Wednesday, October 7, 2009
Sex / Hetero / Science / The Ladies Are You a Lady? On the Pill? Engaged To Be Married?
Posted by Dan Savage on Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 9:25 AM
Then you might want to read the results of a new study published this morning in Trends in Ecology and Evolution: "Does the Contraceptive Pill Alter Mate Choice In Humans?"
Dr. Alexandra Alvergne and Dr. Virpi Lummaa of the University of Sheffield review "emerging evidence suggesting that contraceptive methods which alter a woman’s natural hormonal cycles" may be messing up straight peoples' sex lives and married lives. It may also raise "evolutionary questions and concerns," write Alvergne and Lummaa. It goes like this: the type of man a woman finds attractive varies pretty widely according to her menstrual cycle. Women who are ovulating prefer men who are more masculine and "more... genetically unrelated," like the guy on the right, above; women who aren't ovulating prefer guys who are more feminine and genetically more similar, like the guy on the left. Since the pill suppresses ovulation, and since many women are on the pill when they're dating and sleeping around—or "selecting a mate," as the docs put it—women may be marrying men they find attractive on the pill but not so much once they've gone off the pill.
Which women tend to do once they're married and want to have children.
Alvergne and Lummaa theorize that all those suppressed ovulations may have dire consequences where sexual compatibility and long-term marital success are concerned. It can't be pleasant, after all, to realize you're not as attracted to your spouse as you thought you were once you stop taking the pill. And couples who are genetically similar—the kind of pairings the pill promotes—are more likely to have infertility issues. Which is, um, also bad. And then there's this: since men have been shown to find ovulating women more attractive, "...the use of oral contraceptives may influence a woman’s ability to attract a mate by reducing attractiveness to men, thereby disrupting her ability to compete with normally cycling women for access to mate." While their study is sure to be cited by religious nuts waging war on the pill, Alvergne and Lummaa cite all the good the pill has done for women:
Any such effects should be weighed against the multiple beneļ¬ts that the invention of the pill has brought. This revolutionary contraceptive method has given women unprecedented control over their fertility with the possibility to sample different partners before reproduction, to control their number of children, to reach optimal birth spacing given circumstances or to end reproductive career before menopause if desired, which has had a considerable impact on their social life. For instance, a sharp increase in college attendance and graduation rates for women was observed after the pill was legalized.
Giving women control over their fertility, allowing them to sample different partners, more women going to college—you can see why religious conservatives have problem with the pill. You can download a PDF of the study here. I've also sent a some questions to the study's authors—should women switch to the IUD? should an engaged woman go off the pill to make sure she's not marrying a too-genetically-similar swish? and what does all of this mean for gay marriage? and the ballot booth that is their [RSVP] envelopes?—and I'll share their answers with you when I hear back.
Share via
2
Sometimes I think women literally are from Venus. Everything about chicks, from their immensely complicated sexuality to their unquenchable love of consumerism, is deeply strange.
3
This explains so much. Having never taken hormones, I picked a husband who it turns out is VERY geneticaly disimilar to me. And maybe that's why I can't stand him while I'm pregnant (not ovulating)...
7
We like to think that there's something magical about love, but it really all comes down to math and science.
9
I'm confused. Most pills still have you ovulating. There is still a cycle. You still get your period. It just prevents the egg from ever attaching to the placental wall.
11
@6 Or plural marriages... Enough women around to have the emotional connection with and a brute neanderthal with whom to procreate.
12
Dan - remember that there are two different kinds of IUDs, hormonal (like Mirena, that slowly releases hormones) and non-hormonal (like Paraguard, where the copper creates an "inhospitable environment" for sperm. or something).
I met me husband while not on hormonal birth control and was instantly, crazy attracted to him. I eventually went on, and then even more eventually off the hormones, and I haven't noticed a difference in "how attracted I am" to him or in our compatibility.
I wonder if anyone's studied the different types of men that a woman not on the pill find attractive throughout the month. Based on these findings, you'd think it would vary based on when they're ovulating / not ovulating.
I met me husband while not on hormonal birth control and was instantly, crazy attracted to him. I eventually went on, and then even more eventually off the hormones, and I haven't noticed a difference in "how attracted I am" to him or in our compatibility.
I wonder if anyone's studied the different types of men that a woman not on the pill find attractive throughout the month. Based on these findings, you'd think it would vary based on when they're ovulating / not ovulating.
13
@9 erm wrong. The point of hormonal birth control is to prevent ovulation. They might also prevent attaching to the placental wall if that screws up (its what the labels always say, probably as a warning to the life-begins-at-conception camp).
My gf doesn't take hormonal birth control, since ovulation is what drives her entire sex drive (we found out). So these results don't surprise me too much.
It's always a bit freaky to see the "divine free will" myth cracked a bit, since its so easy to think in terms of mind/body separation, even if intellectually you know its all one thing.
My gf doesn't take hormonal birth control, since ovulation is what drives her entire sex drive (we found out). So these results don't surprise me too much.
It's always a bit freaky to see the "divine free will" myth cracked a bit, since its so easy to think in terms of mind/body separation, even if intellectually you know its all one thing.
14
@6 **Of course** it's much better to find out whether you're sexually compatible after you're legally bound to someone.
