PDA

View Full Version : Blonde Hair Exists Because Cavemen Were Transfixed by Shiny Things



Tota
August 16th, 2012, 12:02 PM
I just came across this article and thought I could share it with you. Just for fun! :D

(http://jezebel.com/5935248/blonde-hair-exists-because-cavemen-were-transfixed-by-shiny-things?utm_campaign=socialflow_jezebel_facebook&utm_source=jezebel_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow)Blonde Hair Exists Because Cavemen Were Transfixed by Shiny Things (http://jezebel.com/5935248/blonde-hair-exists-because-cavemen-were-transfixed-by-shiny-things?utm_campaign=socialflow_jezebel_facebook&utm_source=jezebel_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow)

swearnsue
August 16th, 2012, 02:24 PM
Cavemen were no different than men are today. They will mate with anyone and everyone they can no matter what color the hair! IMO.

cmg
August 16th, 2012, 02:28 PM
Haha, indeed. There seems to be alot of "cavemen" roaming around even today then, LOL

I think this article as well as the illustration on it is misrepresenting some of the facts here. Red hair, not blonde, is the most rare in the world. In fact, there are about twice as many blondes as there are redheads (2% respectively 1%). Sexual selection would have given different traits in men and women, which is not the case with blonde haired people. The responsible genes are indifferent to sexual gender. A blonde gene is also apperaring in several forms in more than one race in the world. Sexual selection is one of the reasons why mutational hair colors are still persevering, but thats not the whole story. Hair color and other traits of the hair also have physical and/or biochemical effect on the human body, which have contributed to the survival of their carriers. Camouflage, heat reduction, protection from infections or insects bites etc. The natural population in the scandinavian countries at early historical times was not even blonde, they were dark haired people. In addition some the first native immigrants, the sami pepole of today, were dark haired people of egyptian ascent (confirmed by DNA). As an example, dark hair on eylashes would protect the person better from snow blindness (or the equivalent in the desert) and in general from heat/humidity loss or skin damage from UV-radiation on high altitudes in the Scandinavian mountains. Only later, some fair haired people came to Scandinavia from the south east of Eurasia and multiplied after the sea level had allowed for the water that covered more than half of todays Scandinavia to dissapear. Scientists may still differ on what carries more weight though, sexual selection or environmental adaptation. It's all a great mix.

I think you will have more scientificly based information on human hair color in those articles on Wicipedia:
On hair color in general:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_hair_color
On human hair:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hair

/ CMG

Nedertane
August 16th, 2012, 02:52 PM
You know, I find it funny that articles on this topic NEVER mention blonde-haired males. Don't they have any effect on the natural or sexual selection towards, and thus prevalence (of whatever degree) of lighter hair?

And why are blonettes always left out too? :p

Tota
August 16th, 2012, 02:57 PM
Haha :) I know, it's a stupid article, but just this quote made it worth reading for me:


... and then, when blonde hair showed up, everyone was all like, "Whoa, wtf?" Which is how people spoke to each other in prehistoric times.

I will so be using this when teaching teens history ... at least I'll know who's listening to me ;)

Tota
August 16th, 2012, 03:02 PM
You know, I find it funny that articles on this topic NEVER mention blonde-haired males. Don't they have any effect on the natural or sexual selection towards, and thus prevalence (of whatever degree) of lighter hair?

And why are blonettes always left out too? :p

Blonde-haired males didn't exist back then. Their beards and hair were all muddy and bloody from hunting and fighting so their "blondeness" was hidden ;)

I think that a blonette that spends most of her time outdoors becomes a blonde, too.

I'm just joking. I don't take this article seriously, but it's funny to me.

cmg
August 16th, 2012, 03:04 PM
Yeah, that was funny. :)

Nedertane
August 16th, 2012, 03:06 PM
Blonde-haired males didn't exist back then. Their beards and hair were all muddy and bloody from hunting and fighting so their "blondeness" was hidden ;)

I think that a blonette that spends most of her time outdoors becomes a blonde, too.

I'm just joking. I don't take this article seriously, but it's funny to me.

Haha, I getcha. I don't take this to heart either, but it's just something I notice in other articles on this topic.

Pegasus Marsters
August 16th, 2012, 03:10 PM
Cavemen were no different than men are today. They will mate with anyone and everyone they can no matter what color the hair! IMO.

If a man on this forum made that kind of comment about a woman we would be ripping them apart right now. Doesn't seem very fair to be derogatory towards men.

