What's in a face?
May. 24th, 2006 01:36 pmBelow are a series of interesting articles about faces and sexual attraction, all culled from the comments section of today's discussion on SBTB:
Women like girly men better when we're on the rag.
Men like girly men better when we're getting about to get on the rag.
Facial prejudices.
Chicks dig big, manly...vocal chords.
Especially before we're about to go on the rag.
And apparently, regulating our on-the-ragginess can change our mate preferences, too.
There's some interesting information in those pieces, but a lot of the conclusions drawn (at least, as reported by the BBC) are a bit too sweeping for my comfort. Some of the research also seems to contradict one another. For example, from the research about how birth control pills affect attraction:
And then in the article about how women who are ovulating prefer macho men:
OK, look, you can't really have it both ways: ovulating women want to fuck macho men because of their OMG good genes that the women want to pass on to the (potential) sproglets, and non-ovulating women want men who are caring and nurturing, but women who are on the pill (and therefore not ovulating) apparently like to fuck macho men as well because...they're unable to make good long-term mate choices??
I'm not arguing that these differences aren't real, but there seems to be some tricky dickery going on here, with researchers providing conclusions based on cultural prejudices. "This one here wants good genes for her kids, and this one, here, just wants to get laid."
Was birth control the only factor that could explain the women's inverted preferences? I don't have access to the studies, but I'd be interested in looking at the women's age, education level, upbringing, political affiliation, reasons why they are or aren't on birth control and income, all of which can conceivably impact attraction and mate choice. I mean, really, if women get on BC pills because they're looking to get laid without becoming pregnant, and these sorts of women tend to prefer macho men for whatever reason, then we might very well see the differences the researchers found--but then the BC pill becomes a side-issue. What I want to know is, do women who go off hormonal BC methods show the same preferences once they're off 'em? What about women who switch from hormonal to non-hormonal BC methods, and women who switch from hormonal to no birth control at all, or non-hormonal birth control to no birth control?
And this bit from the "men are more suspicious of macho men when their women are ovulating" article also bothered me:
That may be true, but this is assuming a population of women who choose to have affairs, yes? How common is infidelity, and is the sample size big enough so that women who cheat are somehow representative of women in general? And how do we know that these women don't share some other sort of quirk which may explain why these macho men are preferred?
I'm somewhat bothered by how very reductionist these studies are, and how some of them seem to consistently conflate physical beauty with sexual attraction with mate selection. Look, just because somebody's pretty doesn't mean I want to fuck him, and just because I want to fuck somebody doesn't mean I want to be with him forever. Also, these studies strip the personality dynamic out of the equation entirely, when I'm not sure that's feasible.
However, some of the information resulting from these studies, such as what are considered masculine vs. femine faces, and introverted vs. extroverted faces, is very interesting.
Women like girly men better when we're on the rag.
Men like girly men better when we're getting about to get on the rag.
Facial prejudices.
Chicks dig big, manly...vocal chords.
Especially before we're about to go on the rag.
And apparently, regulating our on-the-ragginess can change our mate preferences, too.
There's some interesting information in those pieces, but a lot of the conclusions drawn (at least, as reported by the BBC) are a bit too sweeping for my comfort. Some of the research also seems to contradict one another. For example, from the research about how birth control pills affect attraction:
They found those taking the pill were more likely to choose macho men, and to rate men with more feminine, softer physical features as a turn off.
However, the researchers say it is these men who tend to be more sensitive, and more likely to making trustworthy and faithful husbands.
They proved more popular among women not taking the pill who took part in the study.
Blocked ovulation
The researchers believe that the key may be the fact the taking the pill blocks the natural process of ovulation.
As women who take the pill cannot become pregnant, they are sub-consciously attracted to sexy, macho men, rather than to men who are most likely to make a sensible long-term mate.
And then in the article about how women who are ovulating prefer macho men:
Women are attracted to more masculine-looking men at the most fertile time of their menstrual cycle, psychologists have shown.
During the less fertile times, they choose men with more feminine-looking faces. These are seen as kinder and more co-operative, but less strong and healthy genetically.
A controversial implication of the new research is that, in evolutionary terms, it is natural for a woman to be unfaithful in order to secure both the best genes and the best carer for her children.
This is because a less masculine-looking man may be a better long-term partner, but the strongest, healthiest children would be produced by a quick fling with a more masculine-looking man.
OK, look, you can't really have it both ways: ovulating women want to fuck macho men because of their OMG good genes that the women want to pass on to the (potential) sproglets, and non-ovulating women want men who are caring and nurturing, but women who are on the pill (and therefore not ovulating) apparently like to fuck macho men as well because...they're unable to make good long-term mate choices??
I'm not arguing that these differences aren't real, but there seems to be some tricky dickery going on here, with researchers providing conclusions based on cultural prejudices. "This one here wants good genes for her kids, and this one, here, just wants to get laid."
Was birth control the only factor that could explain the women's inverted preferences? I don't have access to the studies, but I'd be interested in looking at the women's age, education level, upbringing, political affiliation, reasons why they are or aren't on birth control and income, all of which can conceivably impact attraction and mate choice. I mean, really, if women get on BC pills because they're looking to get laid without becoming pregnant, and these sorts of women tend to prefer macho men for whatever reason, then we might very well see the differences the researchers found--but then the BC pill becomes a side-issue. What I want to know is, do women who go off hormonal BC methods show the same preferences once they're off 'em? What about women who switch from hormonal to non-hormonal BC methods, and women who switch from hormonal to no birth control at all, or non-hormonal birth control to no birth control?
And this bit from the "men are more suspicious of macho men when their women are ovulating" article also bothered me:
"Whether they consciously know it or not, women do tend to have affairs with dominant males during their most fertile phase.
"That's independent of whether they want to get pregnant or not."
That may be true, but this is assuming a population of women who choose to have affairs, yes? How common is infidelity, and is the sample size big enough so that women who cheat are somehow representative of women in general? And how do we know that these women don't share some other sort of quirk which may explain why these macho men are preferred?
I'm somewhat bothered by how very reductionist these studies are, and how some of them seem to consistently conflate physical beauty with sexual attraction with mate selection. Look, just because somebody's pretty doesn't mean I want to fuck him, and just because I want to fuck somebody doesn't mean I want to be with him forever. Also, these studies strip the personality dynamic out of the equation entirely, when I'm not sure that's feasible.
However, some of the information resulting from these studies, such as what are considered masculine vs. femine faces, and introverted vs. extroverted faces, is very interesting.
no subject
Date: 2006-05-24 09:37 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-05-24 09:42 pm (UTC)