To those who would like to argue that sex differences are exaggerated or of minor importance in human behavior, I have two words:
- Estrogen
- Testosterone
All women know that female attraction triggers span a wide spectrum. For every woman that loves a ripped, hairy chest, there’s one who likes a pale, slim, hairless torso. Some of us are drawn to laid back guys who don’t fret about their feelings much, others are drawn to brooding loners or sensitive ponytail men. We’re less reliant on visual criteria than men are, but many women do have preferences when it comes to guys’ looks.
There are three fascinating studies that have looked at what women prefer in male facial features. The esteemed Face Research Lab in Aberdeen, Scotland uses technology to generate face pairs with more and less masculine facial features for these studies.
I. Facial correlates of sociosexuality
A couple of years ago I wrote the post Player or Boyfriend? It’s Written On His Forehead, about a 2008 study where 700 subjects correctly judged (72% of the time) whether faces in photographs belonged to people who preferred casual sex or relationships, based on their sociosexuality score. The differences in the faces were explained by hormones, and as you might expect, higher testosterone males were more interested in casual sex than other males. What surprised researchers was that women showed a marked, significant preference for the lower testosterone, relationship-oriented men, for both short-term and long-term mating. (Note: only heterosexual male faces were included.) This happened at the intuitive level, and the researchers believe it may be a mechanism whereby women may avoid men seeking short-term sex.
II. Partner characteristics associated with masculinity, health and maturity in male faces
Lynda Boothroyd, who led the study above, also conducted an earlier study looking at the degree to which women select men for masculine facial features. The summarized results:
The more attractive, or “healthy” a face, , the more it was perceived as displaying desirable characteristics. More masculine and older faces were perceived as having more ‘alpha’ traits and less likely to be a faithful and committed partner.
As predicted, across both studies male facial masculinity was associated with higher levels of perceived dominance, but lower perceptions of commitment and fidelity within a long term relationship. This supports previous research into masculine vs. feminine faces. It is concordant with Perusse (1993) behavioral data showing that high status men are less likely to settle into a long term relationship and tend to have more sexual partners, and Mazur and Michalek (1998) data showing a link between testosterone in males and marital problems.
Boothroyd said:
What I’ve shown is that when people look at masculine faces they see them as being associated with dominance – which is a good thing in evolution but less good as a long-term partner.
The study showed these masculine types with larger noses, smaller eyes and thicker eyebrows were viewed as less faithful and worse parents. Instead it was the “feminine” faces with wide eyes, finer features and thinner, curved eyebrows that were chosen as the best potential long-term mates. This helps to counter claims that masculinity is best viewed as an indicator of genetic fitness and immunity to disease. Here what I’m showing is that healthiness is really positive and masculinity isn’t.
III. The health of a nation predicts their mate preferences
Science journalist Jena Pincott penned Why Women Don’t Want Macho Men for the Wall St. Journal. The study included 4,800 females in their early to mid 20s, from 30 countries. (Note: the researchers used only white subjects to control the study.)
After crunching the data—including the women’s facial preferences, their country of origin and that country’s national health index—the Face Lab researchers proved something remarkable. They could predict how masculine a woman likes her men based on her nation’s World Health Organization statistics for mortality rates, life expectancy and the impact of communicable disease. In countries where poor health is particularly a threat to survival, women leaned toward “manlier” men. That is, they preferred their males to have shorter, broader faces and stronger eyebrows, cheekbones and jaw lines.
From an evolutionary perspective, masculinity is basically man’s way of advertising good genes, dominance and likelihood to father healthier kids. When disease is a real threat, as it had been—and arguably still is—heritable health is invaluable. Masculinity, however, can come at a high price. Women often think of high-testosterone types as uncooperative, unsympathetic, philandering, aggressive and disinterested in parenting. In fact, there is evidence that they really do have more relationship problems than other men.
In a study of 2,100 Air Force veterans, men with testosterone levels one standard deviation above the mean were 43% more likely to get divorced than men with normal levels, 31% more likely to leave home because of marital problems, 38% more likely to cheat on their wives, and 13% more likely to admit that they hit or hurled things at them.
In this light, manifest masculinity doesn’t sound like such a good deal. At least not in a significant relationship. A woman might be attracted subconsciously to a high-testosterone man because he’ll give her kids an edge health-wise. But if health comes at the expense of fidelity and good parenting, how much does masculinity really matter?
The apparent answer is not so much—if you’re a woman living in a country with a decent health-care system and few harmful pathogens.
Women with the weakest masculinity preferences came from the countries with the best health care, including Belgium, Sweden, Finland, Denmark and Austria. Those with the strongest preferences for macho men came from the unhealthiest countries, including Mexico, Brazil, Bulgaria and Argentina.
The U.S. came in fifth in the masculinity ranking, and 20th in the health care ranking. It would be interesting to see the American results broken out by socioeconomic status, as we know there are profound differences among sub-populations in the U.S. with respect to marriage and divorce.
Pincott posits that female preferences in the U.S. have other reasons to shift. The promise of potentially improved health care may alter attraction triggers. Also, women’s increasing financial freedom means they are freer to prefer men who are caring, cooperative and communicative. Finally, as women control more resources, they prefer better looking men. Based on this study, that’s more likely to be a pretty boy than a macho dude.
It seems reasonable to wonder if before long American women will have redefined “the perfect male” – not the cad, but the dad. In the meantime, choosing the right long-term partner is a matter of extreme importance. Now you know what he looks like, more or less.
Related posts:
{ 1311 comments… read them below or add one }
1 2 3 … 9 »
“Also, women’s increasing financial freedom means they are freer to prefer men who are caring, cooperative and communicative. ”
Or, it make may allow them the freedom to pursue more alpha men without regard to concerns about his long term commitment.
“It seems reasonable to wonder if before long American women will have redefined “the perfect male” – not the cad, but the dad. ”
But womens’ financial independence in the US seems to be pushing them in the other direction, no?
I believe that feminism and hypergamy are partly to blame for the rising epidemic of ADHD as women do not need to consider the long-term stability of their partner.
Not only that, I’ve read a lot saying many male-dominated jobs are going away in the US and aren’t coming back quickly.
Provider genes don’t help if you have no means of providing.
Dan_Brodribb´s last [type] ..We Have Assumed Control
@Passer By
I would think this would be true for women who don’t intend to have children. Then the character of the male is not as important. Women who want a family, but who also have earning potential, have more leeway to select entirely based on compatibility. They don’t need to adhere to traditional markers of success in, say, bringing down a mastodon. As I’ve written before, I also think the changing nature of the U.S. economy will likely play a role. As we have painfully observed in the mancession, traditional manly jobs requiring great body strength have disappeared for the most part. At some point, the “cons” column becomes much longer than the “pros” column for these men.
Again, I assume you’re talking about women who are not necessarily commitment-oriented themselves. Certainly women’s financial independence is a key factor in delaying marriage and in some cases avoiding it altogether. Women who want to marry and have children will apply their resources to that endeavor rather than strike out independently. That’s what I did.
@Dan
Ah, sorry, I cross posted with you. Agreed.
@christiankp
Interesting, can you say how?
The anecdotal evidence is women are not dating men with perceived caring or communicative attributes. They are going for men that are all wrong for them. Everyone knows this. For every hyper masculine man that is cheating, there is a willing partner that includes married women. There is no logic to this. Women’s financial independence means they can afford to be frivolous; however, time is not on their side. They should keep this in mind, but I don’t they ever think of the ramifications of their actions until too late.
@Susan
“I would think this would be true for women who don’t intend to have children.”
This could mean several things. Women might in the interim not want to have children. This can change when she reaches 35 to 40.
This could mean she doesn’t want to have kids with her man. She could be having fun with a random man, or her beta husband (her starter husband)and she might want to have children in the future with someone more suitable. Hypergamy it is.
This trend towards feminized men, if it does exist, will experience a massive blowback in the near future. This is especially true if there is a substantial economic collapse in the near future. Periods of upheaval hurt everyone, but they always seem to hurt women more.
