Peacocks

[Bri]

Hey, have y'all ever thought about this. I am out in nature gathering all the time. I always notice nature and I like to compare human behavior to wild animals in nature. Of course in nature the male is always the flambouyant one. When I was still trying to figure out why I enjoy crossdressing so much I thought of just that in nature. Maybe it's truly what nature meant and man has screwed it up.

[kimdl93]

Would not be the first time!

[Karren H]

Think in nature it is the female that is trying to hide, blend in so that there is a better chance of survival. The male are trying to draw attention away from the females. So if humans were more like animals in nature, we would want to look more like females who are trying to hide and blend in? Lol.

[GretchenM]

Good observations, Bri. But well decorated males is not always the case and in some species it is the female that is the colorful one. Archaeologists have found that the more decorated female humans date back a long ways. It appears that females do that, in part, to attract males which tend to be more plain, but in many modern and some ancient cultures males are also well decorate but not in the way females decorate themselves. Females generally wore more trinkets and apparently decorated their bodies more.

Each species has its own characteristics and it is probably not wise to generalize to humans. But there is something to what you say as a generalization of the use of different colorful patterns. Decoration in humans probably does not have a survival value per se but does play a role in reproduction which makes it a survival value. As a professional ecologist I can say that each species is unique in coloration and pattern, but it always is associated with what produces the highest survival rate. Some African frogs change their sex depending on the environmental changes. But that is a rare ability in reptiles, birds and mammals. It is common in insects.

On the other hand in humans not all decoration is related to attracting mates except within the younger humans where it plays a big role. With age it seems to become more of a tradition and females just like to look nice and perhaps males look more bland so they don't look like females. But gender identity reversal flips that equation around. The real mystery is why gender reversal occurs and what is the adaptive value of gender identity reversal in the evolutionary process? It has a long history and so it is inherent in humans. It is founded in genetics but it also is modified greatly by experience and environment. Perhaps it is a genetic variation that had an adaptive value in the distant past and that has simply been carried forward in small numbers and thus persists as a part of the vast range in human diversity.

[Bri]

good answers. I thought it was an interesting concept.

[Bea_]

That exact thought has crossed my mind many times since I first started being drawn to what society calls feminine. I've come to the point where I feel virtually invisible in drab.

[Stephanie47]

I'm going to fall back on my old standby: genes. I suspect everyone has some genes that are dominate over others but society comes along and imposes restrictions. Hence we get norms and societal expectations. I don't want my comment to get axed, but look at the men who are dominate in the world of government and finance. They all line up with blue suits and red ties. Until they open their mouths and speak you'd think they are clones of each other. On the other hand, women are the ones wearing clothing with designs and bright colors. My preference is dresses with colorful floral patterns. In male mode in my work environment I had to wear a dress shirt, tie and slacks. There was not too much I could do about slacks since manufacturers limited the selection. I have mentioned before that my sole white dress shirt ended upon my retired in the trash as it had turned yellow hanging in the closet. I wore colorful dress shirts and expressive ties. Now, in retirement? It's graphic t-shirts. Hobbies or interests? As far back as elementary school I enjoys colors; drawing/painting and now growing bright flowers, dahlias and roses and lilies. On the other hand my older brother by fourteen months always had a technical engineering mind. Physically, his genetic profile flows from our maternal grandfather. Me? I have no idea who contributed to my like of colors and patterns that the female humans are suppose display. My conjecture runs to my PTSD counselors statement that each man or women has some genetic material in the chain of the other sex; in some it is more than others. Too much rambling so early in the morning.

[JohnH]

Previously men's fashions were flamboyant. The last time that happened was in the 1970's. Somehow like a disease men's fashions became drab and muted in color. I was looking at the Men's Wearhouse website and noted how muted the outfits appear. You even have to search diligently for pinstripe suits. And the ties - no colorful tartan ties on that website. It seems that male clothing conventions are coffin sized.
Well, I say to hell with that. I now wear dresses almost exclusively during the warm time of the year (Dallas-Fort Worth) and for church I wear makeup and heels. For church the cooler time of the year I alternate between a man's coat and tie outfit and a dress with heels. I have rebelled against the exclusive coat and tie attire as formal wear for men.

[docrobbysherry]

Many women today prefer to wear plain, easy on, comfortable clothing that may not flatter their figure.:straightface:

And, while many trans here try to copy those dressed to blend women, CD's like myself dress to look attractive and sexy or don't dress at all!:battingeyelashes:

But, then again, CD's r mostly men in dresses!:devil:

[Bri]

That's cool and brave John. You know thinking about it you're right. My gosh look how men dressed in the 1700's with wigs and makeup. Really as you said all the way up to the seventies with the bell bottoms and wide lapels and men got perms and afros and basically had their hair done, hell we used to compare stylists. So I guess conservatism began growing, I don't know.

[JohnH]

In my personal opinion the issue of misgendering someone is bunk. I have the appearance of a woman but the voice of a man (bass). So I get ma'amed and sir'ed all the time, but I don't care. All I request is that I'm not called Maggot.
I go by my real masculine name and regard myself as a man since I would like dresses, makeup, and heels become acceptable attire for ordinary men in addition to the coat and tie outfit.
And the interesting thing is I have gotten virtually no pushback with my attire.

[DianeT]

If these animals are named after the size of their privates I really don't see what there is to brag about.

[JohnH]

The females of peacocks are called peahens. A rooster may be called a c o c k, so the term "peacock" is logical.

[DianeT]

But you didn't explain the pea.
(To peacocks reading, don't worry, your secret is safe with me.)

[Bri]

JohnH that is exactly why they're called that just like **** chicken is a rooster.

[char GG]

It seems this thread has run it's course; now off topic from the intent of the OP