Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Home RSS

The social acceptability of human attire

November 30, 2012
The Alpena News

The beautiful Alpena queen forgot to finish getting dressed for the occasion and is photographed still in her mini slip and slip-ons (Sept, 29-30.)

OK, it's a dress, and those are heels-and of course, women have the right to dress however they want and undress to whatever degree they wish. But, why is not even one of the men pictured showing more skin, and instead revealing only face, neck, and hands?

We are all evolutionarily hardwired, or driven above all common sense, to replicate our kind-that is, to attract a prospective mate. It's elemental. Often the female is lackluster in appearance and it is the male who exhibits and struts. The peacock, for example, develops a lavish display of color and feathers, but he moves about encumbered.

Isn't there a law of nature that says everything has to be compensated for? You can't have everything. No free lunch. You gain something you often give up something. The male peacock, therefore, has forfeited mobility in exchange for beauty and show - and ends up vulnerable. Not free.

In humans, males are the "dull" ones. They invariably wear some version of a "uniform" from head to toe. It's a blazer or jacket, shirt, tie, long or short pants, flat tie shoes and free to move about - in addition to no eyeliner or lipstick, no big hair (if a choice). In other words, nothing to distract our attention from the importance and significance of their words and wonderful ideas, and what they've accomplished.

Attiring as for a party or a day at the beach, what do human females today cede in freedom, power, talent, and self-actualization in their drive to fulfill an ancient subconscious mandate to attract a suitable male and carry on the propagation of the species?

Elaine Thompson




I am looking for:
News, Blogs & Events Web