Korean Job Discussion Forums

[Masta_Don]

I am currently reading a book that someone stupendeous-magikal-wonderful enough to care about my sanity gave me, starring evolution. In it, it guesses at how different evolutionary jumps and how they came about. It also makes an attempt at what gave rise to things like hammers and blades and actions like grooming, within the proto-human societies.

But what it fails to make mention is why clothes are necessary. According to this book, proto-humans are near hairless in order to survive the harsh savannah heat, yet still have hair to groom to keep social hierarchies in place. So, going on the book's assumptions, they are not cold.

So what's the evolutionary reasoning behind wearing clothes?

My best guess is as alternative strategy, a cheater strategy. In that, if an animal covers up male ornamentation that is lacking, what wouldn't get any females, and get a female to believe it has something it doesn't, then the female would probably mate anyways due to amount of energy already invested.

And then, for females, a similar situation may have occurred, in order to cover up any defects or scars that would be characterized as having poor genes.

But what my idea doesn't account for are males who are ornamentated well enough that they needn't have a cheater strategy.

Any thoughts?

[JMO]

Efficiency maybe. If you have clothes you can regulate body temperature somewhat. Another contender could be climate change.

What be the name of this book? It seems interesting.

You gave me a good reason to listen to my evolution 101 podcasts again!

http://evolution-101.blogspot.com/

If you scroll down to the last aerticle there is the transcript for the "Why are humans naked" podcast. It discusses various theories for why we do not have hair. You can also download it from itunes in audio form of course.

[tyleranthony]

the use of symbols to communicate was the very first way in which humans began to differentiate themselves from other species...at first it was largely jewelry...now its obviously a bit more complicated...clothing i suppose is an extension of the first, most primitive means of communication.

[tomato]

Hello, Masta-Don!

As I understand it, the human species started out in Africa, where neither clothes nor fur were needed.
Then some of them immigrated to Europe, where clothes or fur were needed.
Then they started wearing clothes, before they had time to grow fur.

What is the title of your book?

[djsmnc]

Man, all these theories seem to have been pulled out of your collective ass. Just accept things as they appear before you, and if you feel that you are not included in the "wearing clothes" thing, then just bare yourself to the world. Be prepared for the consequences, though, because someone somewhere decided that you have to have them on. The best thing to do isn't to look back and figure out why you have to wear clothes, but to find like minded people who will assist you in deciding whether or not clothes are necessary and help you fight the power if they are in fact deemed unnecessary.

Otherwise, just wear your clothes and be happy that there's such a wide selection to choose from. You'll never get a solid confirmation as to why people started to wear clothes. It's all speculation. All of it. You won't be any smarter if you find out theories as to why people started wearing them. That book sounds like a bunch of guesswork pressed between two covers. At least you'll have some kindling for a campfire.

[mindmetoo]

[khyber]

Clothes have, in essence, allowed human beings to be able to inhabit virtually every corner of the planet.

Consider clothes to be a "tool" in the most practical sense. Then it becomes a bit more easier to wrap your head around.

[Kyrei]

I'm going to go with the theory expressed above that it was due to climate change (either geo-evolutionary, or due ot shifting habitats) that caused the wearing of clothes. I think there was a social status involved as well (and I of course speaking out of my ass as I am not an anthropologist / archaeologist / or any other ~ist that applies here) in that hunters would be able to differentiate their hunting skills by wearing the fur or other ornaments of their kills, bracelets/necklaces of teeth, etc. These in turn could be used as gifts to enhance mating attractiveness and show ownership (belonging??) of breeding partners. This would have provided some sort of social heirarchy.

[eamo]

[djsmnc]

A more interesting question is:

Do clothes make it so we are horny when we see nakedness? Or, if we were naked all the time, would we not be horny, or would we be so horny that we'd all be making love all the time and unable to get anything tangible (aside from pregnancy and childbirth) done?

[tomato]

Story (1979) found that preschooler subjects from social nudist families had more positive body self-concepts than subjects from home nudist families. In turn, subjects from home nudist families had more positive body self-concepts than subjects from homes which did not allow nudity.

Among the Yolngu tribe of Australia (Money et al., 1970), 5-year-old children are allowed to attend preschool without a single stitch. Sexual play among children is permitted. Probably as a coincidence and probably not, their culture is free from the sex hang-ups which proliferate in Western society.

A retrospective study (Lewis & Janda, 1988) found that childhood exposure to nudity is harmless and perhaps even beneficial. Out of the sample in the study, "not one man or woman reported any negative experiences from such family practices."



Lewis, R. J. & Janda, L. H. 1988. The relationship between adult sexual adjustment and childhood experiences regarding exposure to nudity, sleeping in the parental bed, and parental attitudes toward sexuality. Archives of Sexual Behavior 17: 349-362.

Money, J.; Cawte, J. E.; Bianchi, G. N.; & Nurcombe, B. 1970. Sex training and traditions in Arnhem Land. British Journal of Medical Psychology 43: 383-399.

Story, M. D. 1979. Factors associated with more positive body self-concepts in preschool children. Journal of Social Psychology 108: 49-56.

[mithridates]

[Kyrei]

[RACETRAITOR]

If you made a list of all the reasons we wear clothes today, I'm sure most of them were around when clothing was first invented.

Either that or God invented us with our clothes on. You know, in order to cover up those bits of us that He also invented.

[khyber]

tomato all your sources are almost 20 years old and up.
I'm not disputing their veracity, but there must be something more current.