Do you think that animals think some of their opposite sexes are sexy like we think ours are?

Question

I know it's a stupid question, lols. Like they would see some of their species as sexy or not, for the purpose of selection, just like we do. It's just that we arn't capable of seeing them that way because we are not their species. And they don't see us that way either.

Answer 1

I'll just throw in my two-cents worth of wisdom here... As so often in scientific work (and not only of the natural sciences) the devil is - as they say - in the detail, and the sticky detail here is the way your formulated the question. I think it safe to to say that animals do not "think" of their potential mates as "sexy" the way we do; no dog will think, "My God, look at those legs... I want her to mother my puppies..." But of course, that was, I believe not really what you meant. What you are interested in, it seems to me, is whether animals simply respond mechanistically to the presence of potential mates or not. In other words, do animals just mate with the next available potential partner or do they choose.

If indeed your answer is correctly re-formulated by me, the answer to your question would be that animals can be extremely picky as to who they mate with. It is a phenomenon that was already discussed by Darwin, and which he considered one of the major mechanisms of evolution. He called it sexual selection.

What Darwin observed was that in many species primarily the males develop physical characteristics that seemingly serve no other purpose than fighting with other males over females or to simply impress the females so much that they prefer to mate with a carrier of a certain rather "attractive" trait. The female's choice obviously would affect which charcteristics would be inherited by the next generation, and therefore affect the trajectory of evolution significantly. Darwin saw sexual selection as distinctly different from natural selection, since the selection pressure at work here is solely coming from the choosing female. As you can see, already since the earliest days of modern evolutionary biology your question has interested the greates minds in the field.

To be sure, Darwin did not reduce the choice to females; he very much left room for male choice as well, but since it is most often the females that invest more into reproduction it simply seemed logical to assume that more species show female than male choice. This assumption was the central tenet for mate choice research for a long time: whoever invests more into reproduction will be the sex that chooses. Of course, things are not always as easy as we would like them to be, and so also in case of mate choice, studies eventually challanged this central paradigm.

At first, the experimental data confirmed wonderfully the hypothesis. In syngnathid fishes (sea horses, needle fish, trumpet fish, etc.), the "sex roles" are reversed and it is the males, not the females that choose. In these fishes the females release their eggs into a pouch on the belly of the male, where they are being fertilized and carried until the young hatch after a certain gestation period. Reproduction is thus far more expensive for the male sea horse than his female partner. Many other examples supporting the correlation of reproductive investment and mate choice. But soon, things got more complicated.

The problem was this, and it makes a lot of sense: Imagine yourself to be a fish (you may choose your species freely) swimming happily through your home reef or sea grass bed, and you see these three really hot studs drifting by, very ready to engage in a little bit of loving with you. Of course, given you shared their sentiments, you would simply "look for the sexiest one" (anthropomorphized language is tongue in cheek, so don't quote me on it) and seek out a nicely sheltered place. But what would you do if you new there were predators in the area and that focusing on who to choose would significantly increase your risk of being eaten? As a human, you'd say, "boys, maybe another time but this shark really kills the mood..." However, as a fish your urge to reproduce and thus be biologically successful, would have to be weighed carefully against the danger. One possible thing to do would be to mate, but be less selective. Exactly that is what experiments have shown animals would do under such circumstances. Obviously, mate preference was not quite as easily explained by "markers of genetic quality," but instead could turn out a contextual phenomenon - at least something being environmentally affected.

As you see, the story gets more complicated, and you are probably tired out as it is, so I should cut it short. But NO, I go on bravely and urge you to do the same. The next complication in the research of mate preference was the question whether it could not be possible that both males and females choose. And once again, experiments demonstrated clearly that this happens. At times, it is even difficult to determine what drives this choice behavior, although it becomes increasingly evident that while certainly part of the equation, parental investment is not sufficient to explain away all the mate choice behavior we observe in animals. Why then may both sexes choose?

There are a variety of possible causes, ranging from environmental factors, such as visibility of water, predator presence, health of the available potential mates, etc. etc. etc. But there is a whole other can of worms that has been opened, and it brings us closer and closer to what you may be wondering about. Studies on a variety of animals, ranging from insects to mammals, have shown that socio-sexual experiences throughout life can have huge effects on how males and females choose sex partners in adulthood. The first sexual experience, for example can have quite an impact on sexual tastes of an animal. Likewise, in certain species with parental care, the way young animals are raised by their parents can affect their future sexual preferences. For example, the bird studies one of the other answerers referred to have shown that there can be clear correlations of parent feather colors and shape as well as behavior that affects the chicks future preferences.