But I do love the idea that the reason we have blondes is cuz cavemen were part magpie!

xoxophelia
August 16th, 2012, 03:17 PM
And why are blonettes always left out too? :p

Ditto.. time for an uprising! :p

whitedove
August 16th, 2012, 03:19 PM
So funny the "Woah, wtf"

Tota
August 16th, 2012, 03:34 PM
They should make a cartoon out of this story. Disney style. Cavemen doing their stuff in front of their cave, along comes a blonde (I don't know, maybe aliens put her there) and they are all like "Whoa, wtf!"

MsBubbles
August 16th, 2012, 03:40 PM
Funny article. Although I have to disagree about rare hair color and men wanting sex. In my experience, all it takes is halfway decent looking females who are alive.

SongofLove
August 16th, 2012, 04:00 PM
Blonde-haired males didn't exist back then. Their beards and hair were all muddy and bloody from hunting and fighting so their "blondeness" was hidden ;) .

Haha great explanation!

Yeah, I think that's silly, because seriously, blonde dudes are sexeh (not just saying that 'cause I have a hot blonde boyfriend :D)

auburntressed
August 16th, 2012, 04:08 PM
I think the treatment of redheads over the centuries is more than enough to confirm that being rare and different can just as easily make you a target for persecution as it can make you more desirable. It seems to be a hit or miss that is somewhat randomized. Different is rare and valuable - or different is dangerous and unknown. Who can say what specifically triggers either response?

Amber_Maiden
August 16th, 2012, 05:01 PM
Cavemen were no different than men are today. They will mate with anyone and everyone they can no matter what color the hair! IMO.

haha. Agreed.

spirals
August 16th, 2012, 10:28 PM
Funny article. Although I have to disagree about rare hair color and men wanting sex. In my experience, all it takes is halfway decent looking females who are alive.It's the "who are alive" that killed me. :lol:

AlicesPlatforms
August 17th, 2012, 01:07 AM
They keep mentioning blonde is novel because it's rare, but red is the rarest hair color, and generally more eye catching. lol

florenonite
August 17th, 2012, 08:27 AM
It's an amusing article, but it fails to acknowledge how often looking different is has unfortunate consequences in human society. It's why there's so much prejudice against people who are a visible minority, whether that be race, sex, hair colour, disability, etc.

There's also the fact that studies have shown that people who are incredibly average looking are considered more attractive. Distinctive features tend to be considered less attractive.

juliaxena
August 17th, 2012, 08:47 AM
The more common a hair color becomes, the less often it is preferred.


Since most blonettes color their hair, the natural blonette is rare so I am sure it is the new blonde (lol).

jacqueline101
August 17th, 2012, 08:52 AM
I think its funny. I agree cave men still exist look at how men look at blondes.

1nuitblanche
August 17th, 2012, 09:28 AM
I think genetics are interesting, but I always get confused by the whole "blonde is the most se*ually desirable hair colour" bit. As some have already mentioned, it's not the rarest hair colour. Also, if you look at stereotypes, blondes are considered more youthful/fun/carefree while brunettes are considered more serious/smart/se*y; not that stereotypes actually mean anything, but they often give an idea about how people are perceived, whether we like it or not.

There are a couple of articles that state men prefer brunettes over blondes here (http://www.pajiba.com/seriously_random_lists/science-dont-lie-dudes-dig-brunettes-over-blondes.php), here (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2029680/What-men-REALLY-want-brown-haired-blue-eyed-size-14-woman.html), and here (http://news.softpedia.com/news/Brunettes-Better-than-Blondes-in-All-Respects-101894.shtml). How does that work with the whole cavemen prefered blonde cavewomen? Or did tastes change?

Having looked after lots of children though, I can understand better if I think it's more about being able to pick someone out of a crowd or see them in a large area. Light blonde is definitely the easiest to spot!

cmg
August 17th, 2012, 04:18 PM
I think the treatment of redheads over the centuries is more than enough to confirm that being rare and different can just as easily make you a target for persecution as it can make you more desirable. It seems to be a hit or miss that is somewhat randomized. Different is rare and valuable - or different is dangerous and unknown. Who can say what specifically triggers either response?

Good point!


It's the "who are alive" that killed me.

Thats OK. I'm not sure this would count you out either :rollin:

Back to serious. I have had all thinkable hair colors on my head. There was a distinctive change in how people treated me in all sorts of contexts, at the time I was very light blonde. Also when I was raven black I felt some subtle differences in attitude, for ex when I looked for a job or in executive business contexts. I am pretty sure I did not imagine this. I discussed this with friends of the same hair colors at the time and they seemed to have the same experiences that I did.


Having looked after lots of children though, I can understand better if I think it's more about being able to pick someone out of a crowd or see them in a large area. Light blonde is definitely the easiest to spot!

