Sorry Dude, but no

I just came across the following quote on the blog of an evolutionary biology Ph.D candidate:

"Sexual selection is our most elegant confirmation of [Darwin's] central tenet that the struggle of individuals for reproductive success drives evolution-a notion that natural selection cannot adequately confirm because its products are also the predictions of other evolutionary theories (and also, for optimal design, of creationism itself). The proof that our world is Darwinian lies in the large set of adaptations arising only because they enhance reproductive success but otherwise both hinder organisms and harm species."

-Stephen Jay Gould, The Flamingo's Smile

My beef is with the part about proof that our world is Darwinian. Sexual selection does not prove the world to be Darwinian and more than it proves Biblical creation. It's true that it's one of many possibilities we could expect from Darwinian evolution, but it also fits perfectly well with creation because of one factor that evolutionists seem to either forget or have trouble grasping; the fall.
I once heard that in thousands of years humans will be divided into two groups. One as ugly as trolls or ogres and one with incredibly beautiful people because of people's tendencies to marry those with a similar level of attractiveness. From a biblical perspective, ugliness would be caused my a mutation that deformed God's perfect creation, combined with our fallen sense of desire. As physical deformities (i.e. uneven eyes, big noses, too much body hair, slanted brow, etc.) became more pronounced in some, they began to be selected against by those with none or very small deformities or what have become highly desirable features. Some of these highly desirable features are harmful, such as overly small waists and overly large breasts.
From a Darwinian standpoint, overly large breasts would be a disadvantage for a woman who needed to escape a predator, and diseases like anorexia and bulimia stem from the desire to have an overly small waist. Clearly if it were only up to natural selection these things would be selected against and disappear.
From a biblical standpoint, these things are to be expected. As our desires wander further away from Godly desires we come to appreciate things that are not good for us, and that are shallow and meaningless. The evolutionists see something that no perfect God would have created. Their uniformitarian glasses have blinded them. The present is certainly not the key to the past here. God created perfection, and man ruined it through sin. The things we desire in a sexual partner are very likely not what we would have desired when God created us.
Sexual selection is evidence of the fall, not proof that the world is in fact Darwinian.