WSA Posted March 6, 2017 Posted March 6, 2017 So I've often been curious on this point: Would a Sasquatch react differently to a nude human? (O.K., just so you know...this is a legitimate scientific hypothesis, not a bid to explore the weird fringe fiction world of Harlequin Romance Sasquatch Tales, or worse!) I've often thought, if I were to find myself face to face with a Bigfoot, and if I had the presence of mind and opportunity, I'd strip. So as to say, "Look! We are both primates/hominids (take your pick)...something you might not have realized because of my "second" skin." Of all the Sasquatch encounter narratives I've read, I don't think I've ever heard of one under those circumstances. Although, I'm willing to concede, a witness might be reluctant to share that detail. Has this ever crossed anyone else's mind? Does anyone of any corollary experience/research from the field of primate studies?
Twist Posted March 6, 2017 Posted March 6, 2017 A little silly at first but what would it hurt to try. Nothing ventured nothing gained. Although I would guess that being bipedal like them and having the same basic albeit smaller frame/build would be the most obvious sign to them we are potentially from the same lineage. Foreward thinking nonetheless.
WSA Posted March 6, 2017 Author Posted March 6, 2017 Right Twist... but who knows what they really think when they see our bizarre garments? We might have lost sight of just how really strange and confusing our clothing might appear to an intelligent wild creature with no apparent technological aptitude. Also, clothing might create some level of uncertainty and distrust...what is being hidden in the folds of those clothes?
spacemonkeymafia Posted March 7, 2017 Posted March 7, 2017 If one was especially hairy the outcome might be regretted. Rival or potential mate!
Twist Posted March 7, 2017 Posted March 7, 2017 Oh, I agree it's a possibility. I think it's worth a shot in the right scenario. What could go wro......well I think SMM hinted at it. Lol
guyzonthropus Posted March 7, 2017 Posted March 7, 2017 But perhaps by shedding the trappings of our technological culture, clothes being a part of that, one presents oneself as more genuine, certainly more vulnerable, and less of a threat...."Oh, that poor thing! What happened to it's fur?"
Branco Posted March 7, 2017 Posted March 7, 2017 WSA: In David's "Missing 411-Eastern," book some of the very disturbing and sad accounts of young children being kidnapped and carried off into inaccessible locations had their clothing removed at some time during their ordeal. I don't think it was ever stated or implied that the removal of the clothing was related to sexual assault. After reading the book, I began to wonder if BF - if BF was the actual abductor - kidnapped the children with the thought of caring for them as we care for young birds and/or small animals we find abandoned in the wild. If so, Bigfoot may have thought the clothing would have been unnecessary and a detriment to their survival since the animals lived the “good life” without them. 2
Guest ABSMs Posted March 7, 2017 Posted March 7, 2017 Agree Branco, Paulides mentions the odd circumstances of finding clothing away from the missing individuals (many are children) in several accounts in the Missing Western book.
hiflier Posted March 7, 2017 Posted March 7, 2017 (edited) Good one Norseman LOL! But I do wish lately that threads would push a little harder for science and topics relevant to discovery. I mean goin out inta da wuds and takin' off m'clothes just to test this out? Sure I could do that. It would be one way to get some answers and maybe actually be the first to discover that Sasquatch is really, really a cool creature. And then I could wrestle it down and bring it in to a facility for scientific study and be famous and................... NAAAAAAH! Edited March 7, 2017 by hiflier
Twist Posted March 7, 2017 Posted March 7, 2017 ^^ I don't think he likes the idea because it wasn't his or in his book !! Lol.
WSA Posted March 7, 2017 Author Posted March 7, 2017 No, I get it....this strategy probably falls firmly under the heading of "You First"! Still, it does intrigue me. With a species which we apparently have an abundance of communication barriers, could this be another one? And if so, could it be overcome this simply? If you believe Native accounts (and I do) they might have had a higher level of communication with these critters. Natives, in temperate climates at least, would have been wearing minimal clothing. Branco, I've not read the Paulides' books, but I do remember now those circumstances have been described in missing children accounts. Very interesting hypothesis, yes. Let me also say, if MM wants to go here, I'm averting my eyes... But Hiflier, this is a serious scientific topic, at least I consider it one in raising it. That it sets up a thousand punch lines is acknowledged by me. Still, it is a basic premise of inter-species interaction...the more an animal looks like us, and us like it, the more common ground there is going to be. When I was a kid, I loved to watch the old Lancelot Link TeeVee shows. So what was the gag? Simple: Dress a chimp up in people clothes and you are on the same wavelength, instantly. The opposite might be true for a chimp. Or a Bigfoot.
Twist Posted March 7, 2017 Posted March 7, 2017 Kind off topic but it does bring up a question along similar lines. If what is being discussed in regards to an US vs. THEM in terms of physical appearance how does this impact BF from different regions. There are varying beliefs on this but a common one is that the BF in the NW tend to be bigger/heavier animal while the SE is proposed to be smaller/lighter. If this were true how often and how would a meeting between the two go? Would they instantly recognize them as a BF or would they avoid each other as they do us?
SWWASAS Posted March 7, 2017 BFF Patron Posted March 7, 2017 (edited) 18 hours ago, WSA said: Right Twist... but who knows what they really think when they see our bizarre garments? We might have lost sight of just how really strange and confusing our clothing might appear to an intelligent wild creature with no apparent technological aptitude. Also, clothing might create some level of uncertainty and distrust...what is being hidden in the folds of those clothes? This thread has touched on some things related to clothing and BF. The Lewis and Clark party experience at Ft Clatsop with clothes made from animal skins is worth noting. When the party wintered in their make shift fort, they reported that because of the constant rain and high humidity their clothing was rotting off their bodies. Perhaps a found child would seem better off to a BF without those wet clothes on. Without fire to dry clothing, unless you are wearing polyester fleece, or water repellent gortex, BF experience may be that no clothing is best in wet cold weather. Certainly they could be lacking the ability to understand tanning processes and never developed those processes to be able to use animal skins for clothing or bedding. Their decisions with a lost child would be based on their own experience not what is best for the child. I have a gut feeling that human clothing warn may alter your experience with BF in the field. During my initial field work I made no effort to wear camo or hide and indeed my most interesting encounters I was wearing bright colorful clothing. Once into camo and sneaking around the interactions seem to get more strained. I suspect that was because I was acting more like a hunter than a hiker. Edited March 7, 2017 by SWWASAS
JDL Posted March 7, 2017 Posted March 7, 2017 One thing to consider is that body odors and pheromones would be easier to smell without clothing - assuming that the clothing hasn't been worn for a few weeks straight.
Recommended Posts