@7 Yes, then, we could choose different husbands according to our cycles ;)
@7 Yes, then, we could choose different husbands according to our cycles ;)
15
@9 - you are mistaken. The contraceptive pill does prevents ovulation and thins the lining of the uterus so that even if an egg were to be released it probably wouldn't attach. The "period" that occurs is not true mentstruation. In fact, it can be skipped altogether by simply starting the next cycle of pills instead of taking the placebo pills (or skipping the week of no pills, if it is a 21 pill pack)
What you described is how an IUD works. Ovulation still occurs, but the lining has been thinned down and made hostile to implantation.
What you described is how an IUD works. Ovulation still occurs, but the lining has been thinned down and made hostile to implantation.
17
@13 They have. There was a really interesting special on Discovery about the science behind sexual attraction. Women are generally more attractive to men during their ovulation (fuller face, brighter cheeks, slighter larger breasts). Women also find different men attractive during different times of their cycles. When they're ovulating, women are attracted to wider faces, firmer stances, "manly men". When not ovulating, they prefer men more like themselves: kind, gentle, sweet... "wusses".
Maybe the pill has helped more poets marry and procreate than would otherwise happen.
Maybe the pill has helped more poets marry and procreate than would otherwise happen.
18
Good point, Allyn.
My ex was using those contraceptive sponges, so she wasn't on the pill when she met me.
My ex was using those contraceptive sponges, so she wasn't on the pill when she met me.
20
I'm having a hard time buying into the seriousness of these implications. So many other factors come into play when it comes to who turns you on. I was on the pill for most of my life, have been off it for a few years, and throughout it all I've been attracted to a VERY diverse group of males (and the odd female). The one I chose was right for many reasons other than pure sex appeal.
Two things, off the top of my head, that make me take this whole study with a grain of salt. First, sex drives and compatibility change throughout a marriage, regardless of birth control method -- familiarity, distractions, exhaustion with work and kids, and the typical boredom of the middle-aged rut. Tiny differences in perceptions of the guy's masculinity or femininity would just pale in comparison to larger life events and changes. Hell, just a partner's willingness to try something new can make that old familiar face seem a lot sexier.
Second, this -- "the use of oral contraceptives may influence a womans ability to attract a mate by reducing attractiveness to men, thereby disrupting her ability to compete with normally cycling women for access to mate" -- implies some kind of "mating pool" that is completely divorced from a real-world situation. Where is this place where personality, style, intelligence, sense of humour, and common life experiences have zero bearing on attractiveness? Where is this place where a woman who is just right in every other way -- confident, vibrantly healthy, sexy -- loses out because she's not ovulating? I've never been to this place.
Two things, off the top of my head, that make me take this whole study with a grain of salt. First, sex drives and compatibility change throughout a marriage, regardless of birth control method -- familiarity, distractions, exhaustion with work and kids, and the typical boredom of the middle-aged rut. Tiny differences in perceptions of the guy's masculinity or femininity would just pale in comparison to larger life events and changes. Hell, just a partner's willingness to try something new can make that old familiar face seem a lot sexier.
Second, this -- "the use of oral contraceptives may influence a womans ability to attract a mate by reducing attractiveness to men, thereby disrupting her ability to compete with normally cycling women for access to mate" -- implies some kind of "mating pool" that is completely divorced from a real-world situation. Where is this place where personality, style, intelligence, sense of humour, and common life experiences have zero bearing on attractiveness? Where is this place where a woman who is just right in every other way -- confident, vibrantly healthy, sexy -- loses out because she's not ovulating? I've never been to this place.
21
Interesting study. Explains a lot about that minuscule population of women that find men with feminine features attractive. Nature is very clear in her intentions, lets not mess with it.
22
I'm pretty sure the the United States would have to hold a lot more than 5% of the world's population for any of this alter the course of evolution. And you'd need reason to believe that the pill will not be replaced with some other technology in a generation or two anyway.
23
@20, Irena - you should look up that special Discovery did, they cited many studies. It's not that your initial attraction means you'll be married, but it determines who you're willing to get to know. If you start with 100 menin a room, your brain narrows the group down to the twenty or so you find attractive at that moment, then it weeds out those who are out of your league (above or below) and settles on the one or two you would like to get to know more. So even before you get to know this guy and whether or not you can spend the next decade, lifetime, two months, one night, whatever, with him, your brain has already cancelled out the 98 other men in the room as potential mates. So no, this study doesn't take long-term compatability into consideration, but it's very important to note that without consious thought, your brain/sex drive has eliminated 98% of your potential mates without getting to know them first.
25
I'm generally not attracted to "masculine" men at any point during the month and I'm not on the pill.
Only the cute nerdy boys will do it for me (I'm absolutely crazy about them in all honesty) and the ones that I'm attracted to tend to look more "feminine" than "masculine."
Only the cute nerdy boys will do it for me (I'm absolutely crazy about them in all honesty) and the ones that I'm attracted to tend to look more "feminine" than "masculine."
26
I wonder if they controlled for the women's sexual orientation. Would bisexual women be more attracted to the fem-boy than straight women even when they were ovulating? Did they have lesbians in the mix at all?
