go 'round, but for people with body dysmorphic disorder, their overly personalized/distorted thoughts about their own looks often drive them to obsessive plastic surgery, eating disorders, and other bodily harm.

As pointed out in an article in the current issue of Scientific American, doctors used to think that body dysmorphic disorder (when a person becomes "pathologically preoccupied with an imagined or barely noticeable defect in his or her appearance") was caused by a combination of nature and nurture. As S.A. puts it, "Psychological factors such as low self-esteem, coupled with society's restrictive definition of physical beauty, are likely to play a role in the disorder." But more recently, psychiatrists and psychologists have found that people with BDD might have "unusually acute perceptual abilities," specifically an "overemphasis on visual details," which helps explain why they "worry so much about minuscule deviations in their features." Maybe so, but whether anyone is pathologically focused on details or robotically-concerned with making a model of "universal beauty," they're missing out on the more intangibly human aspects of attractiveness: a sexy laugh, a sparkling eye, a warm demeanor.

[Image via Mathemetician's Pictures.]

Ad: Work At Los Alamos [ModernMechanix]
Related: Jezebel Stereotype [JimCrowMuseumOfRacistMemorabilia]
Earlier: The Jezebel Soundtrack
Jezebel: A Love Letter To The Most Awesome Blog Name In The Universe