Every statement in these articles should have soimething added to every one… “Unless she is ovulating”.
Put all of this together and one begins to suspect that cuckholding guys with nice faces is the default stategy encoded.
Great post, but…..what about the well-documented differences in attraction cues that women experience during their monthly cycle? This post would seem to primarily describe the non-ovulatory portion of the cycle. When actually fertile though, women prefer (relatively) more psycho-socially dominant, aggressive men, and respond more to physical cues for that (e.g., strong jaw-line, deeper-set eyes, etc.)
Therein lies the rub: At the time when she is most likely to actually conceive, a woman’s instincts for high-value genes have the potential to override her “normal” (i.e., natural, but tempered and informed by experience) attractors.
Sort of Non sequitur: Even seemingly alpha men, like the successful and well know Robert Kardashain, can be cuckolded. (Khloe is at least a full standard deviation taller than and lighter than her sisters.) Kris Jenner clearly slept with a taller (dominance) and lighter-skinned (higher social-status, typically) man while married to Kardashian. Her ovulation triggered these impulses, and her inner-slut surrendered to them.
“Put all of this together and one begins to suspect that cuckholding guys with nice faces is the default stategy encoded.”
Rum – mother nature is a real bitch…
@ Rum, Ted D
Isn’t it nice being the guy who gets screwed out of the important stuff?
The thing is that women select men for different things – the ones they select to have sex with (the ones who are more masculine), are very different from the ones they select to bring up that child (the ones who aren’t). This is why the smart man will always have a DNA test to verify the paternity of a child – for the exact reasons given in the above.
A woman always knows the child is hers – the man, up till recently, had to take it on faith. I’ve always believed in the old adage – Trust, but verify…
Sooooo. . . . I gotta ask the ladies here, who do you find more attractive? Having just the picture to go by, I find the man (is he old enough to call man?) on the right far more attractive than the one on the right.
@Jonny
Yes, and I’m offering data on thousands of subjects from three different studies. Are all women dating uncaring men? Who are the couples who fill the wedding announcements every Sunday? Can men with lower testosterone be uncaring? Can they act like Impostor Assholes?
I don’t.
Yes, the partner who is pursuing a short-term mating strategy. This post is about the traits that make a man suitable for a long-term relationship.
@susan
I’m not saying that the women wouldn’t prefer to have parental investment from the father. But that desire is to be weighed against other desires (attraction, excitement, etc.). I’m saying that the downside of him turning out to not be a dad type is less than it was 4o or 50 years ago, and so this skews the analysis away from the dads. This is evident in the rapid rise of single motherhood and out of wedlock births. Yes, all these women might have preferred it otherwise, but it was not as devastating as it would have been 50 years ago, so more of the dads lose out. I don’t think financial independence for women favors beta types – especially at a younger age.
@doc
Wow, it only took 14 comment to get back to DNA testing. lol
It’s weird how I perceive Guy A (hypermasculine) to be somewhat attractive whilst Guy B (hyperfeminine) triggers sisterly feelings, like it’s almost incestuous to even consider him sexually. Maybe the NHS isn’t as good as I thought. =/
But then, I’ve never deviated from preferring dad types to cads which is something considering that there is zero religious/social/family pressure on me to choose wisely. Why is this all so contradictory?
A-Bax,
But aren’t most women on the Pill? I”ve read that because it stops ovulation and mimics pregnancy, those women are attracted to feminized, attentive types all month long. The problems begin when she stops using contraception whilst still in a LTR with the same guy.
Stingray, maybe I’m confusing you with someone else, but I thought you were a man. Are you a pederast?
Are you a pederast?
HaHa!!! Nope. I’m a woman.
Women with the weakest masculinity preferences came from the countries with the best health care, including Belgium, Sweden, Finland, Denmark and Austria. Those with the strongest preferences for macho men came from the unhealthiest countries, including Mexico, Brazil, Bulgaria and Argentina.
Perhaps “best health care is” a codeword for feminist beliefs being more endorsed in the country’s culture and the widespread use of the pill. Aren’t women who are on the pill more prone to less masculine men and be more promiscous?
Also, women’s increasing financial freedom means they are freer to prefer men who are caring, cooperative and communicative. Finally, as women control more resources, they prefer better looking men. Based on this study, that’s more likely to be a pretty boy than a macho dude.
I don’t think pretty boys are better looking men but then again I’m not a strong independent ill-mannered career woman who has been banging random strangers month after month while controlling my resources.
It seems reasonable to wonder if before long American women will have redefined “the perfect male” – not the cad, but the dad. In the meantime, choosing the right long-term partner is a matter of extreme importance. Now you know what he looks like, more or less.
This has been opposite to my experience. I keep hearing how cads have a lot of testosterone but I disagree. They don’t. The men who thrive in today’s society are not patriarchal and therefore they cannot be the “alpha men” (Exhibit A: Science journalist Jena Pincott penned Why Women Don’t Want Macho Men for the Wall St. Journal.). The patriarchal men, dads and the providers type, don’t generate the tingles that modern women want since they are everything that women have been taught to disdain by liberals. The men who thrive in today’s society are street-thugs, lotharios, bad boys, metrosexuals and man-children being coupled with their high-powered high status women. In PUA language it’s the omegas winning. It’s not a run to the top, it’s a contest to the bottom.
Sheesh. I do NOT find the guy on the right to be more attractive than the guy on the right. Let me just try again. I find the guy on the LEFT to be far more attractive.
Let me proof-read . . . . .
Look at the picture again . . . .
Yes, that is correct.
Yes, unless this study has been indexed to account for each subject’s menstrual cycle, the conclusions are suspect at best. Ovulation changes everything.
@Rum
No, that’s the whole point. Women selected those men as more attractive, even for short-term flings. They also rated relationship-oriented guys more attractive, without knowing that about them.
Women on the Pill don’t ovulate, it’s mostly a moot point now. I do want to say a word about the ovulation issue. It’s real, but it’s very, very subtle. Women do not experience some sort of surge of attraction to burly men when they’re ovulating. Women of good character don’t sex up high T men out of the blue. A woman inclined to cheat is more likely to do so when ovulating. Most women don’t even know when they’re ovulating – which is why they need to carefully track their body temperature when trying to get pregnant.
SW-
Have you ever considered defining your own taxonomy of men with the Alpha, Beta, etc? Or, if you have, could you provide a link? (sorry) Do you follow the Roissy definition of Alpha? Or Dalrock’s? Does your classification scheme have just the two or a spectrum, like Vox Day’s alpha, beta, lambda, gamma, delta, etc.?
It just seems like everybody brings their own definitions to the table here. Maybe if our hostess spent an article laying down her definitions, it might allow us to work toward a more common nomenclature. Just an idea.
Evlution is weird. I instantly regard the guy on the right as nicer and “marriage material” and guy on the right as “not worth it, too many girls probably after him; player.” Both guys are very attractive, so it’s not even about choosing the best looking, most fit one, but about certain cues that tell us- HE WILL BE A GOOD FATHER. Interesting.
It’s so strange, how our reptile (primate?) brain knows so much more than our conscious mind sometimes.
Flavia´s last [type] ..Prom: Then and Now
I instantly regard the guy on the left as nicer and “marriage material” and guy on the right as “not worth it, too many girls probably after him; player.”
You had double right. Fixed it for you.
Elizabeth Smith´s last [type] ..The Catholic Knight muses on Santa Claus
@Susan
“Yes, and I’m offering data on thousands of subjects from three different studies. Are all women dating uncaring men?”
When I reread your post, it seems to assume the “caring” part. Just because a woman might go with a less masculine man who could be better long mates says nothing about caring, communication, or cooperation. It merely says this people is less likely to cheat.
A woman prefers a more handsome guy. She hopes he will be a long term partner. He could very well be a kind person, but to many many women.
From above “As predicted, across both studies male facial masculinity was associated with higher levels of perceived dominance, but lower perceptions of commitment and fidelity within a long term relationship.”