To make the story still more complicated, let me add something else, namely the effect of embryonic environments on adult mate choice. It has been shown that in geckos with temperature dependent sex determination adult male mate choice is correlated with the embryonic temperature. In these critters, the rate of male to female hatchlings is dependent on the temperature at which the eggs are being incubated. If you incubate eggs at 30 degrees Celsius, you will get about 25% males and 75% females. At 32.5 C, this ratio is inverted to 75% males and 25% females. Interestingly, males from the two different temperatures behave very different and have very different brain morphologies and activities. It seems as if their perception of the world is simply very different due to the different brain developments that was triggered by the embryonic temperature during a temperature sensitive phase. It seems that hormone levels in embryos from different temperatures differ, and so the brains develop likeswise differnt. Behavioral experimetns have shown that males from different temperatures prefer females from different temperatures. 30 degree males like females from warmer incubation temperatures, while 32.5 degree males prefer the colder females. Here now, we have a non-genetic, non-social environmental embryonic influence modulating adult sexual behavior.

As you can see, mate choice is a reality for all sorts of animal species. And to answer your question, they certainly find some individuals more sexy than others.

I hope this helps. And apologies for the very long answer.

Answer 2

Well, Natural selection dictates that the most attractive mates are preferred, they are usually adapted in some way to better suit their environment, or to provide for offspring. Some theories have arrisen in the field of ethology as to why some mates are selected. The sexy son hypothesis states that a male is chosen based on his physical appearance or adaptaions, so that the generation born to that male will also be attractive (sexy) and there fore be able to produce offspring as well. It all comes down to fitness...I dont mean exercise, but reproductive output and the replication of genes. Basically all animals want to reporduce thier genetic material as much as possible. In mammals for instance, males ex. moose wiil have harems. The Largest male with the largest antlers, is not only the most attractive, but also the best suited to defend his mates. His offspring will also have these traits, so when they mate, his fitness also increases because they share the same DNA.

In birds it all comes down to looks. Peacocks are a great example. Males carry around these large feathers that serve no purpose. This is known as the handicap hypothesis. If a male can look that good, but be handicapped by it, he must be a real survivor... that is what the female is looking for. Bower birds are another example, the males arent as beautiful as a peascock, but the nests they make are. These birds form a really nice bower, covered in pretty things that they find in the forest, and show it off to the female...she choses a mate based on his possessions...kind of shallow if you ask me. ha ha. That is why many male birds are much more showy than females, because in order to find a mate and spread your genetic material, you have to look your best. Through evolution and natural selection, the males are just more elaboratly colored than females...

Many reptiles are sexually monochromatic and monomorphic meaning that they dont have many differences betweent eh sexes, so I guess if they find themselves sexy, they will find their very similar counterparts attractive too.

Frogs, use sexy calls instead of sexy apprearance to attract their mates. Females are drawn by the vocalization of the males.

I hope that answered your question! I kinda went on a rant there, but that was a very good question!

Answer 3

I don't think it's a matter of sexy or not for animals. Dolphins are said to be the only animal that mates for pleasure besides Humans. So maybe they do. But for most I'd say no. In Birds for instance a bright plumage may be more attractive. This isn't because it's sexy. If a bird was sick or suffered from malnutrition it wouldn't be able to spend the extra energy on producing the bright colors. Therefor when a female bird sees a brightly colored male she knows he's fit and healty and thus should produce healty offspring. Deer are the same way. Antlers are expensive in terms of energy needed to produce and carry them. Plus they are made of nutrients which would be more useful in the animals body. So a male with a large set of antles is showing the female A.) he is mature and survived long enough to grow such a large set and B.) that he is so healthy he doesn't need the extra nutrients and C.) he's so fit he can spend the extra energy to produce them and carry the weight around. From a pure survival perspective Color and Decorations are a waste of engergy and not a good idea. But if you can show your potential mate you are so fit you don't need so save your engergy then you are more likely to pass on your genes. So I don't thinks it's a matter of sexy or not. Even in some regards with humans. Let's not fool ourselves, Women choose who they mate with, Men are less picky (generally). Women see a man who is overly skinny, no muscle tone, scruffy, dirty, sick...and next to him is a more defined, clean, healthy man. PHYSICALLY the attraction is to the fitter man because he is seen being able to produce better offspring.

Answer 4

Yes!! Birds for example, have brightly colored feathers, in amazing patterns, and it has been demonstrated, that there is a direct sexual response to the color/pattern. This is also true, in tropical fish. Among antlered creatures, the width of the rack, attracts females, to the point, certain species of elk can barely move through the bush, to get food,when they are sporting a set. So yes, the females must think they look sexy, or function would take over, and smaller more effective fighting racks would prevail.

Answer 5

in most animals, the female is the one that chooses her mate. i dont really know if they consider others, uh,"sexy", but females tend to choose larger, stronger, or dominant males, if the males set up a display, she chooses the most elaborate. they consider it important that the offspring survive, and therefore, their mate must be strong and healthy.

Answer 6

Yes. You make me feel like an animal!

Answer 7

yes they do because they also are living things with ideas , the way they think is also what we think but in a different way

Answer 8

Yes. If they don't they'll be extinct pretty soon.

Answer 9

ofcourse they do fall in love and eventually they will mate and give birth....

Answer 10

i think its more of an instinct. they feel an urge and they act on it.