Body Hair

[pixi]

Just wondering, if women carry on removing unwanted body hair for the next 100's of generations does this mean that women will eventually evolve to be naturally hair free? 

[Loosehead]

No, natural selection relates to particular traits making survival more likely . Hair or not does not effect the survival prospects of women.

[pixi]

hi loosehead, ta for that, somehow i didnt think it would happen.   :)

[Fibonacci]

Hair today gone tomorrow

[Peter Pedant]

Pixi the inheriting of inquired traits

(so that if you cut dogs tails off, you will end up with tail-less (manx) dogs is called Lamarckianism, after lamarck one of the proponents. Not so much disproven ,as not able to be reliably reproduced in the Laboratory. Some famous names names lost reputations over this - Klammerer and a few bull frogs, a crazy Russian - Lysenko, and one of the researchers on skin transplantation

[estie]

I am assuming you mean 'acquired' traits, Peter?

And he's right. Unless women without body hair are more reproductively successful (produce more offspring), this is not a trait that will be selected for ;-)

[pixi]

thanks peeps, so I guess gillette is here to stay :(

[WaldoMcFroog]

Maybe I'm missing the point here but it seems to me that there's a rather important point being missed out here. Since hair removal does not occur on a genetic level, how could it affect the genetic code of the individual? How would it possibly result in a mutation occuring such that females became less hairy? If you cut the right leg from a man and a women and then get them to breed, it won't result in their children having the right leg missing!

One thing that might happen is that it actually results in a net decrease in naturally unhairy women - this process can be seen with blonde women. Blonde women are apparently more likely to attract a partner than other colours (not me though - I'm a ginger-chaser!). With the advent of blonde hair dyes and an increased number of apparently blonde women, the advantage has been lost. Blonde hair is now on the way out. Within a few years, it will be in enclaves in places such as Scandanavia, and then it will disappear all together!

Perhaps the same will happen with the naturally less hairy women!

[spinchimp]

Waldo - this is what the other posters are saying - unless its as a result of an advantageous genetic mutation its unlikely to persist over time.

[WaldoMcFroog]

And I'm saying it's not just unlikely - surely it's *impossible* - it isn't a mutation at all!

[estie]

Correct. I was not clear in my last post. The only way women will become hairless over evolutionary time is if women who are naturally less hairy are more reproductively successful. Shaving is irrelevant. Waldo's citing of Lamarck's theories is a very good example.

[estie]

Oops! Sorry, I misattributed to quote to Waldo. Peter was the one who brought up Lamarck.

[magicdice]

No. However, hair-removal products will evolve to be fantastic!

[Kev_UK]

OMG.. If woman were all hair free I'd be out of a job.
I am a pubic hairdresser LOL.

[spithray]

Surely the amount of hair we have now is a result of an evolutionary decrease in body hair and therefore as it no longer serves a purpose we will all evolve to be hair-free anyway, given enough time.

[Gnisy]

Sounds like a do-over with Lamarck's theory that giraffes develop long necks because they want to reach the juicy leaves on taller trees. If this is the right way giraffes acquire their long necks, then perhaps women would be spared the pain of childbirth by now?