@Susan
The ovulation effect is real, and you’re right, most women don’t even know they’re ovulating. But an observant husband and twenty years of experience can see how ovulation can denote a profound but subtle shift in his wife’s perspective and attitude. I think if they ran the same test every day for a month and tracked the changes to the responses, they’d have a better data set.
Ian Ironwood´s last [type] ..Game As A Tool Towards Recovering A Lost Masculinity
I’d didn’t like either. The one of the right looked like a girl or a young boy and the one of the right looked like an asshole that has mass bitches.
Ah, now I see why Im gonna end up a spinster.
Damn it I mean the one of the LEFT looked like an asshole.
Isabel,
I don’t know the #’s, but I’d guess that there are more women not on the pill than one might suspect. Lost of women have bad reactions to it, decreased libido, weight gain, etc. The old tried and true methods of condoms, pulling out, etc. are seen by many as preferable to the side-effects of the pill (even given the increased risk of pregnancy).
But, as you point out, finding a mate while on the pill presents it’s own dangers. In the best case scenario, the relationship blossoms and the couple (usually) want to get married and have kids. But, once she goes off the pill, she begins to notice that NiceGuy doesn’t really tingle her tangle so much. She feels restless. She’s not haaaaapy. And suddenly that asshole DudeBro douche at her office seems funny and cool! And boy does he do well with the clients! And is he beginning to flirt with her?
Even if a woman finds her mate while not on the pill (and thus he’s presumably alpha enough to keep her motor running), problems can arise if /when she then goes on the pill because “we’re exclusive now”, and “condoms suck”. The man she fell in love with can suddenly seem boorish and disinterested. He won’t open up! He spends too much time with his friends and she haaates it when he looks at other women!
In short – the pill sucks and fucks up women’s biochemistry and psychology.
I am sitting here trying not to laugh, because that would be three of us now who have said the one on the right compared to the one on the right.
WTH?
“As predicted, across both studies male facial masculinity was associated with higher levels of perceived dominance, but lower perceptions of commitment and fidelity within a long term relationship.”
I wonder where that perception came from (are there any 1970′s or 1980′s movies depicting this?). From what I’ve seen religious patriarchal cultures put most high-testosterone men in the Dad bracket whereas the men who were busy banging chicks left and right and bad long-term mates were depicted as mostly lower-testosterone and in the Cad bracket.
Have you ever considered defining your own taxonomy of men with the Alpha, Beta, etc? Or, if you have, could you provide a link? (sorry) Do you follow the Roissy definition of Alpha? Or Dalrock’s? Does your classification scheme have just the two or a spectrum, like Vox Day’s alpha, beta, lambda, gamma, delta, etc.?
It just seems like everybody brings their own definitions to the table here. Maybe if our hostess spent an article laying down her definitions, it might allow us to work toward a more common nomenclature. Just an idea.
Great idea! You should do it Susan Walsh.
Elizabeth Smith´s last [type] ..The Catholic Knight muses on Santa Claus
For me at first (quick) glance I would have selected the guy on the right (his eyes seemed brighter) but looking more closely… He looks like he’s 11. I’ve always been attracted to older looking guys though.
Can the pill be blamed for the rise of female infertility and childlessness? I always wondered about that. Let’s say one woman in the 1970′s has had her first child and has continually used the pill. This baby girl then uses the pill continually like her mother and has her first child with some difficulty in the early 1990′s. These are two female generations using something that literally tells their body “Don’t get pregnant”. The pill then starts affecting their reproductive system more and more. Sooner or later “Voila!” the pill turns the 3rd or 4th generation women in this family infertile. But I think the pill, a tool of sexual liberation, is not the only factor. Environmentalism, another facet, can also be blamed for childlessness (ever heard of having no children to save the earth from overpopulation?).
In short – the pill sucks and fucks up women’s biochemistry and psychology.
It also poisons oceans and lakes turning male fish into male/female andrygonous creatures.
Elizabeth Smith´s last [type] ..The Catholic Knight muses on Santa Claus
I’ve dug up the oft quoted study re women’s changing preferences as a result of hormonal fluctuations. It’s an interesting read.
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:OxaD50rrjBIJ:www.facelab.org/include/download%3Fid%3D196+&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESgRDVLA6pkkHtGvpi1Ydaqi2grUHwBidZRQ3CxQiJbOXw5P5NqE5dEafVKIhi-gBwflVPhAYW88DW88jB4iR58RjVja380bbpjIea1um71vGKn7I3hjBIO85MvUaDfSp6gW9G1W&sig=AHIEtbQXyGnIy190JrK8c7rPxYa59yIK9g
Interestingly, researcher Lisa DeBruine conducted both this study and the third one in the post looking at health.
In any case, the findings are not contradictory. What is interesting, to me at least, is that the researchers are suggesting that women are adapting. So that their idea of a “dream man” is changing, implying that who they’re most tempted by during ovulation will also change. I would expect, however, that women looking for ONSs will continue to seek out the highest T guys.
Studies have shown that women tend to prefer more masculine faces when judging for a short-term than for a long-term relationship.
I don’t think we should trust studies so easily unless the sources are confirmed as valid.
Elizabeth Smith´s last [type] ..Happy New Year!
While the article makes logical sense, I just don’t see it playing out that way in reality. With all due respect, if it did, I don’t think there would be a need for this blog
@Stingray
You should have saw me. I was about to be super self righteous and correct you after I finished my post. And I did the same thing as you did. Thats what I get. LOL!
Having just the picture to go by, I find the man (is he old enough to call man?) on the right far more attractive than the one on the right.
I, on the other hand, think the one on the right is much more handsome.
VD,
LOL. I know, I know. Proofreading is my friend. The sad thing is, I think I did and I still missed it.
@Passer By
I understand, but what researchers found interesting about the study is the change in female perceptions. They were surprised to find that women chose lower T men even for short-term flings.
Also, the variation among countries is extremely interesting. If women were hard-wired a certain way, then those differences shouldn’t exist. Instead, we see that Belgian women have a strong preference for lower T men, and Argentinian women want macho men. Women in countries with high infant mortality like high T men more than other women do. It makes sense, but what is surprising is that the adaptation occurred in a relatively short period of time, evolutionarily speaking.
For the record, Jena Pincott’s ideas about what might change American women’s tastes were not part of the study. So while it may be interesting to discuss, women’s financial independence was not studied. Personally, I think it makes sense though. If women have the wherewithal to go the turkey baster route and eliminate the male altogether, then she certainly won’t need to go for the disagreeable fellow because he can sire a viable infant.
Cad versus Dad-nice ring to it.
@Elizabeth Smith
No, they used WHO stats.
That’s actually an argument for adaptive attraction cues, rather than hardwiring to prefer dominance.
Just to be clear, the studies included thousands of photographs of college males. This just happened to be the one that the Wall St. Journal featured, it’s not significant.
@JLW
I have said before that my general use of the terms alpha and beta comprises the following:
1. Vox Day’s Sociosexual Hierarchy
2. The academic literature – note the word alpha was included in the results of one of the studies.
3. Athol Kay’s lists of alpha and beta traits.
Overall, I’d say my view is close to alpha = cad and beta = dad. But I don’t really find the labels all that useful, and I’ve been trying to avoid using them. For the very reason that after what must be hundreds of hours of debate on this topic, there is no consensus among readers here.
No, they used WHO stats.
Fair enough. Still every organization has their own agenda.
That’s actually an argument for adaptive attraction cues, rather than hardwiring to prefer dominance.
It’s so-so. I’m commenting on how modern women have been taught to reject their inner female nature on a grand scale and despise their hardwiring that they will openly mock and ridicule masculine men.
Elizabeth Smith´s last [type] ..Masculine men are not Players
Just to be clear, the studies included thousands of photographs of college males. This just happened to be the one that the Wall St. Journal featured, it’s not significant.
