Sorry, not found on Unsplash. (Spirits are flying in bearing mukluks and a parka.) |
Red: theory; black, fact.
This post is about long hair, of all things (which I totally
dig; I was in high school during the Sixties and the girls looked like Shetland ponies), and I will argue that humans evolved the trait to keep them
warm during geologically recent continental glaciations. (Please pardon the teleological phrasing; I use it here only for the sake of brevity.)
Can having long hair really confer such a benefit under cold
conditions? The anecdotal evidence supporting this idea seems abundant. For
example, go to the site shown below
for a near-unanimous list of affirmative replies to the question: ‘Does long hair keep you warm?’ One respondent in particular (#32), from Sweden, seems to have exactly reproduced the method for ensuring this that must have been used in eras of glaciation, assuming that our distant forbears could at least make themselves simple parkas out of animal skins.
for a near-unanimous list of affirmative replies to the question: ‘Does long hair keep you warm?’ One respondent in particular (#32), from Sweden, seems to have exactly reproduced the method for ensuring this that must have been used in eras of glaciation, assuming that our distant forbears could at least make themselves simple parkas out of animal skins.
They would have supplemented this protection by tucking their long hair down inside the parka.
Leaving it outside would have been good fashion but bad engineering, since the
locks would have been quickly parted by the first gust of wind and precious,
life-saving body heat lost.
I began this with mention of goddesses, but of course the
males would have had long hair too, probably a meter long, in outrageous
violation of Sixties cultural mainstream gender expectations concerning hair length. I can still hear my Dad fuming about the Beatles.
I find that
this situation suddenly makes better aesthetic sense if you imagine this long
hair as tousled in the males and smooth and perfect-looking in the
females (and perhaps only in the portion showing above the neckline.) Seen this
way, both males and females look gorgeous in the imagination and the aesthetic
problem is solved. I call this the "rock-star solution." The females could have
smoothed their hair by lubricating it with oil and brushing, and a brush is not
hard to make. Meanwhile, the males would only need their fingers for
cultivating a charming, insouciant look.
Of course, I am thinking here of Mick and Keith and the guys.
While moderns socially code gender as hair length, this
parameter was unavailable to our glaciation-era forebears (the last glaciation maximum occurred 26,000 years ago) because they would have been
unwilling to cut their hair, knowing at some level of insight that they needed
it for survival and mating success. Therefore, they might have coded gender as
hair smoothness as described above.
I assume that these people were living in some glaciation "refugium," as such terrain is technically called, which is a fortuitously ice-free zone surrounded by continental glacier.
While writing this, I was struck by the amount of detailed
information I was able to retrieve from my own aesthetic preferences, some of which
would have evolved under stringent, cold-climate conditions to produce mate
choices favoring traits with survival value.
The heart may have its reasons that reason knoweth not, but reason is learning*.
11-26-2019 I have not mentioned beards yet and the main question there is why women do not have them. The answer seems to be that a long beard would interfere with breastfeeding, whereas long scalp hair can be pushed back. Moreover, women have more subcutaneous fat than men, so their thermoregulation problem in a cold climate would not be as severe. (Not to be outdone, my niece insists that she has a beard hair. Go figure.)
*Based on a famous saying by the philosopher Blaise Pascal.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments are held for moderation before publication to the blog.