Indeed. But this isn't neccessarily a good thing. For a voulnerable animal this is a clear disadvantage when there are predators around. We were the prey in prehistoric times.

/ CMG

frostrune
August 17th, 2012, 06:21 PM
Most of the flaws of this article have already been pointed out, but I'll jump on this opportunity to show everyone this awesome article about why evolutionary psychology is mostly ******** (http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2009/06/19/why-do-we-rape-kill-and-sleep-around.html). :D

It's mostly used as a way for certain men to justify their messed up/bigoted beliefs with ''evolution makes me do it.''

piffyanne
August 17th, 2012, 11:13 PM
>snip<And why are blonettes always left out too? :pinktongue:


Ditto.. time for an uprising! :p
I brought my pitchfork! Right. When do we start? >polishes pitchfork's tines absently<


The more common a hair color becomes, the less often it is preferred.
Since most blonettes color their hair, the natural blonette is rare so I am sure it is the new blonde (lol).
Hey, does this make me special?:D

Also, I agree with SongofLove about blond men, red hair is gorgeous, and, last but not least...


It's the "who are alive" that killed me. :lol:
ME TOO! :rollin:


Most of the flaws of this article have already been pointed out, but I'll jump on this opportunity to show everyone this awesome article about why evolutionary psychology is mostly ********.

It's mostly used as a way for certain men to justify their messed up/bigoted beliefs with ''evolution makes me do it.''
Well, I'm glad they "disproved" it. Yuck.

florenonite
August 18th, 2012, 05:30 AM
Most of the flaws of this article have already been pointed out, but I'll jump on this opportunity to show everyone this awesome article about why evolutionary psychology is mostly ******** (http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2009/06/19/why-do-we-rape-kill-and-sleep-around.html). :D

It's mostly used as a way for certain men to justify their messed up/bigoted beliefs with ''evolution makes me do it.''

Thanks for the article ^_^

My favourite evo psych argument is that women like the colour pink because they were the "gatherers" in a hunter-gatherer society and needed to be able to find berries. That's why in the 19th and early 20th centuries pink was a colour worn by little boys.

Springlets
August 18th, 2012, 11:10 PM
I would think natural platinum hair is the rarest in adults. But in general, I heard that strawberry blonde is the most rare because of the special combination of genes it has.

Not sure what to say about how or why blonde hair developed. If you look at animals, the color of their fur or skin is usually related to their environment- polar bears and white wolves live in places with snow therefore their coloring reflects it. Humans could have similar reasons as blondism seems to originate from cold north Scandinavia.

CorinaS
August 19th, 2012, 06:26 AM
I think the treatment of redheads over the centuries is more than enough to confirm that being rare and different can just as easily make you a target for persecution as it can make you more desirable. It seems to be a hit or miss that is somewhat randomized. Different is rare and valuable - or different is dangerous and unknown. Who can say what specifically triggers either response?

I read on the Internet that in Britain gingers are considered ugly and are being bullied and it came as a total shock to me. The only ginger guy I ever knew was one of the most popular kids in high-school. I remember walking pass him and hearing other girls comment about his hair and how cute it made him look. I had a crush on him too... I'm not even going to talk about how popular blonds are my country. I'm pretty sure that the fact that both blonds and gingers are quite rare around here is what makes them so attractive.

woolyleprechaun
August 19th, 2012, 07:19 AM
I read on the Internet that in Britain gingers are considered ugly and are being bullied and it came as a total shock to me. The only ginger guy I ever knew was one of the most popular kids in high-school. I remember walking pass him and hearing other girls comment about his hair and how cute it made him look. I had a crush on him too... I'm not even going to talk about how popular blonds are my country. I'm pretty sure that the fact that both blonds and gingers are quite rare around here is what makes them so attractive.
Redhead discussions are realy booming today on LHC! :D Its a proud day to be a CopperTop ;)
On the origonal topic, I dont think we will ever truly know what a caveman found arousing. To be honest, I think people were more like animals then, and probs mated with whatever they could :o

cmg
August 19th, 2012, 11:06 AM
I would think natural platinum hair is the rarest in adults. But in general, I heard that strawberry blonde is the most rare because of the special combination of genes it has.
.....
Humans could have similar reasons as blondism seems to originate from cold north Scandinavia.
No thats just a prejudice. The original native scandinavians have black hair and the northern europeans with lighter hair are many times of scythian ascent or a mixture (south east asia). Other old races have blondes too, also in combination with dark skin. Read my first post. But you might be right about the platinum blonde thing though. I have only ever met one person like this, and that happens to be my oldest stepdaughter. Her younger sister remained light blonde until her mid twenties also.

BTW you have lovely springlets in your hair, so even!

/ CMG