Cuddly Pandas Are "Cuteness Crack" Says British Zoologist

Pandas aren't the hapless bunglers we make them out to be in zoos around the world

"Baby pandas are basically cuteness crack...The real panda is a secret stud, with a taste for flesh and a fearsome bite, at least in its natural habitat." Lucy Cooke

The title and subtitle of a recent Wall Street Journal essay by British zoologist Lucy Cooke called "The Un-Cuddly Truth About Pandas: In their shrinking natural habitat, the bears are tough, sexually potent survivors, not the hapless bunglers we have created as zoo attractions" caught my eye because I've long been interested in just what attracts people around the world to these charismatic mammals. Sure, they're cute, but they're essentially sentenced to a lifetime in cages for people to stare at and to be used as breeding machines. Ms. Cooke's essay is not available online, so here are a few snippets to whet your appetite for more if you choose to pay for it. Frankly, I think it's worth the price.

Source: Dannyphoto80, Dreamstime free download

Pandas are "secret studs" and "cuteness crack"

Ms. Cooke begins, "The image of the pathetic panda—a benign, bungling creature who needs human help to survive—is a very modern myth, conjured more from human desires than from biological facts." She then goes on to note that human encroachment has basically severely reduced the number of wild giant pandas to around 1,864 in 2015. But, because this represents an increase in the numbers from a previous census, the status of these magnificent animals has been downgraded from "endangered" to "vulnerable" despite the grave concern of many respected conservationists. And, since 2005, the number of captive pandas has doubled. They have become so-called "ambassadors" for their species, although it's difficult to image that individuals living in unnatural habitats in cages can be ambassadors for any wild being (for more discussion please see "Pandas: Do We Really Need Another Cute 'Ambassador'"?). Of course, captive animals aren't really "ambassadors" for their species.

Ms. Cooke also notes that certain characteristics make baby pandas "cuteness crack" in that they have baby-like features, "namely a big bulging forehead, large, low-set eyes and round cheeks." Nobel Laureate Konrad Lorenz's ethological research in the 1930s showed that "Humans feel affection for animals with juvenile features: large eyes, bulging craniums, retreating chins. Small-eyed, long-snouted animals do not elicit the same response." In an essay titled "Animals In Our Brain: Mickey Mouse, Teddy Bears, and 'Cuteness'" I wrote about the research demonstrating the neural basis for this attraction. In addition to research on how animals are perceived, there also are data on how human babies are perceived. Lorenz called the attractive "cuteness" qualities the baby schema (‘‘Kindchenschema'') that included "a set of infantile physical features, such as round face and big eyes, that is perceived as cute and motivates caretaking behavior in the human, with the evolutionary function of enhancing offspring survival." In humans it's known that the "baby schema activates the nucleus accumbens, a key structure of the mesocorticolimbic system mediating reward processing and appetitive motivation, in nulliparous women [women who have not previously given birth]" and this is "the neurophysiologic mechanism by which baby schema promotes human caregiving, regardless of kinship." Looking at baby-like schema is rewarding, and it's not difficult to see why pandas are so attractive.

Viewing pandas as cuddly animals can have its downside. Ms. Cooke notes, "The powerful muscles in the panda’s cheeks, which ironically give the bear its lovable big round head, evolved to force their way through bamboo’s tough sheath; the strength of their bite is somewhere between that of a lion and a jaguar." As such, humans can be severely injured. She also notes that pandas aren't "the hippie vegetarians of the ursine kingdom." Rather, they're opportunistic omnivores who eat a lot of bamboos and will also eat flesh, including dead deer.

Pandering Pandas: Zoos, where captive breeding occurs, are "breeding mills"

Captive-breeding programs spend a significant amount of money on pandas, yet don't have much to show for it. ​(Will Travers, CEO of the wildlife-advocacy group Born Free USA)

Ms. Cooke also writes about the use of captive pandas as breeding machines. Sometimes they're world travelers and rented out for breeding purposes. Mating pairs are kept in isolation, but in the wild this isn't how they live. Wild females tend to prefer males who scent mark with urine highest in a tree. She notes, "Scientists have described males adopting various athletic poses—'squat,' 'legcock' and, most remarkably, 'handstand'—in order to squirt their pee as high as possible." And, a male who wins a female's heart will mate upwards of 40 times in an afternoon. It turns out much captive breeding is done via artificial insemination, which is 100% unnatural, of course.

It's also important to note that introducing captive-born pandas to the wild is a very difficult feat and that so-called "panda mills" aren't a conservation success story. For example, a young male named Xiang Xiang, Chinese for “lucky,” was the first captive-bred panda to be released in his natural habitat and "he was savaged to death by wild pandas." And, while captive populations of pandas are growing, there are significant losses of natural habitat. Even in these "protected areas" logging and tourism continue, and optimal panda habitat is more fragmented and there was less of it in 2013 than there was in 1988. In a piece called "Are Fluffy Pandas Worth Saving or Should We Let Them Go?" I wrote about an essay called "Another inconvenient truth: the failure of enforcement systems to save charismatic species" by Elizabeth Bennett of the prestigious Wildlife Conservation Society, in which she points out that we're really not very good at protecting charismatic species so there's not that much hope for those who aren't eye-catching.

Ms. Cooke offers that hands-off policy is the best way to go for pandas. She writes, "The real threat to pandas isn’t their incompetence but our mythology." Some humans think that the future of pandas is dependent on humans taking control, but this hasn't worked at all. I agree with Ms. Cooke when she concludes, "We need to let the pandas take care of themselves, something they can only do if we leave them with enough forest to live their secretly sexy lives."

Why are pandas forced to make more individuals who will languish in captivity?

"So, I like pandas as much as anyone. But at some level I can’t help wondering what we’re saving them for. Just as tourist attractions?" (Dr. Susan Clayton)

It's easy to be consumed by cuteness, sensationalist PR, and the rabid press, but in the end, baby pandas will have highly compromised lives, and in some cases rather long lives in totally unnatural captive habitats with no control over what happens to them. This isn't anything that marginally represents a good life. In 2013, a video of a baby panda sneezing received more than 155 million hits, but most people who find these endangered mammals to be seductively alluring don't know what sort of life they're destined to live.

We can't save all species and in the future, we'll have to make some tough choices. Informed discussions are sorely needed and ignoring the critical and difficult questions that arise will get us nowhere and indeed, will work against us, other species, and the integrity of ecosystems we are trying to save.

Charisma Essential Reads

The Science of Charisma for Romance, Work, and Everyday Life

How Anyone Can Get More "Rizz"

Pandas of all ages are money-makers, and although some people who control panda mills do have good intentions, it's about time to stop breeding these cute creatures and to work diligently to save panda-friendly habitats. We don't need any more zoo-born baby pandas.