27
You know all this research is thrown out the window if a man is playing the guitar or bass. A man and his ax, oh my ....
28
I have often wondered if the rise in Autism was directly related to this issue. People selecting mates that are not a good genetic match generally lead to more genetic problems, like autism and other forms therein. I haven't found a study researching that link, but maybe it is out there?
30
@12- Julie, yes, many people have studied how preferences cycle during the menstrual cycle. Read that pdf Dan attached. Burly, big-jawed dudes when ovulating, less so when not fertile. That's the generality, of course.
Another point some people are overlooking is that "choice" of mate in this case can mean one of two things - a long term partner, who might help you raise your babies, or a sperm donor, basically, a guy who will father your offspring. Regardless of whom you're in a LTR with. The point here is that a woman might get pregnant by a guy with "good genes", but have a guy with good fathering instincts around to help raise the baby.
The paper linked suggests there's only a 3.5% rate of extra-pair paternity (i.e. cheating resulting in kids) in humans, but I seem to remember studies showing this to be a lot higher... and a story about a town that was being tracked on a number of health metrics ... the researchers found that quite a large number of guys weren't the fathers they thought they were.
As for whether this would fuck up "the course of evolution...". Evolution doesn't have a course it follows. Don't think like that. No one "deevolves"; the population would just evolve to be fit in the current environment. However, currently, the problem is that poor mate choices by women can lead to crappy life situations, perhaps, no? Would you want to be involved with someone that you liked while on the pill but found repulsive when you went to go have kids?
@25 Biology is full of variation.
Another point some people are overlooking is that "choice" of mate in this case can mean one of two things - a long term partner, who might help you raise your babies, or a sperm donor, basically, a guy who will father your offspring. Regardless of whom you're in a LTR with. The point here is that a woman might get pregnant by a guy with "good genes", but have a guy with good fathering instincts around to help raise the baby.
The paper linked suggests there's only a 3.5% rate of extra-pair paternity (i.e. cheating resulting in kids) in humans, but I seem to remember studies showing this to be a lot higher... and a story about a town that was being tracked on a number of health metrics ... the researchers found that quite a large number of guys weren't the fathers they thought they were.
As for whether this would fuck up "the course of evolution...". Evolution doesn't have a course it follows. Don't think like that. No one "deevolves"; the population would just evolve to be fit in the current environment. However, currently, the problem is that poor mate choices by women can lead to crappy life situations, perhaps, no? Would you want to be involved with someone that you liked while on the pill but found repulsive when you went to go have kids?
@25 Biology is full of variation.
31
@26 Lesbians will ruin your p-values in science.
It would make an interesting study, though, expanding the sample to include all sexual preferences. Probably not too many lesbians on the pill, though...
It would make an interesting study, though, expanding the sample to include all sexual preferences. Probably not too many lesbians on the pill, though...
33
Allyn @ 29,
The sax is sexy sounding, and a man into making music is a lovely sight. But, an ax needs to come with a lifetime supply of condoms. It's not just the sound, it's those hands and how they use them ...
The sax is sexy sounding, and a man into making music is a lovely sight. But, an ax needs to come with a lifetime supply of condoms. It's not just the sound, it's those hands and how they use them ...
34
@22, this study took place not in the US, but in the UK -- and Sheffield at that. And not even God could make a pill that made an Englishman attractive.
35
Dan,
This is interesting. But, far more problematic for ALL is when science discovers something "politcally incorrect" (that's usually the trouble with science). You are correct to scrutinize them (the data and the scientists). BTW, I did read once that Charles Darwin was against artificial birth control (though I admit I can't verify that but it does stand to resason as it apparently interfers with natural selection). That said, I believe the "pill" to be possibly the most important discovery since the wheel. It altered human populations. It gave women a relatively safe choice of when to reproduce or not. I believe it is the 50th anniversary of it's discovery (and eventual FDA approval) by Dr. John Rock.
This is interesting. But, far more problematic for ALL is when science discovers something "politcally incorrect" (that's usually the trouble with science). You are correct to scrutinize them (the data and the scientists). BTW, I did read once that Charles Darwin was against artificial birth control (though I admit I can't verify that but it does stand to resason as it apparently interfers with natural selection). That said, I believe the "pill" to be possibly the most important discovery since the wheel. It altered human populations. It gave women a relatively safe choice of when to reproduce or not. I believe it is the 50th anniversary of it's discovery (and eventual FDA approval) by Dr. John Rock.
36
@29, @33: are you high? Saxophones are repulsive-sounding.
The sexiest instrument is the Hammond B-3. Or the snare drum. Or the human voice.
The sexiest instrument is the Hammond B-3. Or the snare drum. Or the human voice.
37
14
of course.
because people who discover
they are
"sexually compatible"
never never ever ever
split up or divorce.
they enjoy lifelong bliss-
just like swans.
of course.
because people who discover
they are
"sexually compatible"
never never ever ever
split up or divorce.
they enjoy lifelong bliss-
just like swans.
38
And how would that compare to societies where people have NO choice in whom they marry, which would include ours up to 100 years ago?
There's good evidence to suggest that autism used to be misdiagnosed as mental retardation, and that's one explanation for the "sudden" rise in autism rates.