I realize that. I was just correcting a horrible sentence I had written earlier. (Heh, three of us wrote). I was mostly just curious when I asked.
@Susan
“I understand, but what researchers found interesting about the study is the change in female perceptions. They were surprised to find that women chose lower T men even for short-term flings. ”
Well, the study was asking them questions, not observing who they went to bed with. But the facts on the ground seem to contradict that.
“Also, the variation among countries is extremely interesting. If women were hard-wired a certain way, then those differences shouldn’t exist. Instead, we see that Belgian women have a strong preference for lower T men, and Argentinian women want macho men. Women in countries with high infant mortality like high T men more than other women do. It makes sense, but what is surprising is that the adaptation occurred in a relatively short period of time, evolutionarily speaking.”
I wonder if they considered that they might be reversing cause and effect. Perhaps the northern euro societies are more advanced (with better medicine) precisely because their women have evolved less preference for high T men (notice I didn’t say no preference, just less preference) in favor more committed men. This might have happened before modern civilization (and welfare states) due to the harsher climate – which would have substantially lowered the chance of survivial of infants without two parent investment. Just sort of thinking out loud here.
@ Susan
Okay just to clarify on the article you posted.
Women already in LTRs find more masculine men attractive while ovulating.
All the single ladies find less masculine men attractive when ovulating.
If so, seriously, how do we(betas) win?
@Jonny
Beta guys are often very handsome. Handsome is not the right word here. It’s about specific features: prominent brow, heavy eyebrows, large nose, large jaw. Those are the things that convey dominance.
The guy on the left is the cad.
There’s also the very real, but unverifiable, possibility that these studies may have involved some element of social pressure that would influence women’s answers.
Women did rate men’s attractiveness according to their appearance, but this plays a much smaller role in real life. Women may want a stable, caring man, but place that man next to a dominant alpha and stability might be the last thing on a woman’s mind.
It would be altogether encouraging to see YOUNG women making choices based on virtue and fidelity, but the 15 year social experiment that is Game would suggest otherwise. The only women that I’ve seen who are willing to hold out for long-term value men have some external pressure guiding them into that frame (e.g. micro-culture, religious upbringing, etc.).
John´s last [type] ..Struggling to Function
Susan
The women studied did not select the low T man for a short term fling. They selected the picture of the low T man during a time – on the basis of probability alone never mind being on the Pill – of the month when they were not ovulating/fertile. In real life, where there would be displays of behavior involved, which kind of guy would get taken home by the ripe, welcoming ovaries? We already know the answer. The answer is still a massive advertizement for game-ology.
BTW, it is merely silly to talk about T levels and male levels of various kinds of dysfunction without consideration of ethnicity because T levels differ a lot according to which continent your ancestors came from.
@Jimmy Hendricks
Ah, well to be clear, my own expectation is that this shift will take several generations. But the benefits can be realized now for women who choose wisely.
The risks of mating with high T men are well documented. If I were single, I would certainly incorporate that knowledge in searching for a partner.
@ Susan
“Beta guys are often very handsome. Handsome is not the right word here. It’s about specific features: prominent brow, heavy eyebrows, large nose, large jaw. Those are the things that convey dominance.”
I meant to say Masculine guy, but many masculine guys are more handsome. Even for myself, I can’t stop looking at a more masculine guy. His presence and looks suggests dominance, thus I preceive him as better looking and many times, objectively he is better looking.
@Lokland
Well, first of all, there are beta guys who are high T, but who were socialized to suppress that. Mike C has described himself that way, and he is a great guy and a great partner, from everything I know about him.
If you’re asking, though, how lower T guys win, it’s to appeal to a single woman and wife her up. Women vary widely in their levels of hypergamy. Obviously men need to choose wisely too. The beta guy’s challenge is to choose a woman who never picks the high T guy.
My first serious relationship was with a high T type – my college bf, and we dated for three years. Never again. He was a good man, but very difficult to communicate with, very emotionally reticent. I left him and began dating an emo dude who was totally beta. I consider my husband a beta – Vox Day style.
In addition, I would just point out that a lot of betas do win. According to the stats, they’re less likely to divorce. I know that goes against manosphere assumptions, but high T men are much more likely to cheat, argue, behave in a volatile and aggressive way, etc.
@Rum
I don’t think the studies argue against Game at all. If anything, they explain how Game can make a beta guy the most attractive option. He’s not saddled with the very real hormonal disadvantage of excessive testosterone, women will choose him most of the time anyway, and with Game he can bring the dominance that is going to keep her “in hand” during ovulation.
My post above came out a little jumbled.
1. A static picture does not convey alpha vs beta behavior displays. 2. Listening to what someone says they would do is a very poor substitute for observing what they actually do. 3. STR is always femcode for ” with a guy who makes me tingle”. 4. Ovulation only increases the receptiveness to alpha displays.
I guess if a guys favorite thing was getting half hearted sex with emo-girls on the pill, there is some useful data here. But the big picture still screams cuckold danger alert if any thing serious was to be contemplated..
@Passer By
That’s certainly very possible, and an interesting theory.
Do you ever wonder why one needs a PhD to get these grants? Readers here have more insight than the study authors often times.
The guy on the left is the cad.
Wait, I thought the guy on the left is high T. Yes, I understand that a lot of guys who are high T are cads, but I am not convinced it is the testosterone making them cads.
What passerby thought outloud is a staple of the R -sphere.
Yes, I understand that a lot of guys who are high T are cads, but I am not convinced it is the testosterone making them cads.
I agree. I think it’s high adrenaline, not hight testosterone.
Elizabeth Smith´s last [type] ..The Two Horses of Female Infertility
I will have to caution women about this “Also, women’s increasing financial freedom means they are freer to prefer men who are caring, cooperative and communicative.”
Any man who has been with a women will know that they will never sufficiently satisfy a women in being caring, cooperative and communicative. Either it is not enough, or it is discarded.
I was accused of not caring simply from verbal or physical cues. A women is just looking for a man to neglect her and she will invent it she must. She is constantly looking for assurance to alievate her doubts. She will never find it unless the guy totally prostrates himself. But if he does that, she loses respect and there will be contempt. You don’t want to go there.
As for it being discarded, she will communicate to you only to tell you what she wants. Failing that, and she mentally divorce the situation since compromising is something some women just won’t, she will give up. Thus discarding any notion of you doing anything to help. Any attempt to talk to her will fail. In addition to not speaking the language of women, you won’t be able to get your message through her head. The different communication styles of women and men is the hinderance, as well as the mental filters women will place to protect themselves, which will likely hurt the marriage. The marriage will be sacrificed to protect the egos of women. Yet, the law is on their side and she will weld it.
The best solution to fix this is finding the women with the same temperament. Don’t date opposites. I know opposite attract, but they don’t help the marriage. Don’t date women with similar interests. Interests change, but temperament never does.
A-Bax,
I’m speaking mostly from my own experiences and assorted memories of sex ed talks I’ve had over the years. It’s all academic. So far, most either take it for its real contraceptive purpose, to stop menstruation or because they believe in the myth that the Pill, particularly Yasmin, makes your boobs bigger (uh, uniform weight gain). I’ve never actually met an unmarried woman who wasn’t on the Pill.
In the best case? That’s a little cynical, no?
I really think men overstate the surge of testoterone that women get during ovulation. It peaks considerably, yes, but it isn’t some sort of overnight Jekyll vs Hyde transformation. Ovulating women who are prone to flightiness will cheat and say they felt “lonely” or “neglected” to rationalise their actions. Ovulating women who possess the teensiest of self-awareness will just have more sex with their boyfriends/husbands. Remember that this happens once a month to every woman in the country until menopause – for all eternity. Evidently, the majority aren’t chasing DudeBro or it would be reflected in OOW and paternity statistics.
This is even *more* cynical lol. IDK. Biodeterminism only gets you so far.
