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's work with gorillas, Jane Goodall and her chimpanzees and Birute Galdikas, noted for her work with orangutans in Borneo -- none of these women were chosen on the basis they'd be more likely to 'attract' the wild primates they were to study but all of them were fearless, gutsy, self-assured, highly intelligent women.

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

Dr. W. Henner Fahrenbach, Ph.D., formerly from Beaverton, Oregon, now retired and living in Arizona speculated on the latter point with regard to Sasquatch some time ago as follows:

(1997) - "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 quickly depart the scene..."

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 "we're not going to hurt you." The disinterested Sasquatch departed. This is a peculiar behavior by women in that it suggests that women are not quick to recognize size & bulk as something fearful.

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. When questioned, the woman observed greater detail than her male 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).

In another instance, 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 above his head. The male observer was so shocked he could but tremble violently and then, unable to get up, he crawled on hands and knees back to his truck where the wife stood unimpressed with hands on hips. To this day the male observer has difficulty describing details of the Sasquatch, but his wife had intimate detail and a non-emotional, matter-of-fact tone to her voice.

Mike Dardanos described his own horror upon seeing an enormous human-like figure approaching their mountain campfire. He readily admitted great fear, whereas his companion stayed in her camp chair while Mike ran screaming "run, run" all the way back to the truck fully expecting her to follow. Mike, a combat Marine said he felt no sense of anything but quick retreat, ("get the hell out of there") noting the size of the image. As a result, he didn't have much of a description. His female companion on the other hand, slow to feel fear said she was more amused by Mike than she was afraid of the shadow, which she did not describe as something frightening. "It was just a huge dark figure," she said, while Mike's descriptive words were, "..the damn thing was huge, wide and coming right at us." Mike's female companion was quick to tell on him, saying he sat behind the wheel of his truck quietly peeing himself.

Maryland Pixelshop owner, Dave Bittner told a similar 1990's story that occurred in Pennsylvania while out bigfooting late one night with a group of friends, one was a veteran U.S. Navy Seal that went by the screen name, "Shikiri" and another early-day footer by the name of Scott McCaslin. The creepy sounds and visual they described sent Bittner hauling tail back to their vehicle, leaving a stunned McCaslin and his fiance behind. She had the better description.

Dr. Grover S. Krantz stated that women tend to "lock-in" the visual of a Sasquatch and are the better ones to 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. "Women," he said, "are slower to recognize fear if something fearful is present in daylight hours but more inclined to be _as fearful_ at night; adding that he believed women were more incline to sense fear in sounds than men were, especially at night."

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 were more inclined to braggadociously exaggerate what they found difficult to articulate in detail. In one case, a couple argued back and forth about small detail he didn't see that she did; she accusing him of making up what he observed and he accusing her of seeing something that didn't exist in his visual.

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 older Indian adult parent 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 what he perceives to be a "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 wider depth. Male reaction is instant and excitable, female reaction delayed and calmer, sometimes by days if we pay attention to studies collected from the data...

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; a natural response by the Squatch considering men are usually the seasonal hunter.

This has been more of a brief case study-looksee than it is a scientific study, but it was fun running the figures and rereading the data again. All manner of statistical figures can be worked via collected data by rereading the various cases and running the figures... Bobbie Short

Sources:
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
4. Notes from Dr. Henner Fahrenbach, Ph.D. Marine Biologist, Oregon.
5. Data collected from undernet chat rooms and personal notations, 1996-1998.
6. Dr. Louis Leakey, Ph.D., article notations
7. California investigator, Mike Dardanos, 1995
8. Maryland Bigfoot investigator Dave Bittner, 1996
9. Scientist, conservationist, primatologist, Birute Marija Filomena Galdikas (Bio)
10. Lou Leakey's friend, Dian Fossey and "Gorillas in the Mist."
11. Jane Goodall's many books on the chimpanzee; "In the Shadow of Man" and "Return to Gombe."
12. Benbasat, Izak: Case research strategies - "The case research strategy in studies of information systems" PDF

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.