I have often wondered if the rise in Autism was directly related to this issue. People selecting mates that are not a good genetic match generally lead to more genetic problems, like autism and other forms therein
And how would that compare to societies where people have NO choice in whom they marry, which would include ours up to 100 years ago?
There's good evidence to suggest that autism used to be misdiagnosed as mental retardation, and that's one explanation for the "sudden" rise in autism rates.
40
@ 32 and others...
Folks, this is science. Biology, at that. There's a statistical difference in preferences shown by samples of women as to which face they prefer in relation to their menstrual cycle. That doesn't mean the difference is large or absolute.
Folks, this is science. Biology, at that. There's a statistical difference in preferences shown by samples of women as to which face they prefer in relation to their menstrual cycle. That doesn't mean the difference is large or absolute.
41
RE #30 - I had forgotten about that aspect of the study(ies)- You're quite right. I think it's all part of the humans arent designed to be monogamous belief. The man a woman wants to mate with is not necessarily the man she wants to raise her kids with. So for three and a half weeks a month, a woman unconsciously want to spend her time with a man similar to her, or who may exhibit more feminine physical and emotional traits, a man who may make a good Dad. But for the few days shes fertile, shes generally attracted to men who will produce strong offspring, a man who will make a good father, but a not-great Dad.
@28 Monique - interesting thought. That should be looked into.
@28 Monique - interesting thought. That should be looked into.
42
How large is the difference between ovulating and not ovulating preferences? I bet it's tiny compared to the variation in preference that exists overall.
This is a classic statistical error. We hear about a small difference between two very overlapping distributions, and we leap to the conclusion that it is a large difference with no overlap. ALL non-ovulating women ADORE girly-men! ALL ovulating women ADORE neanderthals! In fact, there is a slight change in preference that is only detectable when you average over lots and lots of women. The implications for human reproduction and success of marriages is probably nil.
This is a classic statistical error. We hear about a small difference between two very overlapping distributions, and we leap to the conclusion that it is a large difference with no overlap. ALL non-ovulating women ADORE girly-men! ALL ovulating women ADORE neanderthals! In fact, there is a slight change in preference that is only detectable when you average over lots and lots of women. The implications for human reproduction and success of marriages is probably nil.
43
@36, Fnarf, as a singer, I want to believe the voice is the sexiest... I'm not sure my husband agrees, however.
44
All the more reason to switch to IUDs really. Not sure what the point of expounding on the political significance of the pill was though. Its the pill, not all of birth control in general.
45
Fnarf @ 36,
Sorry, you lovely thing, but I'm sober. I'm betting Allyn is sober as well, seeing that she is expecting.
You're welcome to your opinion on which instruments are sexy, but unlike Allyn and I, you don't ovulate. Perhaps, Mrs. Fnarf would like to give her $0.02? She has good taste, you won the lottery when she claimed you as her prize. You lucky, lucky man...
Sorry, you lovely thing, but I'm sober. I'm betting Allyn is sober as well, seeing that she is expecting.
You're welcome to your opinion on which instruments are sexy, but unlike Allyn and I, you don't ovulate. Perhaps, Mrs. Fnarf would like to give her $0.02? She has good taste, you won the lottery when she claimed you as her prize. You lucky, lucky man...
46
hm, I wonder if lesbians are more attracted to butcher womyn when they are ovulating? cant we do a SLOG study? Dan, who do you know that could help the stranger sponsor a companion study of lesbians?
47
So you are saying less masculine men are by default genetically similar to everyone...this is a poor summary of the study. Woman who are not ovulating are not attracted to genetically similar men, they are still attracted to genetically diverse men. That attraction increases during ovulation. The word choice and correlation of the two attributes in the sentence "women who aren't ovulating prefer guys who are more feminine and genetically more similar" is misleading. This is how misinformation gets started.
48
I don't get how any woman can say that she's not attracted to masculine men but still likes guys. If you're not attracted to the essence of what makes a man a man hence masculinity, then what are you attracted to? If you're a woman that without the side effects of the pill or any other drug find feminine traits sexually attractive then you're dealing with a lesbian attraction cause the men you're finding attractive are outwardly identical to women.
Same with guys who find women with masculine traits attractive.
Same with guys who find women with masculine traits attractive.
50
@30: "Would you want to be involved with someone that you liked while on the pill but found repulsive when you went to go have kids?"
But see, this is my point. That's how this sort of study gets played in a magazine or on a blog, but that's not how it works. The pill's effects are not nearly that dramatic.
Allyn @23, I haven't seen the show, but it sounds like that study only looked at initial attraction. Lots of people become attracted to someone only after getting to know them -- after working with them for awhile, or seeing them in a different context from the one in which they formed their first opinion.
And thank you, elenchos @22. I just can't see blowing this information up into something that predicts "dire consequences" or raises "evolutionary concerns". But because evolution is a sexy topic right now, and research grants and publications follow sexy topics, the evolutionary biology angle continues to be way overblown.
But see, this is my point. That's how this sort of study gets played in a magazine or on a blog, but that's not how it works. The pill's effects are not nearly that dramatic.
Allyn @23, I haven't seen the show, but it sounds like that study only looked at initial attraction. Lots of people become attracted to someone only after getting to know them -- after working with them for awhile, or seeing them in a different context from the one in which they formed their first opinion.
