Why Following Fashion really is a Matter of Life and Death

[adriaan]

Why do women find it important to be in on the latest fashion trends? It couldn't be just to look nice for the opposite sex, because most men hardly notice it. I believe the reason lies in our evolutionary background.

 

We evolved as hunter-gatherers. Hunting requires plenty of skill, obviously. Compared to hunting, gathering seems a pretty simple task. What I want to show is that the occupation of gathering wild fruits and vegetables is far from simple. It is a highly information intensive occupation.

 

A tree full of fruits is a temporary store of valuables you encounter by chance. The female that finds it comes home with enough fruits for her family, and one important bit of information. Where others can find wat she has.

 

Who should she share that information with? In her best interest, she should share it with someone who will return the favour another day. So she can go and get fruits and vegetables and feed her family another time. The best person to share that with is the one that always seems to be in on the latest finds. She is the most likely to be able to let you in on the next bargain to be had.

 

This is why it is important as a woman to always show you are in on the latest finds. It will get others to share the information on their finds with you, which in the end is what gets you that regular stream of fruits and vegetables you and your children need.

 

Fashion is the present-day signal between women intended to sort the ones in the know, from the ones out of it. Female status is geared towards showing you are close to the information through signals like fashion and gossip, because gathering is all about getting the information in time.

 

Women still dedicate a lot of effort to keeping up with the latest finds, because once it really was a matter of life and death.

 

For a more complete explanation, and some other ideas:

http://adriaanb.blogspot.com/

[DrP]

Similar (but not the same) is the behaviour of males being comparable to the bower bird. The more colourful (more physically attractive) bower birds do not really take to long over building their bowers (love nests/houses). The plainer ones build very elaborate ones. The females assess their mates on both visual appearance AND ability/enthusiasm for building a bower. Thus a very colourful bird doesn't need to be so good at bower building to get a mate, but a dull one needs to build a palace. In the human world, I suppose it is a bit more complex, but you could say a naturally attractive man doesn't need to groom quite so well to attract a mate, where as if you are unattractive, you need to dress sharp, smart and maybe keep up with the fashions to get the mate(having a large house too would help). Hey if you're both attractive and well groomed even better I suppose.

 

To get to your point about fashion, or looking up to date and attractive I think you are right - I think it goes further than just the sharing of info though - it's also about finding a mate I rekon.

[adriaan]

With fashion I mean the change in clothing style, that just seems to be for the sake of changing. Handbags and shoes go in and out of fashion without most men ever realizing it. So you can assume it is a signal between women.

 

Clothes have many other functions, but they have taken on the role of signalling a woman's ability to be up to date. You can't say if that always was the case or if that has just happened after mass production and advertising made it possible. Just like cars are used as status symbols between men, that would obviously not have been possible before 1900.

 

The succes in gathering depends on the information you get. You can't rely on your own finds. Women have a need to signal that they are always in on the latest so others will let them in on their finds. That is the point I am trying to make. How they signal it may not be fixed.

 

And of course nothing is black and white. Men follow fashion and women like cars. But if you look at who buys magazines on fashion, gossip, beaty, cars, politics and sports, the lines are pretty clear cut.

[Edtharan]

Fashion is a cultural identifier. It allows members of a culture (or subculture) to label themselves as part of that culture and show someone who is from "outside" that culture.

 

However, with today's mass media, it is much more easy for someone from outside the culture to "infiltrate" because it is more easy to get representations of that culture's identifying symbols (this is not just for fashion as in cloths, but also with mannerisms and other symbols). So if a culture is to maintain its uniqueness and be able to spot interlopers, then it must constantly keep changing. The more easy it is for outsiders to fake it, the faster that culture must change its fashions.

 

Some people see this as the culture that is changing, but it is only the symbols that change. However, a lots of people think that the symbols are the culture .

 

So these changes in fashion are not just for the sake of change, but are the culture's means of maintaining the symbols of it's unique identity.

[pioneer]

Men are visual animals. Women know that and try to enhance visual appeal. Men are aware that this is make-up, but appreciate the effort. Woman are verbal animals so the male's version of make-up is often verbal. It is called charm and clever picked lines, which are also subject to fashion. You can't use passe' pick up lines but have to stay cutting edge. Woman don't wish men to lie to them but fashion is sort of a lie in the sense it uses special affects to enhance beauty. Lying uses special verbal affects to enhance the male's lure of power, sensitivity, security, etc. The female version of make-up is socially acceptable because it generates revenue for business. If business could figure out a way to make money off men lying to women...

 

Fashion has less to do with attracting men as it does with the group dynamics of females. Men rarely notice subtle changes. But other women are schooled in the subtleties of male attraction. The group dynamics tries to push each other so the female team wins. This is the uniform. Men are simple critters when it comes to women. All they need is a bikini or nothing at all. The rest allows more women to enter the attraction game. The same is true of women. They would like a millionaire or the soul male. Verbal make-up allows more men to become attractive with the promise of that. Once you strip off the make-up reality is seen both ways. But if there is an infatuation by both, then all that make-up no longer matters. It was there to get them together, like a catalysts, to start the body chemistry.

