If baldness was really a defect and unattractive to women, going by the logic of survival of the fittest it would have been phased out. But the opposite is happening, more and more men are going bald. And suprisingly, it is the male hormone that promotes it.
On the other hand, the female hormone estrogen promotes hair growth. That is why women start losing hair after reaching menopause when their estrogen receptors weaken up and testosterone level goes high. That is also when they start losing their hourglass shape of their youth.
So my point is that hairloss happen in men at their peak of reproductive age, while it happens at the end of reproductive age for women. So if nature promotes it in young men, it must be something useful, or no?
One theory that cross my mind is that maybe it happens to a man so that he sticks to his family, as he would think of himself as less attractive and stop seeking attention of other females. In this way he becomes dedicated to his family, which is vital for the survival of his family.
On the other hand, the female hormone estrogen promotes hair growth. That is why women start losing hair after reaching menopause when their estrogen receptors weaken up and testosterone level goes high. That is also when they start losing their hourglass shape of their youth.
So my point is that hairloss happen in men at their peak of reproductive age, while it happens at the end of reproductive age for women. So if nature promotes it in young men, it must be something useful, or no?
One theory that cross my mind is that maybe it happens to a man so that he sticks to his family, as he would think of himself as less attractive and stop seeking attention of other females. In this way he becomes dedicated to his family, which is vital for the survival of his family.
Comment