And thank you, elenchos @22. I just can't see blowing this information up into something that predicts "dire consequences" or raises "evolutionary concerns". But because evolution is a sexy topic right now, and research grants and publications follow sexy topics, the evolutionary biology angle continues to be way overblown.
52
Loveschild @48, I'd like nothing more than to have my face buried between Ricky Gervais's oh-so-feminine buttcheeks. Does that make me unnatural?
That question goes to Fnarf @34 as well.
That question goes to Fnarf @34 as well.
53
LC,
Look back at the top, both of those men look like men. They are all masculine, because they are men. Men. Women who are attracted to men, are attracted to them because they are masculine, again because they are men.
The results to this study likely have more to do with the innate desire to create a nurturing environment for any potential fetus. We, well most of us, are programed to nurture, and it makes sense that when ovulating we would find ourselves attracted to men who come across like us. This doesn't really have any true baring on a man's masculinity or his ability to nurture.
Besides, it's the heart of the man, that really matters. Not his physical appearance, looks are only icing and they succumb to time.
I think it would be interesting to study women who have ceased ovulating, because they don't ovulate.
Look back at the top, both of those men look like men. They are all masculine, because they are men. Men. Women who are attracted to men, are attracted to them because they are masculine, again because they are men.
The results to this study likely have more to do with the innate desire to create a nurturing environment for any potential fetus. We, well most of us, are programed to nurture, and it makes sense that when ovulating we would find ourselves attracted to men who come across like us. This doesn't really have any true baring on a man's masculinity or his ability to nurture.
Besides, it's the heart of the man, that really matters. Not his physical appearance, looks are only icing and they succumb to time.
I think it would be interesting to study women who have ceased ovulating, because they don't ovulate.
55
This study's pretty interesting, but the authors do acknowledge a number of weaknesses (most studies reviewed used university students and didn't take into account preexisting differences between pill users and non-pill users, for example). There's also no direct evidence that short-term differences in mate preference influence actual long-term mate choice. But that hardly makes for a sensational headline or interesting conversation topic, so....
http://www.phdcomics.com/comics.php?f=11…
http://www.phdcomics.com/comics.php?f=11…
56
@50, Irena, you're quite right. The studies cited were mostly looking at initial sexual attaction, the "biology of attraction" or something like that. But they did note the differences between long-term life-partner choices women make versus the sexual attraction let's-mate-right-now-type choices women make.
57
@28 - we're doing some studies on Autism and a couple of our papers are in review right now - yes, you bring up some good points, and when we look at our older data we do have to correct for the earlier misdiagnosis.
But we'd need a much larger study to directly answer that exact question, as just doing a few phenotypes requires a larger study than you'd think, since many participants in one study end up being in many other studies - filtering those out is critical but reduces the statistical power, sadly.
But we'd need a much larger study to directly answer that exact question, as just doing a few phenotypes requires a larger study than you'd think, since many participants in one study end up being in many other studies - filtering those out is critical but reduces the statistical power, sadly.
59
I should point out some other recent studies show that human evolution has a high correlation of actual mate choice with drinking (ceremonial events, etc), so even though one shouldn't drink when pregnant, the chances of pregnancy increase when men and women drink.
So, keep the emergency contraception in the bathroom at home and your favorite contraception (condom, etc) in your purse/wallet when you go to a wedding, funeral, holiday party, or a bar. Unless you want a rugrat.
So, keep the emergency contraception in the bathroom at home and your favorite contraception (condom, etc) in your purse/wallet when you go to a wedding, funeral, holiday party, or a bar. Unless you want a rugrat.
60
So wait, straight guys are either: ass, tits, or leg men. Straight girls like either girly or neanderthal?
62
@ 58, Allyn, I'm sure your husband values it as well. Singing is to you, what guitar playing is to me, soul food and self expression. The world needs more music, so keep on singing.
63
Loveschild: would you care to expand on your definition of what makes a man a man? Just curious ....
64
Dear uneducated public,
Your individual anecdote that is contrary to the findings of a large-sample scientific study means absolutely nothing concerning the validity of the study. Research selects a representative sample of the population as a whole, but there is variation within the population in any characteristic. General conclusions drawn from research studies do not, cannot, and will not ever claim to represent every single individual in the population; they do, however, say something about groups of people in general.
Love, Science
Your individual anecdote that is contrary to the findings of a large-sample scientific study means absolutely nothing concerning the validity of the study. Research selects a representative sample of the population as a whole, but there is variation within the population in any characteristic. General conclusions drawn from research studies do not, cannot, and will not ever claim to represent every single individual in the population; they do, however, say something about groups of people in general.
Love, Science
65
Allyn, Kim, et al, I agree: the saxophone is a sexy instrument. It suppose it heightens the appeal of a man, but a woman who plays one becomes immeasurably hot!
67
While we are on this topic: an article on why women say they have sex.
http://www.straight.com/article-260253/n…
http://www.straight.com/article-260253/n…
68
63 To me that is something very obvious to both genders. Mind you, this is about the physical nature not sentiments in which case i totally agree with Kim's statement about physical appearance in men.
I would understand perhaps a hermaphrodite not knowing that but if you're born male, even if you're struggling with homosexuality as an adult, deep down you know what masculinity is.
I would understand perhaps a hermaphrodite not knowing that but if you're born male, even if you're struggling with homosexuality as an adult, deep down you know what masculinity is.
69
Dan: why stop with IUDs? I wish more women knew about the non-condom barrier methods of birth control that are available. In the US, that's diaphragms and the FemCap. They're like condoms only without the STD-protection or need to educate your boyfriend on proper use and disposal.
70
After 6 years on the pill and after I was in a great long-term relationship, I started the Fertility Awareness Method (FAM) after reading _Taking Charge of Your Fertility_. http://www.ovusoft.com/
It's empowering to learn more about my body and feel my rhythms again- coming off the pill was also awful. I realized how much the hormone regulation had affected me. I recommend FAM to anyone in a long-term relationship.
It's empowering to learn more about my body and feel my rhythms again- coming off the pill was also awful. I realized how much the hormone regulation had affected me. I recommend FAM to anyone in a long-term relationship.
71
Loveschild:
You are conflating two separate items: sex and gender. Biological sex (as has been discussed on Slog) is not a rigid binary but a continuum between man / woman - and often it is hard to tell the difference. (Just Google androgen insensitivity if you doubt me.) And, if gender is something that everyone recognizes, why isn't masculinity the same across all cultures and all time? Anytime I hear "But everyone knows what that is," I think that I have found one of those deeply buried assumptions that shape us and our culture.
If you are at all interested in this, why don't you read Kate Bornstein's books on gender ? You may find them interesting .....
You are conflating two separate items: sex and gender. Biological sex (as has been discussed on Slog) is not a rigid binary but a continuum between man / woman - and often it is hard to tell the difference. (Just Google androgen insensitivity if you doubt me.) And, if gender is something that everyone recognizes, why isn't masculinity the same across all cultures and all time? Anytime I hear "But everyone knows what that is," I think that I have found one of those deeply buried assumptions that shape us and our culture.
If you are at all interested in this, why don't you read Kate Bornstein's books on gender ? You may find them interesting .....
72
massive /facepalm at this article. articles like this are why i stopped reading the stranger, lol.
I am wondering if this is a serious article or if you are trying to bait the lovechilds of the world.
I am wondering if this is a serious article or if you are trying to bait the lovechilds of the world.
73
Off topic, so sorry!
I have to second what 70 said about Fertility Awareness Method. I never bring it up casually because the women in the room will all give me warning glances & imply that they are all too fertile to try such a method, or that I'm sitting on a time bomb, but it's actually shockingly easy to avoid getting pregnant by keeping a chart of your cycle.
I was told bluntly by my doctor several years ago that she no longer fitted women for diaphragms and they were pretty much obsolete, so no diaphragm for me. She pushed a rx for more pills into my hand, which I never filled, and I've been FAM ever since.
I have to second what 70 said about Fertility Awareness Method. I never bring it up casually because the women in the room will all give me warning glances & imply that they are all too fertile to try such a method, or that I'm sitting on a time bomb, but it's actually shockingly easy to avoid getting pregnant by keeping a chart of your cycle.
I was told bluntly by my doctor several years ago that she no longer fitted women for diaphragms and they were pretty much obsolete, so no diaphragm for me. She pushed a rx for more pills into my hand, which I never filled, and I've been FAM ever since.
74
Uhhh, hate to break it to you all, but the new low-dose pills that most of us use do NOT prevent ovulation 100% of the time. Their effects are more diffuse: the cervical mucus is thickened, the motion of the tubes altered, the endometrial lining and fluid changed, etc. Breakthrough ovulation occurs up to approx. 40% of cycles, depending on which studies you read.
Ergo, this piece is pointless.
Ergo, this piece is pointless.
76
21 - So you're saying that guys with more feminine features should just fuck other guys?
I'm off the pill. Prefer guy on the left. Love my husband the same whether I'm on or off hormones. I think this is probably bullshit.
I'm off the pill. Prefer guy on the left. Love my husband the same whether I'm on or off hormones. I think this is probably bullshit.
77
48 - You know, people like you really make your fear of gender-noncomformity painfully fucking obvious when you make statements like that. If anything you ever said about "saving" people from homosexuality was true, you wouldn't be calling people out on whether they're "real" men or "real" women based on the traits God gave them or what they happen to be attracted to, or any other factors like behavior or interests or other inconsequential bullshit. No, you're always the people who are the first in line to point and someone and cry "homosexual!" if they're the slightest bit non-conforming.
Why? Because what you're saying isn't about "love" or spirituality: you'd just be lost without someone to hate.
Why? Because what you're saying isn't about "love" or spirituality: you'd just be lost without someone to hate.
78
64 - Yeah, but there's a difference between a study about what women think of some pictures and drawing the conclusion that hormones have the power to brainwash an epidemic of women into marrying guys they aren't attracted to.
79
I think I have experienced this. Explains why "Hmm.. you need to shave..." sometimes means your face is hairy and sometimes means fuck me.
80
@ 70 & 73,
FAM is the Rhythm Method. Good luck with that. You're going to need it.
@ Loveschilde,
Considering the popularity of manga/anime drawings of the most femme looking men and boys ever created are hugely popular amongst a demographic of girls not on the pill, I'd say your theory that "nature" wants women to go after manly men is pretty much bunk. Ditto, Edward Cullen and company. Not exactly a butch, he-man is he?
@ Original Monique,
They said being on the pill made women more attractive to men who shared similar genes and there is evidence that Autism has a component of heredity, so you might be on to something. It could be more women are breeding with men who are too genetically similar to them. However, I personally think Autism is over diagnosed. It seems nowadays everybody and their brother Bob is diagnosed with something in the range of Autism. I have a feeling in a few years the diagnosis will go out of fashion with psychiatrists/psychologists just like the fad to diagnose people with repressed memories did.
FAM is the Rhythm Method. Good luck with that. You're going to need it.
@ Loveschilde,
Considering the popularity of manga/anime drawings of the most femme looking men and boys ever created are hugely popular amongst a demographic of girls not on the pill, I'd say your theory that "nature" wants women to go after manly men is pretty much bunk. Ditto, Edward Cullen and company. Not exactly a butch, he-man is he?
@ Original Monique,
They said being on the pill made women more attractive to men who shared similar genes and there is evidence that Autism has a component of heredity, so you might be on to something. It could be more women are breeding with men who are too genetically similar to them. However, I personally think Autism is over diagnosed. It seems nowadays everybody and their brother Bob is diagnosed with something in the range of Autism. I have a feeling in a few years the diagnosis will go out of fashion with psychiatrists/psychologists just like the fad to diagnose people with repressed memories did.
81
Mate selection is so messed up by so many factors that it's hard to believe that this difference is telling. It's apparently measurable, but it's just one more statistically significant factor out of many.
That said, anecdotal counterexamples (eg, "My experience is different") do not bear on the significance of a statistical tendency.
In the 1970s, it was increasingly common to say that sexual attraction was cultural. Any fool could tell that what counts as "attractive" varies across cultures. Politically, a cultural explanation of human differences had the considerable merit of cutting racism and sexism off at the knees. Marx taught that humans were defined by their societies, Freud taught that individuals were shaped by their parents, Mead taught that people are naturally happy, and Skinner taught that behavior is learned. Doctors prescribed hormones as contraceptives with little thought that altering someone's hormones might alter their behavior, especially their sexual behavior.
Turns out that it does.
That said, anecdotal counterexamples (eg, "My experience is different") do not bear on the significance of a statistical tendency.
In the 1970s, it was increasingly common to say that sexual attraction was cultural. Any fool could tell that what counts as "attractive" varies across cultures. Politically, a cultural explanation of human differences had the considerable merit of cutting racism and sexism off at the knees. Marx taught that humans were defined by their societies, Freud taught that individuals were shaped by their parents, Mead taught that people are naturally happy, and Skinner taught that behavior is learned. Doctors prescribed hormones as contraceptives with little thought that altering someone's hormones might alter their behavior, especially their sexual behavior.
Turns out that it does.
82
Oh man, this whole set of responses is stereotype heaven! And look! Here's one more! I am an artist and an academic. Only very very rarely in my life have a found a manly-man hunka hunka burnin' love attractive. Perhaps it has to do with the fact that guys who look like that don't seem to spend much time doing the things I like to do. Sentences comprising single-syllable words, clumsy eating and lovemaking habits, sneering put-downs of the natural world (other than to drive down a deer in the road) -- uh....no thanks. And to imagine that my anti-Neanderthal attitude puts me into lesbian territory, Loveschild, cracks me up!
83
So this may influence, at an absolute maximum, about 5% of the factors that determine people's attractions to each other. Call me when it's something serious.
84
@40
thanks so much for saying that, It drives me up the wall when people look at statistics and say "Well I'm not like that, so it must be bullshit."
it's as if they lack even a rudimentary understanding of what statistics represent, and it can really make a rational conversation difficult.
thanks so much for saying that, It drives me up the wall when people look at statistics and say "Well I'm not like that, so it must be bullshit."
it's as if they lack even a rudimentary understanding of what statistics represent, and it can really make a rational conversation difficult.
85
More importantly there are studies showing that not only does hormonal birth control reduce libido while women are taking it, if taken for too long it can PERMANENTLY reduce female libido.
Condoms, condoms, condoms. And whatever happened to the diaphragm and cervical cap? Those can be used with condoms. And for women in committed relationships, learning the sympto-thermal method paired with barrier methods on fertile days, and once a woman has decided no more kids a non-hormonal IUD or the new natural plug method of birth control are the best options.
Condoms, condoms, condoms. And whatever happened to the diaphragm and cervical cap? Those can be used with condoms. And for women in committed relationships, learning the sympto-thermal method paired with barrier methods on fertile days, and once a woman has decided no more kids a non-hormonal IUD or the new natural plug method of birth control are the best options.
86
80
the epidemic of autism stems from parking kids in front of tv and computer and feeding them brain killing crap.
the epidemic of autism stems from parking kids in front of tv and computer and feeding them brain killing crap.
87
Some more Loveschild posts that show that she has been spending too much time reading and commenting on Slog and not enough time hanging out with real-life straight people.