[cellbioS]

Then how could one explain the "recycling" of fashions? There are many trendy clothes available today that are very much like 1980's styles and many of the women (girls) wearing these fashions did not wear them the first time around and many women who wore them originally, as young girls, are not wearing them now, even the attractive, single women. How does that fit if fashion (and mate attracting) is an ever evolving process? Would these fashions (tactics) be considered passe or "new" trends that a part of the single population doesn't keep up with? Just interested.

[adriaan]

Fashion and gossip can work as a demonstration of the quality of your information network. And that information network has been all important in getting food through gathering. That is actually the main point, that gathering is a far from simple task.

Edited July 25, 2008 by adriaan

[Edtharan]

Then how could one explain the "recycling" of fashions?

Also, not all fashions are directed at mate selection. Take for example the fashions in "Gang Colours". This has nothing to do with mate selection, but everything to do with group identification.

 

Men are simple critters when it comes to women. All they need is a bikini or nothing at all.

This is an incorrect stereotype pushed forward by the mass media. It is a Meme, a fashion if you will.

 

It has only really be in existence since around the 60's. Many a time the desirability of a woman was based around their family's status rather than her looks. With glossy colour photos, it was in the media's interest to promote something that they could deliver (pictures).

 

Appearance has played a part in the desirability of a woman, but that desired "image" changes. Today it is the thin look that is in, not all that long ago it was narrow waists and wide hips (and women wore clothing to accentuate and create these looks). Back in the Palaeolithic era it was what today we would call obese (there are figurines of fertility goddesses that today we would call obese, yet fertility goddesses are a representation of the desirability of a woman).

 

So attractiveness is a fashion, I'll agree, but mate selection is not the only driving force behind fashions. There are many fashions that have nothing to do with mate selection at all. Mate selection is a factor, but it is by far not the only one.

 

If mate selection was a major factor, then it wouldn't actually act the way you presented it. If mate selection was a major driving force in fashions, then more emphasis would be put on being unique (as that is guaranteed to be "new") and major marketing franchises would not exist.

 

Mate selection is a factor, but it is more of a limited factor (it only applies to some fashions, not all) and acts more to fine tune them than drive the change in the first place.

[adriaan]

You have to see that clothes can carry more than one signal. Yes, they can show you are part of a group, they can make you look better and hide other signals like being terribly unfit, they can keep you warm and protect you too!

 

But to a gatherer there is a seperate interest in using clothes to make you look up to date. That wouldn't have been possible before the availability of easily changeable, mass produced clothes, it may have just become the most efficient method to signal 'being up to date' in our modern times.

 

That is seperate from the mating game, it is tied to the requirements in making a living through gatherering. Of course when you pick a mate, you might be better off with one that is good at gathering and showing off she is up to date. But that wouldn't be the primary function of the love to use trendy clothing.

 

A gatherer might be attracted to any source of information that looks up to date. Whether that is a gossip tv program, a fashion magazine. Even men can attract women by looking fashionable, as long as they don't lose too much respect from their hunting team mates (see other post)! Although they may attract a lot of attention that doesn't translate into mating opportunities..

[mrsemmapeel]

I am quite offended that you are generalising women (and men in your other thread) like this, you seem to think the majority of women are fickle and shallow. Women like to look good mainly for themselves, not to attract a mate, dressing in a stylish way (doesn't need to be latest fashion) makes them feel more confident, and personally I think confidence in a person rather than what they're wearing is far more appealing to the opposite sex. I want a man to be attracted to me and not what I choose to wear and I don't know one woman who considers following fashion to be a matter of life or death

[booker]

Good grief. It's not a matter of life and death, and you don't have to go back to cavemen senarios to understand it.

 

And now a lesson about the birds and the bees.

 

Women are simply maximizing their potential--or trying to--whether conciously or not. Potential for what, need you ask? Main goal: to attract a mate with maximal traits: wealth, position, potential, and desirably breedable (a hottie with money, and prestige). There are alternate subsidiary goals that become more apparent during divorces 'n stuff.

[adriaan]

Wanting to look like you are up to date is still around because it used to be important for the survival of your genes.

 

Saying something makes you 'feel good', is a good enough explanation for behaviour you see around you. But then you have to go back to where humans evolved to see why that love or hate could have evolved. You will find that it helped you in some way in your survival.

 

We are talking life and death of the genes here. Small differences in individual survival rates are enough. And I am sure women hunted and men gathered too so we will share plenty of the behaviours typical for a hunter or a gatherer. But in general hunting fits a male better and gathering a female.

 

Plenty of women love to compete in games, obviously. I believe the 'equal rights' movement is moving us back to the normal situation. The stereotypical differences between men and women are just remnants of our very recent history. But when men and women are completely free to do what they want, you may still see an 80/20 split or so between typical hunting and typical gathering behaviour.

Edited August 6, 2008 by adriaan

[PhDP]

You will find that it helped you in some way in your survival.

 

...and that's where you're wrong, not everything is an adaptation, it could be a maladaptive behavior, it could be a byproduct, it could be neutral.

[adriaan]

I didn't mean to say 'everything' is an adaptation.

 

But the female need to signal she is 'up-to-date' is.