I am going to think out loud here for a minute (and in generalities) so please bear with me. Here is what I see might be happening. Go back 50 years and far more (most?) men were marrying high T and low T alike. I think more women went for the high T man and one lucky woman got the prize alpha (I am not taking into consideration what happened after this marriage here as I think it irrelevant at this time). Then along comes feminism and the pill and we now have all these women freely giving it up to the high T men on a regular basis. Therefore, these men marry far less as they are happy the way things are. They burn a lot of women in the process and then the women, already aware on a subconscious level what a high T man looks like, begins to avoid and teach their daughters to avoid high T men as many are now cads. So even though women still find the high T man more exciting and more tingle producing, they (smartly?) stay away from these guys and start to go after the safer low T man and while I think there is attraction, it is not at the same level as with the high T guy. This is when we begin to see the low trickle of sex but at least a very friendly and even a happy marriage though maybe not entirely ideal. Next insert the next wave of feminism teaching women they should always think of themselves and their happiness first and we begin to see these women thinking they want to marry, going for the low T guy (smartly?), discovering that she is not happy and then up and leaving for no good reason.
Elizabeth…”Perhaps “best health care is” a codeword for feminist beliefs being more endorsed in the country’s culture and the widespread use of the pill”…to which Susan says…”No, they used WHO stats.”
But even if the measurement of healthcare quality is correct, it is still possible, even likely, that good healthcare is highly correlated with the overall economic level of a society, as is contraceptive use. So it’s possible that the apparent correlation of female preferences in men with healthcare quality is actually a correlation with contraceptive use. Not sure what statistical methodologies these researchers used, but the population of “societies” is pretty small, which puts some limits on what can be done.
@susan
“Do you ever wonder why one needs a PhD to get these grants? Readers here have more insight than the study authors often times.”
Well, yeah, but we’re all pretty freaky smart here. Except you, Tom. Except you.
@isabel
Yes, one thing I’ve noticed is that, if a study suggests a very modest tendancy on the part of women or men, those who want to grasp at it will use it as evidence that the overwhelming majority of women/men act in accordance with that.
“What surprised researchers was that women showed a marked, significant preference for the lower testosterone, relationship-oriented men, for both short-term and long-term mating.”
This was what they told the researchers…before running off to f**k the bass player
Like everybody else I prefer the guy on the left, but I think that’s because he already looks so young. Maybe the response would be different if they used an older-looking model.
In general, I looooove pretty boys. One of my girlfriends once made fun of me saying that I like my men “to look as much like women as possible”. If I were to go on the pill, I’d probably turn into a lesbian. : P
@emily
“Like everybody else I prefer the guy on the left, . . .”
What is it with women and this difficulty with right and left? Are you gals all dyslexic?
@emily
Oh, wait, I think I get it now. You prefer the guy on the left despite the fact that you usually prefer less masculine guys. Ok, never mind my comment.
@ Tony Stark – I played bass for years. We were always at the bottom of the groupie totem pole
They might have told the researchers they were into relationship-oriented guys and then run off to f**k the bass player, but they always told their friends they f***ed the lead singer
Alas.
dan_brodribb´s last [type] ..Burnout Is Normal
@Jonny
I would respectfully suggest that this is related to male intrasexual competition. I have frequently experienced wide differences of opinion between men and women on which guy is good looking.
Furthermore, other other attributes a guy brings are so important, that a woman’s perception of attractiveness can shift dramatically in his presence. This has been suggested already by others above. For example, women often speak about “sexy ugly” guys. That is not an oxymoron, whereas the concept doesn’t exist for men wrt females.
Also, as to the issue of masculine men or less masculine being more handsome, it’s pretty moot. The differences probably aren’t great either way. But, if testerone drives the masculine look, then a guy with that look has probably spent a lifetime developing more assertive and confident behaviors as a result of higher T, and those behaviors are generate the tingle. But that won’t come across in a study that just looks at pictures.
@Dan,
My friend’s mom had a saying:
“Date the lead guitar, marry the bassist.”
I’m going to be completely honest in this post.
1. I find the guy in the picture to the left far more attractive than the guy on the right.
2. For me, ovulation is definitely akin to turning into Mr. Hyde. I always know when I am ovulating because I’m very aware of the changes in my personality when it happens. My desire for sex goes through the roof during that time. I tend to go to bars far more often and with less clothing than I usually do. I feel more compelled to flirt with men during ovulation. It’s essentially the feeling of being on the prowl, hunting down a gazelle with a great sense of urgency.
Despite all that going on in my head and body, I resist it. It definitely sucks sometimes. There are some days where I just want to grab a random guy and have my way with him. Luckily, my frontal cortex rises above all that raw animal instinct, but it’s extremely hard sometimes.
3. My body doesn’t react well with hormonal birth control, so I don’t use it. I think one of the problems with that is that I’m always drawn to masculine looking men. Strong prominent facial features on a guy turn me on the most. I am aware, however, that high T guys might not be the best bets for a long term relationship partner.
What’s a girl to do when the traits that attract you to a man end up being the things that may cause a relationship demise in the end?
@ Emily
My Dad has a saying,
“The chick who dated the lead guitarist and then wants to marry you.
Don’t fall for it.”
Sassy,
I can totally relate re: ovulation. If I’m more drawn to high-T guys at this time, I haven’t noticed. I think more than anything, I just want to have sex with *everybody!*
@emily
Oh, wait, I think I get it now. You prefer the guy on the left despite the fact that you usually prefer less masculine guys. Ok, never mind my comment.
I like the guy on the left too. I think the whole problem with all this is the murky definitions. For example look at the movie “Titanic”. I prefered Cal and thought he was a great male character but according to PUA theory he’s a beta and Jack was the alpha. I’m a 19 year old virgin and will probably never use the pill. My moderately feminine religious mother has never used the pill either (she’s been married +20 years to my moderatly patriarchal father). Also I don’t like it when men use the colour pink. I just don’t like it.
@emily
“My friend’s mom had a saying:
“Date the lead guitar, marry the bassist.””
And women wonder where guys got this idea that women want to ride the alpha carousel for a while before marrying the beta?
@ Sassy
“I resist it.”
+1. I want to say good for you but am worried it will appear cynical. Its not meant to. Good for you, your a rarity.
@Passer_By, @Susan
I agree with you here Passer_By. I see girls choosing most often based on a combination of dominant looks and dominant behavior. Susan, not to knock your background info, I do like the article and think there are informative elements for women, but the truth doesn’t seem as simple as the results would suggest based on experience. Haven’t read all the comments but the ovulation effect is something to think about, and age is a huge deal when watching how women choose and how frequently they choose the fling versus holding out for boyfriend material. And it does seem anecdotally that wealthier societies are creating women that choose the “cad” first. It would seem to me that women from less wealthy societies like the provider vibe more. The concept of watching what women do versus what they say might come into play here, which is why I’d say guys who are working the provider angle shouldn’t be jumping for joy reading this. What would be really valuable was a study that measured women’s actual choices in real situations where they didn’t know they were being studied.
@Sassy
I don’t take birth control either. Its so wonky and really screws with me in a way that I didnt like it. I took 3 pills and still felt the effects two months later. Can’t say this has made me go looking for sex, but I definitely feel this urge to really want it. Though, I too would never just do it with anyone. Im not an animal.
Before I said neither was attractive and I stand by it. During ovulation I my idea of testosterone is reflected in the idea that i want a tall man with broad shoulders and decent muscles with some body hair and the smell of old spice. Lol.
>> And women wonder where guys got this idea that women want to ride the alpha carousel for a while before marrying the beta?
NAWALT! NAWALT! (Though apparently my friend’s mom is…. : P )
@ Charm
Don’t even get me started on Old Spice. That is the top scent on a man that gets me going. I can’t explain it really. All I know is that my body reacts to the smell of Old Spice like nothing else.
@ Emily
“NAWALT! NAWALT! (Though apparently my friend’s mom is…. : P )”
I don’t think you understand how serious some guys take that. Just reading it made the hair on the back of my neck stand up, pull my shoulders back and I got a flood of adrenaline.
