English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

are the only mammalian species with adornments to attract males?

Seriously. In every other species, the MALE is the one with decorations - peafowl, wood ducks, bower birds, lions, you name it - but human females have non-functional adornments, namely breasts, attractively cantilevered butt flab, etc.

Yeah, I know, all mammals have breasts, but they don't amount to anything in any non-human species unless they are filled with milk. Human women are the only ones that have developed them for show. Same with butts. It's been proven (insofar as it's possible to prove these things, that the SINGLE greatest turn-on for a male is a large differential between the size of a woman's waist and the size of her hips. Yeah, I know they have to have wider pelvises for the childbearing duties, but the cheerleader bubble butt owes more to form following function in terms of attracting a mate than it does to facilitating squirting kids into the world.

Just wondered what you folks think.

2006-11-25 02:57:10 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Social Science Gender Studies

10 answers

Why did you put this question in the most social science of the social science section? Not in every other species, though. Sexual dimorphism is not as marked in many mammalians, as secondary sexual characteristics rarely equal that of the lion, except in size dimorphism. It just so happens, that in our species, women have this secondary dimorphism that is so noticeable. The male not having either a mane or wattles or that superior of size differential. I see you have garnered the usual crop of social science nonsense answers.

2006-11-25 11:06:36 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

The problem with this is that humans are soooo far removed from the world which our mammalians friends live in. We have a constructed society with the construction of language, money, roles (gender, sex, race, etc.), and the construction of sexuality.

There is variance among all species as to who does the attracting - on a whole, though, males do what they can to attract a female. Now, it does seem a bit backwards that we as humans and female humans wear the adornment to attract men...but let's think about it this way: The reason the males are typically more colorful is so alert the female, so to speak, of how good their genetic material is. The brighter the feathers or scales or the nicer the hair, the more suitable the genetic material is and that is what the female wants. The problem with this is that we, as humans, no long base our choice of mate on biology but on money, compatibility, and love and other things which have NO bearing on what types of genes we might be carrying. Have you ever noticed that when men let the hair on their head grow, it is typically really nice? It's curly or wavy or has a lot of body or texture where as women, of course not exclusively, tend to have flatter, less textured hair? In fact, many products exist to make womens hair have more body, more texture, and kind of replicate men's hair. Same with body hair - it is a sign of sexual maturity and men with a lot of hair are thought to be more fertile or a better mate. Men are given the natural adornments; the eqivalent to pretty scales, manes, and feathers.

As for breasts, the most logical theory I have heard on them is pretty great. If you look at our ape ancestors, they have very small breasts but their faces (well, I guess their mouth, essentially) protrudes a lot. A baby ape is able to get milk from it's mother very easily because it's mouth protrudes, so it can can milk and also breathe at the same time. Human have flatter faces. If females didn't have breasts, the baby would suffocate while trying to eat because it would have to press it's face against a small amount of fatty tissue. The form and curvature of the breast works well as the flat faced human baby is able to eat and breathe at the same time. (And in fact, infants are able to swallow and breathe at the same time up until 3 months or so which means that they won't choke, either).

As for butts, the fat is deposited there because it is ESSENTIAL to have when bearing a child. Being pregnant takes up a lot of calories, and if you have ever eaten 2,000 calories a day of relatively healthy food, it is difficult. So, imagine feeding two mouths and how much time you would have to spend eating just to maintain a weight. Since fat provides 9 calories per gram and is infact one of the best long term energy sources for humans, it is a quick way to store energy which can be utilized while bearing children.

I doubt that they were put there just so men would be attracted to the females, but that certainly is a secondary purpose for breasts and butts.

2006-11-25 13:05:22 · answer #2 · answered by jr_crime_fighter 2 · 1 1

Actually in the animal kingdom the male of the species is more "colorful" than the female. It is the males responsibility to attract the female into mating.
I do understand what you're trying to say though. I have to disagree that human women have developed their breasts for show. We were born with them. Society and largely the media have objectified womens body parts to the point where women feel they have to have silicone pumped into their breasts to attract men.
It is after all is said and done human nature to mate and have children so the species can continue.

2006-11-25 11:36:28 · answer #3 · answered by Jadis 4 · 1 1

Dennis; Sorry sir nudity was never accepted.
In the garden of Eden when man sinned God made them clothes. (the first sacrifice). and dressed them.

Some of you need to go to the Farm or Zoo and watch the animals. Animals give off a scent that attracts the other genders. Ever watch the bulls and the like, where they put their noses.
I often wonder how it was in the ole west, when folks did not bathe everyday, their underwear could stand alone, in the corner, their tub was a river or a lake.
Women give of scents to especially when she just comes from the shower. Or when she's hornie, maaAAAaan what a smell.
And, what to you mean non functional adornments.
Them lovely globes they possess are very functional, and an added attribute to their beauty.
Big Bubble butted cheerleader? Nah, Nice, soft, round, curvy, flavored buns, are a perfect assssset there boy.
I believe when Adam woke up and saw his rib standing their it was the most beautiful sight he had ever seen. Puppies, lovely soft buns, furry..... never mind. She was all there and Adam observed all of her.
And suddenly, Adam realized he had a new buddy!
There was Adam & Eve, and Adams new friend all in the garden. you'll catch it in a minute if you haven't already.

2006-11-25 12:25:16 · answer #4 · answered by smially 3 · 0 2

were programmed to find things about the opposite sex attractive.

ok you may think other animals breast not very attractive but i'm sure they attract males of that species in the same way ours do you.

2006-11-25 12:06:36 · answer #5 · answered by QueenB 4 · 1 0

It works. That's what evolution is all about. Men through the ages have gravitated toward those women shaped like the ones you describe.

2006-11-25 11:59:51 · answer #6 · answered by anita.revolution 2 · 1 0

Society has programmed us to these things. Before there were more than just loincloths as clothing, nudity was accepted and normal. Different cultures (mainly extinct ones) exhibit nudity in their art and their pictures in routine or daily activities.

We, as the human race, have imposed these things into ourselves and our society. We can only blame ourselves as a whole.

2006-11-25 11:25:35 · answer #7 · answered by konstipashen 5 · 1 1

The attraction to breasts is an instinctual attraction for men. That is where our food comes from when we are infants--a very impressionable age. If we don't eat, then we die. You do the math.

P.S. Please don't tell me that penis size is not a decoration on men.

2006-11-25 11:10:24 · answer #8 · answered by timdvrs 4 · 1 1

It's dictated by the society.When people start wearing clothes, sexiness was conceptualized. The things that we hide now became delicacy to the opposite sex.

2006-11-25 11:06:40 · answer #9 · answered by dennis 2 · 1 1

Birds ("...peafowl, wood ducks, bower birds,...") are not mammals ("mammalian species").

2006-11-26 06:34:12 · answer #10 · answered by Predictor 3 · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers