in which I attempt some scientific theorizing

[aryanhwy]

Warning: Vast and wild generalizations forthcoming!

I read an interesting article today about how "women dress to impress when they are at their most fertile." The study was about how women, in many cases probably unconsciously, dress in a more attractive fashion when they are ovulating than when they are not. The researchers took notes about what the women wore, and also pictures (and they didn't tell the women that this is what the study was about), and then later on showed the pictures to men asking "In which of these pictures (all of the same woman) do you think the woman was most trying to appear attractive?" (Not in which photo did they find the woman more attractive, but in which they thought the woman was trying to look more attractive.) The men picked the photo taken at ovulation 60% of the time - which is far more than chance. The researchers found this particularly interesting, because of all mammals, the fertile period of the woman is one of the least advertised. A lot of women, unless they've spent a lot of time taking their temperature daily and keeping notes and are very in tune with their bodies, don't even know when they are ovulating. (I certainly haven't a clue.) There's no wild meows, or heavy scents, or change of skin color. (Well, not generally...)

So this was interesting in itself. But it tied in with something that I've thought about over the last couple of years and which I'm finding increasingly weird. Among humans, it's really the women who are competing to attract the attention of the men. Yes, I know this is a broad sweeping generalization, but I can't help but think of college sorority girls. They put so much time, money, effort into dressing expensively, having the perfect hair, perfect make-up, perfect clothes. Women wear high heels, push-up bras, hair-spray, make-up, they have lipo-suction, breast enhancements, you name it. They will do anything to get the attention of the right kind of guy (rich, suave business man or athlete - the kind that you find in the college fraternities). It doesn't matter which man, they'll take whatever one they can get. And on the other hand, the men can pretty much pick and chose, and when they're sick of one girl, they move on to the next. There is a lot more time and effort invested into "will he like me in this?" than "will she like me in this?" among humans.

This is not the case for many, many other species. It's the men who have the antlers, the big tails, the manes, the flashy colors. It's the men who go around saying "Look at me! Have sex with me! Aren't I great! Look at me!" And it's the women who can look on them scornfully and take their pick.

So this got me thinking. I wonder if, in some small way, these two things are related? Women don't generally know when they are fertile. Therefore, in order to maximize their chances of reproducing, they have to be as attractive as they can as often as they can, so that hopefully one of their matings will happen at the right time and have the desired result. On the other hand, females in other species often either know or can make known to the males when they are fertile - and then it's up to the male to convince the female that he's the one she should chose during her mating period.

I have no idea if there's any basis to this, but I found it very interesting nonetheless!

Comments

[adelais.livejournal.com]

This is not the case for many, many other species. It's the men who have the antlers, the big tails, the manes, the flashy colors. It's the men who go around saying "Look at me! Have sex with me! Aren't I great! Look at me!" And it's the women who can look on them scornfully and take their pick.

I think many men would argue that this remains the case for humans. You did specify "the right kind of guy".

[tedeisenstein.livejournal.com]

I've signed on to a mass-market dating service, and have talked a fair amount with others (both male and female) who've done the same (on that and on other dating services). The consensus by a wide margin is, if you're male, you'll have almost no chance of receiving any contacts from women; if you're female, you'll have way more from men than you can handle.

Women preen, yes. But so do men; you'd think that both sides would have similar manners-of-dating, since both want the best looking/most successful looking/attractuve/sexiest. Men want fertile women; women want studly men.

(. . .and no wonder I'm a hermit: I don't preen and don't come within a metric mile of being Standard Studly, just vaguely rotund and (I hate the word) cute. I wonder where I can get a whole-body implant?)

[ursula]

I suspect that sexual display in our culture is far more influenced by cultural stuff (like advertising and economics) than any lingering biological effects.

[ursula]

Also, CODPIECES!

[meehesh.livejournal.com]

That article was discussing a notion called "sociobiology", speciphically a section called "evolutionary psychology". We learned about it in my Darwinian Revolution class. The end result that we arrived at in class was that this field of study, while a seemingly valid blend of sociology and biology, often fails to take adequate account of the culture, age, or upbrining of the women in the studies when it makes these claims.

It is a pity, as when I first read these stuies, I was amazed, but no one has been able to reproduce them who is not a sociobiologist (or rather, this is what my professor told us). According to the laws of the scientific community, an experiment must be reproducible in order for it to be valid, and if it cannot be reproduced, it is declared invalid or a fluke. There must have been confirmation bias in the studies, as thus far, only researchers in that field have produced that result. It was interesting, though, and I want to look into it again. Sadly, though, it is a hard topic to find reliable results on when searching on the internet. So many sites are hosted by people with a vested interest, it is hard to be sure you are getting impartial information, you know?

Anyway, I hope that helps shed a new angle on this.

I thought about this a lot while in university

[bend-gules.livejournal.com]

and taking sociology. (I often miss the 'feel' of university, where people spend time talking about ideas. You don't do it nearly as much in the ordinary workplace.)

I'm fairly convinced that both sexes 'enhance their attractiveness' to draw mates.

Since 'attractiveness' can also include wealth, power, authority, intelligence, some people pursue those areas instead of appearance, if they have strengths there.

Men might find it easier to pursue business success - but the *huge* amount of research into curing male-pattern baldness shows that there's still a demand for men to look a particular way to be attractive/successful.

Western society does put a heavy emphasis on female appearance. BUT the messages about womens priorities have been thoroughly mixed since the 1960s, so you can find a wider range of behaviour now (some women acting like sorority sisters, others pursuing PhD studies in demanding and esoteric fields) :-).

It's possible that many women don't know when they're ovulating. But I don't agree that it's *hard* to know: all you need is a calendar.