@Rum
LOL, with all due respect, the post is meant to be useful to women in selecting worthy men. I’m supporting women in their search for men who are LTR material, and I’m sharing concrete findings with that end in mind.
The Goal:
Hindbrain———>Frontal Cortex.I think the research, if valid, should make that a bit easier.
@sassy
Hey, I wear old spice. Send me your address and ovulation schedule.
Sassy,
I feel your pain. As I’ve said elsewhere, I’ve realized recently that I have some alpha behavior attraction triggers. I’m not exactly excited about it. Life would be so much easier if I just had beta triggers. While many guys probably have a good mix on an instinctual level (and I think my BF falls into this category), I really do think it’s true that feminism/bad family circumstances/probably a whole host of other stuff has beaten the alphaness out of them.
Olive´s last [type] ..The Quest for Supportive Friends, Part IV
I like to smell male cologne on men.
Elizabeth Smith´s last [type] ..The Three Horses of Female Infertility
@lokland
“Just reading it made the hair on the back of my neck stand up, pull my shoulders back and I got a flood of adrenaline.”
VERY ALPHA!!
Me too! Also, like Charm, I really dig chest hair. Not something I knew until I started dating my BF (my high school boyfriend was bare-chested).
Olive´s last [type] ..The Quest for Supportive Friends, Part IV
@ Emily – Re: comment 77 – Your mom didn’t say to do both at the same time, right? I’d hate to be forced to choose between my wife and a lead guitar player who owned his own gear and didn’t step on my back-up vocals
@ Sassy – “What’s a girl to do when the traits that attract you to a man end up being the things that may cause a relationship demise in the end?”
I don’t think that’s a problem exclusive to women. It’s the human g*d-d***ed condition
I could have sworn I just read an article somewhere that said something to the effect that often the traits we’re attracted to initially become the traits that most annoy us. “Vulnerable” becomes “whiny.” “free-spirited” becomes “unreliable.” “Assertive” turns into “Controlling.”
What can you do?
dan_brodribb´s last [type] ..Burnout Is Normal
@ Passer By
Seriously?
I always considered it that an alpha would have no response because he was already on the winning end. If anything an alpha should feel elation at hearing that.
@ Passer_By
Send me a pic, and maybe we could set something up.
@ Olive
It’s definitely like navigating a minefield. Date a guy with the wrong combination of traits, and it’s likely to blow up in one’s face later.
“Don’t even get me started on Old Spice. That is the top scent on a man that gets me going. I can’t explain it really. All I know is that my body reacts to the smell of Old Spice like nothing else.”
Weird. My husband liked to use Old Spice, but I don’t like the smell. He switched for me, because he didn’t really care about it.
Also, like Charm, I really dig chest hair.
OMG! I like hair on men too. I don’t gorillas but adequate natural hair is appreciated. I like it on the arms, the legs, the back and the chest. Facial hair? If they have a small nice beard on the face I can even tolerate it, otherwise keep a stubble.
Elizabeth Smith´s last [type] ..The Three Horses of Female Infertility
My husband definitely looks more like the guy on the left, and I’m normally attracted to that type even when not ovulating… >.>
@Lokland, @Emily
But you do realize that most women ARE like that, so we might as well accept it. But you don’t have to sit and do nothing. Susan’s article is great for women to understand themselves to a certain degree although I do think that the conclusion is incomplete. The only thing guys need to focus on is where the rubber meets the road. Even surveys of women have next to no value if you can go to a house party or a local bar and do your own research.
@ BroHamlet
Don’t worry I’m fully on board with you. MWALT.
Personal experience tells me so.
Personal experience also tells me how to be both and frankly I’m damn good at it.
That doesn’t mean I have to like it.
@lokland
I guess you’re right, though I think righteous displays of anger can be alpha
@sassy
Ok, but, come to think of it, I should probably clear it with my wife first.
pull my shoulders back and I got a flood of adrenaline.
Nice
@ Passer_By
You scoundrel.
@ Elizabeth Smith
I like beards on guys, as long as they are well maintained. I don’t want to date Grizzly Adams, but a well trimmed beard is very attractive on a man.
@ Passery By
Without a doubt.
I was debating on sharing this but now ti seems it will fit.
On my fiances most recent ovulation cycle (on all actually) she tends to pull a bitchfit of some kind.
I got pissed off and walked into our room and started reading. She came in began talking and my response was “drop it now. I don’t need to deal with a bitch.”
I got laid like tile.
Afterwards, her “when I saw you were angry I was so horny’.
So ya genuine anger can definetly be alpha.
Cont’d from before
In the case of getting angry at womens hypergamy.
The anger would be unwarranted for the alpha because he is already winning.
Therefore feeling angry can’t be alpha so it has to be some other type of male in the hierarchy.
I think the issue is less that most women are like that and more that pretty much all of the women who are having casual sex are like that. Those women just tend to be the most visible.
Thank you for the great post Susan. I was already somewhat familiar with this subject through the Wall Street Journal article, but you were certainly much more thorough. I am glad that in the comments section you are clarifying that just because a guy is high T it does not mean that he would be a bad mate. My features are definitely very high T (thick eyebrows, chest hair, 5 O’clock shadow at 3 O’clock, etc.), I can definitely be very aggressive in social situations, and I probably have a higher sex drive than most guys, but I would never even dream of cheating. I think, for better or worse, I have been so socially programmed against such behavior that no amount of testosterone or promise of easy sex would change my behavior. So, ladies, do not write off the high T guys: just find one who has learned reverse game, and also has an emotional side. He may want you to be a slut, but just for him, and he can be an emo-guy, but just for you.
On a related note, I wonder if this is why Roosh loves Latin America and Eastern Europe so much, and is not much of a fan of Northern Europe. It sounds like his very masculine features would be more in demand in developing countries, rather than highly developed ones.
Lokland,
No, no, no, no, no!! A flash of anger (exactly what you described) but controlled just beneath the surface, in certain situations is incredibly alpha, and tingle inducing. Alpha is not all aloof and uncaring. It is also maybe even more about control.
This is purely a personal thing, but I find men who are all aloof and uncaring boy like. It gets tedious after awhile. Men have emotions, they feel anger. There is absolutely no shame in that. There is also no shame in showing it. The key is control and knowing when the most control is needed and when the time is right to let that control slide a bit.
Yeah I definitely agree with this. Over on another thread Hollenhund has been claiming women are inherently “manipulative” and that men should separate themselves so they don’t have to deal with shit-tests, nagging, and BS. He also went on a weird rant against Hope when she curiously asked about his life situation. MRA? Probably. Alpha? Probably not.
Olive´s last [type] ..The Quest for Supportive Friends, Part IV
@Stingray
I think that’s what the research suggests. What is your theory?
>> On a related note, I wonder if this is why Roosh loves Latin America and Eastern Europe so much, and is not much of a fan of Northern Europe. It sounds like his very masculine features would be more in demand in developing countries, rather than highly developed ones.
Ha! That’s brilliant! I think you’re on to something there.
@ Stingray
Hmm. Thank you. That actually explains some past interactions quite well.
Honestly never considered it.
@Jonny
It is certainly not enough. There is a baseline level of dominance which absolutely must be met.
Wise words.
As someone who ovulated for well over 40 years, I can honestly report that I never experienced a surge of any kind during ovulation including sex drive. It might be there, but it’s too subtle to note. And I certainly never craved a caveman just because I was ovulating.
Guys, you need to know, this is definitely not a Jekyll and Hyde type transformation. I have personally never known a woman to express these feelings much less act on them. That doesn’t mean the research is wrong, but the MSM has exaggerated it enormously.
@ Olive
I’m following that with quite a bit of interest.
I get what he is saying about maniplulative but I think its the ‘to a degree’ part where he seems to be taking it over the top.
Thats actually where I was going to use the example I just gave for manipluation not anger.
She obviously manipulated me to make me act out in anger (apparently alpha). Shit test/manipulation by my defintion.
