choroyabc1
Iron
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2023
- Posts
- 82
- Reputation
- 149
Here are 3 studies which explain why looks mean jackshit in the real world, and why gym maxxing is MEGA LEGIT
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1090513813000615
Quantifying the strength and form of sexual selection on men's traits
Read the study carefully and remember following outtakes:
- Height was negatively associated with mating success(despite the women saying they prefer taller men, just as with attractiveness)
- Men's short-term attractiveness(rated by the women) was negatively associated with mating success.
- Facial masculinity was slightly negatively associated with slaying (despite women once again saying they liked it in their short term partners).
- Girth was significantly associated with mating success - girth explained as: "We consequently standardized and summed biceps, chest, and shoulder circumference, and weight to produce the composite variable “girth”
- Perceived fighting success (rated by other men in the frat) was associated with mating success.
Remember this sentence from the authors:
"Nevertheless, perhaps women rate men's sexual attractiveness differently from how they ultimately choose. For example, attractiveness ratings may not adequately capture women's differential resistance to men's seduction attempts."
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/...07/5-reasons-why-muscles-matter-women-and-men
>In the study, researchers recorded short videos of 157 different men. Next, another group of men watched these videos. Researchers asked them a question about each of the men in the videos: “How likely is it that this man would win a physical fight with another man?” They used a scale ranging from “extremely likely” to “extremely unlikely.”
>A group of women also viewed the videos. They responded to a question about each of the men: “How sexually attractive is this man?” They used a scale ranging from “extremely unattractive” to “extremely attractive.”
>Eighteen months later, the men in the videos completed a questionnaire asking about their sexual history over the 18 months. How tough a guy looked to men predicted his reported mating success better than how attractive he looked to women. The researchers concluded, “Men with higher physical dominance, but not sexual attractiveness, reported higher quantitative mating success.”
These findings converge with two more ecologically valid results from two studies in small scale societies. In one Western African population, men involved in traditional ritual fights (wrestling) had a higher number of offspring, but were not especially preferred by local women (Llaurens, Raymond, & Faurie, 2009). In another traditional society, men's success in turtle hunting predicted earlier onset of reproduction and higher reproductive success, but again did not seem to be valued by women (Smith, Bird, & Bird, 2003).
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1090513813000615
Quantifying the strength and form of sexual selection on men's traits
Read the study carefully and remember following outtakes:
- Height was negatively associated with mating success(despite the women saying they prefer taller men, just as with attractiveness)
- Men's short-term attractiveness(rated by the women) was negatively associated with mating success.
- Facial masculinity was slightly negatively associated with slaying (despite women once again saying they liked it in their short term partners).
- Girth was significantly associated with mating success - girth explained as: "We consequently standardized and summed biceps, chest, and shoulder circumference, and weight to produce the composite variable “girth”
- Perceived fighting success (rated by other men in the frat) was associated with mating success.
Remember this sentence from the authors:
"Nevertheless, perhaps women rate men's sexual attractiveness differently from how they ultimately choose. For example, attractiveness ratings may not adequately capture women's differential resistance to men's seduction attempts."
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/...07/5-reasons-why-muscles-matter-women-and-men
>In the study, researchers recorded short videos of 157 different men. Next, another group of men watched these videos. Researchers asked them a question about each of the men in the videos: “How likely is it that this man would win a physical fight with another man?” They used a scale ranging from “extremely likely” to “extremely unlikely.”
>A group of women also viewed the videos. They responded to a question about each of the men: “How sexually attractive is this man?” They used a scale ranging from “extremely unattractive” to “extremely attractive.”
>Eighteen months later, the men in the videos completed a questionnaire asking about their sexual history over the 18 months. How tough a guy looked to men predicted his reported mating success better than how attractive he looked to women. The researchers concluded, “Men with higher physical dominance, but not sexual attractiveness, reported higher quantitative mating success.”
These findings converge with two more ecologically valid results from two studies in small scale societies. In one Western African population, men involved in traditional ritual fights (wrestling) had a higher number of offspring, but were not especially preferred by local women (Llaurens, Raymond, & Faurie, 2009). In another traditional society, men's success in turtle hunting predicted earlier onset of reproduction and higher reproductive success, but again did not seem to be valued by women (Smith, Bird, & Bird, 2003).
Across 91 studies, bodily masculinity was predictive of men's mating and reproductive success
As the only trait in our analysis that is consistently (and most strongly) correlated with fitness outcomes across populations, body masculinity is the only trait we can conclude appears to be under present selection in naturally fertile populations [...] Since traits such as strength and muscularity are associated with formidability, this finding lends support to the male-male competition hypothesis
Last edited:
