PDA

View Full Version : Are we really that different?



curse within
08-11-2008, 12:04 AM
Have had a lot of free time as you can tell. Anyways have you ever noticed that in the animal kingdom the fellow creatures we share this planet with the males are always more colorfull, more pretty most of them I guess you could say to get a mate. The females are plain no frills blending in thing going on. Most ancient cultures like Japan,Eqypt and even the American Indians the male stood out more colorfull. I have read that just in recent times have males became more,,,plain and blending in and the females are now more colorfull. I just found that interesting.

valenstein
08-11-2008, 12:51 PM
Certainly. Not long ago, they didn't dress baby boys in blue because it was too feminine.
I can argue lifestyle and gender against religious issues, but always find it funny when people say this is not "natural". I like to ask ignorant guys if they think it's unnatural for their wives/girlfriends to shave their legs and armpits.

curse within
08-11-2008, 12:56 PM
That is also a good point Valenstein never thought about the shaving some countries today still have women who do not shave thier leggs or arm pits .

Jenna Lynne
08-11-2008, 03:56 PM
Males in many species engage in "fitness displays." The ladies shop around for the males who have the most spectacular plumage.

A transgendered male peacock would surely pull out his tail feathers, not strut around with them!

Among humans, males compete for females in several ways. Displays of physical agility are important (think how successful pro athletes are with the ladies!) because they provide a visible indication of good genes. Displays of fine possessions (fast car, Rolex) show an ability to care for children, which is also important to mating.

In many species, such as moose and goats, the males engage in mock combat by butting heads. Human males sometimes fight, either individually or in groups. (The war hero is, again, likely to have his choice of mates.) But it's not quite so ritualized, because our weaponry has evolved faster than our instincts.

The problem with transgendered behavior, in terms of human ethology, is that because women are slighter in stature than men and typically don't engage in combat, displaying as a female is interpreted as a sign of weakness. When other males sense weakness, they may seize on the opportunity (quite instinctively) to display their fitness by winning a fight. You and I get to fight with them, whether we want to or not.

This instinct is very misguided. Not too many women will admire a guy for beating up a crossdresser! But when the instincts start pulling the levers, the conscious mind is a 97-pound weakling!

***Jenna Lynne***

[blogging at jennalynne.wordpress.com]

melissaK
08-11-2008, 04:34 PM
Ooo. All those biology, ecology, genetic classes are coming back to me now . . . analysis of male behavior when the female controls who gets to mate with her . . . besides simple generalizations, the rules don't apply too well outside a particular specie . . .
hugs,
lissa

Joy Carter
08-11-2008, 06:55 PM
With humans it's about sex for males. For females, It's about a good provider, with good genes too father children.

Fab Karen
08-11-2008, 07:51 PM
Humans aren't run by instinct.

Jenna Lynne
08-11-2008, 08:14 PM
Humans aren't run by instinct.
Sorry to have to rain on your parade, but humans are very largely run by instinct, just as all other animals are. We have this thin veneer of rationality, but you don't have to dig very hard to peel off the veneer and see what's underneath.

I could give many examples, but I'll limit myself to one:

The acquisition of language is entirely under the control of an instinct. If you put a normal human infant around adults who speak, you can't prevent the infant from learning the language. The infant doesn't decide to learn to speak: There is no conscious volition involved. The brain just does what it does.

Most of human behavior is like that. Including perhaps especially the things we're proudest of because we think we're somehow responsible for their existence.

***Jenna Lynne***

[blogging at jennalynne.wordpress.com]

Angie G
08-11-2008, 08:15 PM
Just evolved differently. :hugs:
Angie

Fab Karen
08-11-2008, 08:20 PM
IF what you think were true, men would be jumping on women in the street & attempting to have sex with them. And CD's would be wanting to look pretty & feminine for the purpose of attracting a man.

valenstein
08-12-2008, 07:59 AM
I think you're both right. We do still behave instinctually, but in our efforts to be social creatures, we have lost some of that instinct. It is partially due to that loss of instinct that has allowed us to evolve beyond our ancestors. In a recent study, a test was done where two participants had to work together to receive food. The same test was done with primates and human babies. While both the primates and humans worked together to get the food, once the food was within their grasp, the alpha primate grabbed the food time after time whereas the humans repeatedly found a way to share.

I will say this: If it weren't for our social adaptability, men definitely would be jumping on women in the street, they can barely contain themselves now! ;)

shannonsilk
08-12-2008, 10:13 AM
IF what you think were true, men would be jumping on women in the street & attempting to have sex with them.

There certainly have been times and places where this was true. In the USA, all those white guys who had slaves felt that it was their right to jump the females. In most other countries, the kings and other high officials thought they had the right also.
Isn't that the plot of Braveheart or the other one around the same time?

Today there is a small chance of repercussions that makes it less likely.

Bev06 GG
08-12-2008, 11:43 AM
Certainly. Not long ago, they didn't dress baby boys in blue because it was too feminine.
I can argue lifestyle and gender against religious issues, but always find it funny when people say this is not "natural". I like to ask ignorant guys if they think it's unnatural for their wives/girlfriends to shave their legs and armpits.

Hi Valenstein,
We have to be careful going down this road though because the argument soon gets blown out of the water. Not its not natural to shave legs and armpits your right but it hardly measures up against a male trying to pass as a female. Its not just the colours or the dresses is it, its the whole package, the wig the makeup the breast forms etc. Please dont get me wrong I wouldn't be one of those people saying its not natural, but if your going to have an argument or a debate with someone who does then you need a water tight one and that old argument is just too full of holes.
Bev

curse within
08-12-2008, 11:56 AM
I completely agree Bev, sorry I know it wasn't directed at me "but" Valestein also has a point. I guess you could compare it to a pro CDer and someone totally against CDing. I believe what Valenstein was directing her thoughts towards the sake of argueing . I.E. is it anymore natural for a man to dress as a women than a women to shave in those areas? I think the obvious answer to the question is no. It is what society tells us what one should do with thier bodys and clothing. Not out for argueing either you both have great points.

valenstein
08-12-2008, 12:15 PM
I believe what Valenstein was directing her thoughts towards the sake of argueing .

Totally. It's the debate person in me. If the word had been "okay" instead of "natural", I'd have gone down a different path. It wasn't so much I thought I'd win with that argument, it was more like "leading the witness".

I've been reading a lot of Alan Dershowitz lately....

Bev06 GG
08-12-2008, 12:22 PM
Totally. It's the debate person in me. If the word had been "okay" instead of "natural", I'd have gone down a different path. It wasn't so much I thought I'd win with that argument, it was more like "leading the witness".

I've been reading a lot of Alan Dershowitz lately....
Thanks girls,
Devils Advocat. Which is always good when you have a debate because it gets people thinking of all sides.
Take care
bev

Fab Karen
08-12-2008, 06:12 PM
I only refute that humans are SOLELY run by instinct.

Nicki B
08-12-2008, 06:50 PM
I only refute that humans are SOLELY run by instinct.

I know many people (men and women) who seem to be very good at rationalising their instinctive decisions after the event... :heehee:


Devils Advocat.

You don't drink that stuff, do you? :eek:

Nicole Erin
08-12-2008, 07:23 PM
I wonder how in our society, the men became so dull?


For females, It's about a good provider, with good genes too father children.

Well that would certainly explain why so many younger women date LOSERS and later become single moms.

Deanna2
08-12-2008, 07:56 PM
Are we really that different?

I hope I am. I wouldn't want to be like some of the people I am acquainted with. And I know for a fact that the world would not want too many of me floating around.