However it occurs once a month and for a valid reason so I’m not really disturbed by it.
If she shit tested me daily then the manipulation would be an issue but thats not the case 28 days out of the month shes a snuggly bunny I can say all the endearing beta stuff I want to without repurcussion. However when its baby making time I gotta have my shit together.
All women I’ve been in LTRs with have done this to some degree. Most were within a completely reasonable degree though.
@Lokland
True. I’m pretty indifferent I guess. Personally I think if a lot of guys stopped making women a goal at all, it would solve a lot of their problems. I’m not talking about going their own way or “MGTOW” (because I don’t even know exactly what that’s about so I can’t comment, just making myself clear). I’m about pursuing your purpose and looking out for number one without any hesitation. I find that removes the concept of “liking it” or “disliking it” from the equation because you aren’t seeking anyone’s approval nor do you have to buy into the “system” in a conventional sense.
Right. Care, cooperation, and open communication are good (if a woman responds poorly to these, then drop her), as long as it’s w/i a framework of dominance. And dominance doesn’t have to be threatening, pushy, or self-absorbed. You just have to exude some confident masculine authority.
BroHamlet
+1.
Personally I think if a lot of guys stopped making women a goal at all, it would solve a lot of their problems.
+2
I don’t even have a chicken in this fight anymore. I’m getting married in 2 months.
I’m here purely because this happens to be the topic I find endlessly fascinating, its one of my favourite hobbies.
Huh, well that’s counterintuitive, from the POV of the researchers. It’s the women from poor countries who like thugs. And the women from wealthy societies with socialized health care who like dads.
I don’t really buy the women hamsterwheeling here. The third study included 5,000 women who looked at many, many pictures and chose one in each pair they found more attractive. It wasn’t complicated, and hardly seems like a situation where women would be hiding from themselves. I know I could look at 10,000 pairs and tell you clearly which guy I found more attractive.
Susan,
I went into your question a bit in my comment at # 67 but let me expound a bit. I do think that a high T guy may be more prone to be a cad. Let’s face it, there have always been cads out there and there always will be. And very likely these are the very highest T men. However, I think the prevalence of cads today is not due to just high T but more because they are almost literally having sex dumped into their laps with little to no reason to be anything other than a cad. I think that had feminism never started this whole thing that women can sleep around consequence free there would be FAR fewer cads and FAR more happily married hight T men with happy wives.
BroHamlet,
Nicely said.
Lokland,
Congratulations. That is wonderful. I wish you a happy and truly blessed marriage.
The third study included 5,000 women
Is there an age range listed for the women? I would be interested to see how it broke down by age, in maybe five year increments starting at about 16 and ending at around 45.
@Emily
Every woman wants the maximum tingle from her man and will seek it out to the degree her situation allows her to, i.e. how close she is to her prime years. Women are not that different from men in that given the option, they want to have their fun while the circumstances allow. So I am saying that at root almost all PEOPLE are like that lol. We’re just at a point in western culture where girls have tons of opportunities to partake, even if they only do so a few times before they settle down. So yes MOST women are like that, and so are most men. I think in western culture we pride ourselves on being “moral” to such a degree that everyone wants to be idealistic to save face. I obviously am not an idealist.
@ Susan
“Huh, well that’s counterintuitive, from the POV of the researchers. It’s the women from poor countries who like thugs. And the women from wealthy societies with socialized health care who like dads.”
Thought experiment.
Lets say there are three types of countries: rich, middle and poor/wild.
In poor countries its obvious why woman choose cads because their kids survive.
In middle countries where a) its reasonable safe, b) the economy allows a provider to provide then dads become a priority. Cads are the losers that can’t hold a job and feed their kids.
In a rich country where a) everyone is provided for regardless of work ethic, b) its very safe then women would prefer cads. A cad satisfies the tingles but theres no need to maintain a provider role because it can be satisfied from some other role.
Maybe civilization has a “sweet-spot” where betas are king and we’ve overshot it. Following from this would be a pendulum effect where societal collapse occurs enough until the beta is again preferred at which point the pendulum is reset to swing either way.
@Emily
I’ve been sitting on a post about that for a while. It might be time to air it.
@StudentGuy
Guys might not want to hear this, but from a female perspective, high T + beta socialization = ideal mate. The truth is, without the beta conditioning, you’d probably be a manwhore, and women have reason to be thankful that you’re not
@Stingray
Oh, I agree 100%!
@Lokland
But that’s the opposite of what these studies found. Which is that if one doesn’t need a protector, one prefers dads over cads. IOW, the high T male offers protection, food, and a better chance at survival. Once you have those things anyway, you don’t need him.
BTW, StudentGuy makes a good point that I want to reiterate. There are plenty of high T guys who are dads, and plenty of other guys who are cads. Naturally, we tend to generalize, and the research projects reinforce that, but in this post-feminist era, there are many variations.
“I understand, but what researchers found interesting about the study is the change in female perceptions. They were surprised to find that women chose lower T men even for short-term flings.”
After junior high my attraction triggers were based on looks that I associated with being a combination of smart and funny.
To illustrate this, my long term celebrity crushes since I was a teenager… John Cusack and Vince D’Onofrio.
Significant Other would be much more concerned if I was in deep conversation with Ed Norton vs. Benicio del Toro…
I also have a thing for glasses and modern suits.
I don’t know if those are high or low testosterone markers… I consider all the men that I named to be sexy and masculine.
For me the biggest factor is a form of positive reinforcement these look like the guys that have always made me laugh and think… and these look like the guys who have been attracted to me and have been great mates.
I don’t know where my personal taste would fit in with evolutionary mate selection ~JS
@Susan
I don’t doubt the results of the study, but what I and other guys are trying to tell you is that the study doesn’t give us anywhere close to the full picture of how women weigh all of the factors in a real life situation. It tells us who she looked at across the bar and thought was cute, but not who she went home with or gave her number to with the sincere intent to actually talk to. It doesn’t tell us who she actually ended up with out of the 4 new guys that showed up at her girlfriend’s house party, and if more than one of them, how long she stayed with each and why. The conclusion is incomplete. In the real world there are MANY more factors at work than just a flash card assessment of who’s got a cute face in addition to the simple fact that words and actions don’t usually directly correspond for women. The study is to simplistic to really draw too many conclusions. Not to be argumentative, but the best data is not always found by asking people questions.
“For example, women often speak about “sexy ugly” guys. That is not an oxymoron, whereas the concept doesn’t exist for men wrt females.”
Sandra Bernhard, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Ugly Betty… I have seen guys debate the beauty of all these women and it usually comes down to ugly sexy ~JS
I know B.S. when I see it. This post contains too much pseudoscience and correlations that don’t exist.
Beta guys are often very handsome. Handsome is not the right word here. It’s about specific features: prominent brow, heavy eyebrows, large nose, large jaw. Those are the things that convey dominance.
Well, first of all, there are beta guys who are high T, but who were socialized to suppress that. Mike C has described himself that way, and he is a great guy and a great partner, from everything I know about him.
Well…that nails my facial features to a tee. I’ve got a prominent brow, heavy eyebrows (that my GF plucks and shapes, but she doesn’t like to take too much off, wonder what that says?), a large nose, and a large jaw. I was actually very insecure about my nose for a long time, and contemplated a nose job to take something off many, many years ago. I guess this supports my thought that my T-levels are very high. I may get them tested just to see. FWIW, given the subject, I figured what the hell, so if I set this darn gravatar thing up right, that should be me.
Re dominance, not sure if it was something I had to learn or just retap what I naturally was….I really don’t know. No doubt though, I was heavily socialized for beta type traits. My Mom definitely raised me to be polite, deferential, approval seeking. It is impossible to know the counterfactual. I think there were positives but there was certainly alot of self reconstruction.
Anyways, I do think this probably plays a role in a guy’s attitude and drive towards casual sex and perhaps proclivity to be a cad or manwhore. I do find some of the male comments on casual sex interesting in an academic sense especially the ones I cannot relate to at all because it does make me wonder what the difference is driving it.
