Would someone please validate this theory so I don't feel dumb?

okay, so as a generalality, female children look more like their fathers and male children look more like their mothers, so theoreticaly(theoretically?)as time progresses males and females should start to look more like each other, until, theoreticaly,total androgeny is achieved. Did any of that make sense?

It made sense but I still think its wrong. At first the child may look more like their parents of opposite gender but it doesnt increase down the generations.

Its not like:

15% idenical at first generation
20% at second
25% at thrid.

So maybe your theory explains why I have these great tits when I'm a guy?

I disagree with the initial assumption, in my experience children are just as likley to look like the parent of the same sex as they are to look like the parent of the opposite sex

hehe this reminds me of this time when flicking at my parent's photos of them when they were about my age now, and i realised that i looked a lot like both of them.

i told this to a mate, i was thinking that i was a perfect balance of the two. her mentality made her think that my parents looked the same.

well, when ur isolated by geography and the only people around are kin... welllll... no, thats still too disturbing