The question was asked, "why do some people think that a Sasquatch is more attracted to a female in the woods?"

Three names -- Dian Fossey, Jane Goodall and Birute Galdikas -- neither of which were chosen on the basis they'd be more likely to 'attract' the wild primates they were to study.

Fewer people have had more impact on the study of human origins than Anthropologist Dr. Louis Leakey, Ph,D. who chose women to conduct the field research because he believed they made better observers than men, were more perceptive, more patient, had a better eye for detail, and did not excite male primates' aggressive tendencies.

Dr. W. Henner Fahrenbach, Ph.D., formerly of the Oregon Primate Center in Beaverton speculated on the latter point with regard to Sasquatch some time ago as follows:

"From eye witness interviews I gathered the marginal impression that a sasquatch of either sex will respond differently to a man than to a woman observer or couple. I explored this hunch statistically by way of John Green's records and found no difference.

However, the problem is many fold. In an encounter, it is rarely recorded whether the Sasquatch or the person(s) broke off the meeting; thus, a potential greater lingering of a Sasquatch vis-a-vis a female observer may be negated by the possible greater propensity of the woman / girl to run off.

From the attitude that many women have reported to me from encounters, namely a mixture of curiosity and warm concern, it would follow that their body language - something that even notoriously dumb animals like horses are keenly aware of - would project a benevolent intent. Conversely, a man standing his ground may project just enough aggressive body language for the Sasquatch to depart.

A few cases in point:
A sasquatch, upon meeting a couple, the man was on aluminum crutches, looked at the couple long enough (the couple studiously avoiding frank eye contact), that the woman started talking to the sasquatch in soothing tones about them "not going to hurt you." The disinterested Sasquatch departed.

A woman and her son, facing a Sasquatch rather up close, had enough time in the protracted encounter to study it down to its toenails. They departed quietly leaving the Sasquatch standing there, the woman with better details.

A couple sunning themselves in bathing suits observed a nearby juvenile Sasquatch in the water, evidently intent on catching fish, for about half an hour (without being noticed despite conversational exchanges). They then walked to the edge of the river themselves and sat down on rocks. The Sasquatch observed them out in the open for about 15 minutes, and then retreated to bushes, from where it continued its inspection of the <white dwarves>, until they departed. The woman observed more than her mail companion.

A teenaged girl observed a female Sasquatch from behind a screen door, as it explored a walk-in food locker. Both looked at each other for some time before she screamed (in the dead of night). The Sasquatch did not react to the scream and only left at the approach of several other persons from within the building (with a tidy chunk of meat under her arm).

A male observed what he thought was a bear feasting on a carcass and approached it until the "bear" stood up on two legs, faced him and started flailing his arms in a circular motion in the air. The male observer was so shocked he could but tremble violently, crawling on hands and knees back to his truck where the wife stood unimpressed with hands on hips. He still has difficulty describing details of the Sasquatch, conversely his wife had intimate detail.

Dr. Grover S. Krantz stated that women tend to "lock-in" the visual of a Sasquatch and better articulate details from that impression plus they maintain details, whereas unarmed men have a tendency to quickly 'assess danger over detail' & depart an area where an unknown is greater in stature than they are. He noted that men in the safety of cover or from a tree-stand observed longer than in a situation of confrontation or surprise.

Men were less inclined to observe details of the encounter but more apt to be the better debater and the better definer of Sasquatch evidence. In the study, men were incline to speculate and sometimes exaggerate what they found difficult to articulate in detail.

Children playing outdoors in a rural mountain atmosphere were more apt to be undisturbed by the presence of a same-size Sasquatch. Moreover, there are reports of small Native American children playing tag with small Sasquatch children but only until an Hoopa Indian adult appeared on the scene, then the hairy little ones departed or were quickly collected by an adult Sasquatch.

When the children were asked to talk about their hairy little playmates, most of the children involved were unaware of the subtle differences. Children age 6 or more knew about the 'man of the mountain' but usually disregarded the warnings. Ten years old and up, the pre-teen better heeded the warnings about "stealing children," and both boys & girls could give adequate detailed descriptions of the sasquatches they did observe.

It appears, the male observer better recognizes the "no win" situation, whereas the female observer's mothering instincts kick in and their want to understand what they see takes over, thus they stay longer observing the picture in a wider realm. Male reaction is instant, female reaction delayed, sometimes by days if at all.

Of interesting note, more women have up-close encounters than men, leaving speculation that the Sasquatch may regard males as a threat to their well being thus aggression or seemingly aggressive behavior towards men.

References:

1. Galdikas, 'Reflections of Eden', Boston, New York, London: Little Brown & Co, 1995, p.25.
2. Re: Life expectancy and gender response', IVBC Digest V4 #98, 13 Sept '97
3. John Green's collective database and various interviews, 1997


Back to Bigfoot Encounters Main page
Back to Newspaper & Magazine Articles
Back to Bigfoot Encounters "What's New" page

Portions of this website are reprinted under the Fair Use Doctrine of International Copyright Law as educational material without benefit of financial gain.
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html
This proviso is applicable throughout the entire website.