Just being truthful, I have basically zero regrets about the casual sex I engaged except perhaps 1. A couple I have really great memories. Truthfully, my only regret is that I didn’t engage in alot more. I had alot of opportunities in retrospect that I didn’t capitalize on. My number could easily be 5x higher, and I’ll say it is lower than Jesus based on his summer activity.
Does that make me a bad bet for faithful monogamy? I guess statistically it does, but as Susan says the cortex can trump the hindbrain. I’ve been faithful for 6+ years. I try to live in a deliberate and disciplined say. Avoid temptation. My GF and I keep any junk food out of our place. YOU CANNOT EAT WHAT IS NOT THERE.
It is interesting though because there are some guys here that articulate mixed feelings about casual sex/variety or seem to have no interest in at all. Again, just speaking truthfully, I literally instinctually want to bang every hot chick I see. I suspect that is the T which can be seen in those set of facial features. So perhaps women can use that as a filter/screening mechanism depending on what they want.
Hmm. Interesting study. There’s this:
What surprised researchers was that women showed a marked, significant preference for the lower testosterone, relationship-oriented men, for both short-term and long-term mating.
But I agree with Jonny who early on in the post pointed out that when the rubber (heh) meets the road and when you really get down to it, women aren’t selecting the low T, relationship oriented men for sex or relationships. Sassy, for her part, admits that ovulation changes everything for her. Many women don’t even know when they ovulate.
Many women are even more mystified on why they continue going for the cads who break their hearts. Even after their hearts are broken, they go right back to the cads for more.
I think the only real significance of the study and Susan’s comment on it is to help women become more aware of attraction cues. That’s really about it.
Mike C, can’t see too well from the thumbnail size, but what little I can tell, your gf looks lovely!
Both men are good-looking, but the one on the left is more masculine-looking and handsome, whereas the one on the right is more of a pretty boy.
However, I’ve met guys who look like the one of the left who are ‘betas’ in the sense that they are white knights, and ones on the right who get laid tons with hipster girls. PUA game at its finest.
I think the corollary for ‘sexy ugly’ in women is ‘butterfaces,’ or girls who have all the trappings of hot girl-ness (fit bodies, glossy hair, nails done, always wearing make-up, stylishly and skimpily dressed, tons and tons of confidence and usually that sexy walk.. a certain type of man LOVES the bottle blondes) without actually being that pretty.
agreed. your gf looks very pretty.
Sassy
I remember what it was like to be a 17 year old guy. Walking any distance when the sky was clear was a tricky proposition because when I could see clouds, some of them always reminded me of ripe, fertile girly-bits and further ambulation was therefore compromised by the painfully engorged thing that ran down one of my pants legs. That anyone could see from a distance. Is that what you mean by feeling horny like a guy feels it?
Susan
As others have suggested, maybe some parts of the world become rich and safe BECAUSE the hot chicks there have for historical reasons chosen to bang and commit to the well intentioned, prone to work cooperatively with others sort of man. Indeed, many of us still cannot imagine a place continuing to be rich and safe without that happening rather often.
Elizabeth
Titanic was a great movie: I am watching it (again) right now. But it is a movie made by Hollywood.
Cal and Jack Dawson are both uber-alphas in that movie. Movies are fantasies. Hold onto that thought.
See, no one wants to watch, much less pay to watch a fantasy where all the women are ugly and the men are not alpha in their behavior. In the Titanic fantasy, the ripe, young, red haired , 17 year old Rose had to chose between two super alpha guys who were both hopelessly in love with her and eager to commit. Jack won her because he had displayed a lot more real courage and aggressiveness and alpha-ness than even the very rich narcissistic asshole that was Cal. And Jack still had a nice guy vibe as he made a prolonged series of rock hard alpha moves.
“So, do you want to go to a real party?” He says straight away to a virtually married woman he met yesterday.
I find the guy on the right more attractive than the one on the left, but I hate his haircut.
This might be off-topic, but…I realized today that there are some “markers” for attraction that I hadn’t considered before. For instance: glasses. A guy wearing glasses looks intelligent and conveys the semblance of an intellectual man, regardless of whether or not he actually is one. This is something primed by society; for whatever reason, glasses equate to intelligence (or nerdiness) in our culture.
I went on an impromptu date with this guy tonight. The first time I went out with him I was like, “Hmm. He’s alright.” Tonight he showed up wearing glasses and I was like, “Hello, who is this?”
Then he mentioned how he has a ton of plaid shirts because of his hipster proclivities and I was like “HELLO WANT.”
What I am trying to say is that I realized I’m insanely hypergamous for intelligent men.
Another aside:
You guys don’t know how hot it is to watch you work. Sitting at a desk, maybe with your sleeves rolled up, staring intensely with your brow furrowed as your tie swings in the small space between your chest and the computer screen. It just makes me want to give you a cup of coffee, a hug, and an intense fuck session to make you relaxed and cuddly.
Seriously my gawd.
haha. so true. nothing hotter than men at work. I think this is behind the whole thing with men in suits. And men in uniforms.
It would be interesting to compile the stats on which women prefer which face. Clearly, not all women prefer the more masculinized features. I’m curious what drives that difference.
“What I am trying to say is that I realized I’m insanely hypergamous for intelligent men”
@SayWhaat…
Yes and score one for team smart guy… and some geek, comics, movies, music… and I’m a goner.
“You guys don’t know how hot it is to watch you work. Sitting at a desk, maybe with your sleeves rolled up, staring intensely with your brow furrowed as your tie swings in the small space between your chest and the computer screen. It just makes me want to give you a cup of coffee, a hug, and an intense fuck session to make you relaxed and cuddly.”
Significant Other says I have to plead the fifth on any specific details… but watching Smart Guy be smart is really, really hot.
Significant Other used to hustle chess in college… there are a couple of neighborhoods in the city with stone, outdoor chess boards, guys bring their own timers and if a guy is good he can make some decent money.
Well in college I never got to see him play and so the summer after we started dating he busted out his timer and let me see what he can do… he won $100 and I swooned.
Girl pass me a church fan ~JS
Susan:
“I do want to say a word about the ovulation issue. It’s real, but it’s very, very subtle. Women do not experience some sort of surge of attraction to burly men when they’re ovulating.
Sassy:
2. For me, ovulation is definitely akin to turning into Mr. Hyde. I always know when I am ovulating because I’m very aware of the changes in my personality when it happens. My desire for sex goes through the roof during that time. I tend to go to bars far more often and with less clothing than I usually do. I feel more compelled to flirt with men during ovulation. It’s essentially the feeling of being on the prowl, hunting down a gazelle with a great sense of urgency.
Clearly, this ovulation thing must vary across women in terms of sex drive and preferences. Wonder if that is hormonal as well?
Honestly, I just feel more horny than usual. And maybe I’ll dress more nicely. But I don’t actively seek out men, I just feel like looking better than usual. Idk, I haven’t observed myself excessively flirting with guys when I’m ovulating. I’ll keep an eye on this in the future to better understand myself.
“You guys don’t know how hot it is to watch you work. Sitting at a desk, maybe with your sleeves rolled up, staring intensely with your brow furrowed as your tie swings in the small space between your chest and the computer screen. It just makes me want to give you a cup of coffee, a hug, and an intense fuck session to make you relaxed and cuddly.”
Significant Other says I have to plead the fifth on any specific details… but watching Smart Guy be smart is really, really hot.
Observation from personal experience. Sometimes, I’ll be sitting in my home office with my brow furrowed staring at stock charts. As far as I can tell, my GF has never given me a single indication that it excited her sexually. In contrast, she has told me there were times at the gym where she saw me pushing heavy weight and getting loud with my breathing and that it really turned her on. This is very interesting, there is clearly some switch that differentiates whether a woman is more turned on by sort of old school aggresssive masculinity versus a more sensitive intellectual.
1 2 3 … 9 »
{ 4 trackbacks }