Bruce
11-07-2003, 11:15 AM
Hi Folks,
Thought you might find this interesting. Keep in mind that this is often presented as the classic
antithesis to the pheromone theory of attraction. The way to fit this into the pheromone view is that the
perception of these visual clues as attraction/beauty is a conditioned reflex. IE: Attraction is initially created
by pheromones alone, then just like Pavlov\'s dogs who salivate to the sound of a bell, with continued contact
with the oposite sex various visual clues begin to excite us as well.
Bruce
-----------
Biology: Sex and Dung
Beetles
Why don’t women like square-jawed macho men? And what’s all this fuss over J. Lo’s bellybutton?
By
Michael Hastings
NEWSWEEK INTERNATIONAL
Nov. 10 issue — Why is sugar sweet? To Victor Johnston, it’s not an idle
question. Johnston, a biopsychologist at New Mexico State University, takes evident pleasure in pointing out that if
you were a dung beetle, dung would taste like sugar on your tongue. “Sugar is a molecule, and we have evolved a
brain to generate a positive response for its taste.” The same, he says, goes for our perception of beauty—a perfect
smile, an ample bosom, a muscular bicep. All, basically, dung.
NOT THE MOST romantic of
notions, especially from a man whose career has been devoted to researching, in essence, what makes a person
beautiful. Johnston’s quest to understand attractiveness has led him not to the glitz and glamour of Vogue photo
shoots or Nicole Kidman’s Oscar party, but to the lab. In the past 10 years, he and other beauty researchers have
managed to explain in some detail how beauty is a product of evolution, a Darwinian mechanism for the survival of
the species, that is both hard-wired into our brains and a product of culture.
On his Las Cruces, New
Mexico, campus, Johnston designed a computer-graphics video that illustrates the spectrum of human beauty, starting
with the “hypermasculinized” face (think Schwarzenegger) and morphing gradually to the other extreme, the
“hyperfeminized” face (think Kidman). Johnston has shown the video to thousands of test subjects, both men and
women, and asked them to choose at which point along the spectrum they find their ideal face. Men, it turns out,
unanimously pick as most attractive the face with the most feminine features, which corresponds to a woman with the
most accentuated “hormonal markers.” These are facial characteristics developed during puberty from the release of
estrogen, which causes the lips to swell, the jaw to narrow and the eyes to widen. These features indicate
fertility, and because they’re biologically programmed, they’re common to all cultures.
Women perceive
beauty in a more nuanced way. They aren’t always attracted to the hypermasculinized, bushy-eyebrowed, wide-jawed
caveman type, flush with testosterone. Their choice of a mate is informed by evolutionary complexities involving not
only potential fertility and health but perceived ability to protect the female’s offspring through wealth and
power.
More evidence that men are hamstrung by their biology comes from psychologist Devendra Singh of
the University of Texas at Austin. In a study of the female form throughout history, Singh confirmed last year that
the most important feature of the female body, from the ancient Egyptians to the streetwalkers on Sunset Boulevard,
has been the hip-to-waist ratio. “What is the fascination with Jennifer Lopez’s bellybutton?” he asks. Because it
draws attention to her hourglass form, a sign of fertility. Fortunately, evolution has left some wiggle room for
culture. Ian Penton-Voak of Britain’s Sterling University demonstrated that faces you see as a child contribute to
your vision of an ideal mate. It’s called “imprinting,” a process by which your brain makes a template of an ideal
face that’s an average of all the faces you’ve seen, and it works for men and women. Not very romantic, but it’s
better than dung.
Thought you might find this interesting. Keep in mind that this is often presented as the classic
antithesis to the pheromone theory of attraction. The way to fit this into the pheromone view is that the
perception of these visual clues as attraction/beauty is a conditioned reflex. IE: Attraction is initially created
by pheromones alone, then just like Pavlov\'s dogs who salivate to the sound of a bell, with continued contact
with the oposite sex various visual clues begin to excite us as well.
Bruce
-----------
Biology: Sex and Dung
Beetles
Why don’t women like square-jawed macho men? And what’s all this fuss over J. Lo’s bellybutton?
By
Michael Hastings
NEWSWEEK INTERNATIONAL
Nov. 10 issue — Why is sugar sweet? To Victor Johnston, it’s not an idle
question. Johnston, a biopsychologist at New Mexico State University, takes evident pleasure in pointing out that if
you were a dung beetle, dung would taste like sugar on your tongue. “Sugar is a molecule, and we have evolved a
brain to generate a positive response for its taste.” The same, he says, goes for our perception of beauty—a perfect
smile, an ample bosom, a muscular bicep. All, basically, dung.
NOT THE MOST romantic of
notions, especially from a man whose career has been devoted to researching, in essence, what makes a person
beautiful. Johnston’s quest to understand attractiveness has led him not to the glitz and glamour of Vogue photo
shoots or Nicole Kidman’s Oscar party, but to the lab. In the past 10 years, he and other beauty researchers have
managed to explain in some detail how beauty is a product of evolution, a Darwinian mechanism for the survival of
the species, that is both hard-wired into our brains and a product of culture.
On his Las Cruces, New
Mexico, campus, Johnston designed a computer-graphics video that illustrates the spectrum of human beauty, starting
with the “hypermasculinized” face (think Schwarzenegger) and morphing gradually to the other extreme, the
“hyperfeminized” face (think Kidman). Johnston has shown the video to thousands of test subjects, both men and
women, and asked them to choose at which point along the spectrum they find their ideal face. Men, it turns out,
unanimously pick as most attractive the face with the most feminine features, which corresponds to a woman with the
most accentuated “hormonal markers.” These are facial characteristics developed during puberty from the release of
estrogen, which causes the lips to swell, the jaw to narrow and the eyes to widen. These features indicate
fertility, and because they’re biologically programmed, they’re common to all cultures.
Women perceive
beauty in a more nuanced way. They aren’t always attracted to the hypermasculinized, bushy-eyebrowed, wide-jawed
caveman type, flush with testosterone. Their choice of a mate is informed by evolutionary complexities involving not
only potential fertility and health but perceived ability to protect the female’s offspring through wealth and
power.
More evidence that men are hamstrung by their biology comes from psychologist Devendra Singh of
the University of Texas at Austin. In a study of the female form throughout history, Singh confirmed last year that
the most important feature of the female body, from the ancient Egyptians to the streetwalkers on Sunset Boulevard,
has been the hip-to-waist ratio. “What is the fascination with Jennifer Lopez’s bellybutton?” he asks. Because it
draws attention to her hourglass form, a sign of fertility. Fortunately, evolution has left some wiggle room for
culture. Ian Penton-Voak of Britain’s Sterling University demonstrated that faces you see as a child contribute to
your vision of an ideal mate. It’s called “imprinting,” a process by which your brain makes a template of an ideal
face that’s an average of all the faces you’ve seen, and it works for men and women. Not very romantic, but it’s
better than dung.