88
I think that study is a load of BS. Women's sexuality is much more complex than mere biological factors (although they play a part). Speaking as a woman who has been on and off the pill for many years, I have always gravitated towards slightly feminized men (like the "puppy" on the left). I think it is because I value intelligence and personality over more masculine looks. (I'm not attracted to men who are too feminine, though--like I said, it's complicated). Whether or not I feel attracted to a man involves a huge mixture of factors--physical looks, intelligence, social skills, how he dresses, what he does for a living, etc.
As for women being perceived as more attractive off the pill, that doesn't make much sense to me. When I went off the pill, I got acne and yeast infections, my breasts "deflated," and I had more mood swings (along with painful periods). When I went back on the pill, all those nasty things disappeared. Which, I'm pretty sure makes me more attractive. Interestingly, being on the pill hasn't changed my libido one way or the other.
As for women being perceived as more attractive off the pill, that doesn't make much sense to me. When I went off the pill, I got acne and yeast infections, my breasts "deflated," and I had more mood swings (along with painful periods). When I went back on the pill, all those nasty things disappeared. Which, I'm pretty sure makes me more attractive. Interestingly, being on the pill hasn't changed my libido one way or the other.
89
I haven't been on the pill in more than 20 years, and I much prefer the guy on the left. But all bets are off if a guy can't make me laugh - I don't care if it's Johnny fucking Depp, if he's a humorless turkey, he's on the curb.
Oh, and Fnarf @34 - snap. Except Sean Bean is from Sheffield. *drool*
Oh, and Fnarf @34 - snap. Except Sean Bean is from Sheffield. *drool*
90
I have heard that the actual scientific basis for this study is that a woman's sense of smell changes slightly when hormonally adjusted, such as when on the pill. As smell is such an important component of attraction, this makes sense. As a pregnant woman, I can say definitively that not only is my sense of smell very much enhanced, I'm also less attracted to men (or lady-men, for that matter) in general. Interesting.
91
Yeah, so I've always found this interesting... I 100% of the time find the more feminine looking guy more attractive. Actually, it's more that I always find the "more masculine" guy just hideous. We took a poll of the room in my animal behavior class, and I was one of 2 girls that chose the more feminine one. Just thought it was interesting: what would account for my liking more androgynous looking guys?
92
@21 and btw, this is true whether I'm on or off the pill. Was true before I went on the pill, will be true when I get off of it. More feminine guys are just more attractive.
93
Is it me or does the guy on the left look an awful lot like the guy on the right? They could be brothers. In a dark bar what girl--ovulating or not--could tell the difference? Maybe it all comes down to whether she met him on a sunny day or in the aforementioned dark bar. Being post-menopausal the reaction I have is "Who cares?" I'm not attracted to either. I like older men.
94
Is it me or does the guy on the left look an awful lot like the guy on the right? They could be brothers. In a dark bar what girl--ovulating or not--could tell the difference? Maybe it all comes down to whether she met him on a sunny day or in the aforementioned dark bar. Being post-menopausal the reaction I have is "Who cares?" I'm not attracted to either. I like older men.
95
Loveschild - I tend to be most attracted to femnine men and to masculine women. So sue me. (I'm straight, attraction is a relative term. But I prefer hanging out with masculine women.)
@70 and @73, I'm sure I could be completely successful at FAM. I'd just never ever have sex when I'm in the mood. Can I tell where I am in my cycle? Hell yes. If I'm in heat, men look and smell hot. Otherwise, meh, they just look like people. Of course, the pill completely sucked for me and my husband. Condoms rock.
@70 and @73, I'm sure I could be completely successful at FAM. I'd just never ever have sex when I'm in the mood. Can I tell where I am in my cycle? Hell yes. If I'm in heat, men look and smell hot. Otherwise, meh, they just look like people. Of course, the pill completely sucked for me and my husband. Condoms rock.
96
Sure, sexual attraction is determined by much much more than whether or not a woman is ovulating.
This study doesn't claim that ovulation alone explains attraction. So those of you whining "this only explains .01% of why I'm attracted to someone"...you are probably right. But don't discount it or toss it solely based on that.
Picking behavior apart, bit by bit, is what Science does. No one can design a controlled study that simultaneously takes into account all traits that influence our mating choices. We have do study them one by one, or a few at a time, and then put everything we know together.
And read the discussion again. They've got a ton of caveats and disclaimers. I don't think they are trying to overstate their results.
It would be like studying taste preferences. Someone might study why we like sweet things and their impact on our health. Of course, this doesn't explain why we like salty foods,or how much we like salty foods, or if salty foods have a bigger impact on our health than sweet foods. But does that mean we SHOULDN'T study sweets?
This study doesn't claim that ovulation alone explains attraction. So those of you whining "this only explains .01% of why I'm attracted to someone"...you are probably right. But don't discount it or toss it solely based on that.
Picking behavior apart, bit by bit, is what Science does. No one can design a controlled study that simultaneously takes into account all traits that influence our mating choices. We have do study them one by one, or a few at a time, and then put everything we know together.
And read the discussion again. They've got a ton of caveats and disclaimers. I don't think they are trying to overstate their results.
It would be like studying taste preferences. Someone might study why we like sweet things and their impact on our health. Of course, this doesn't explain why we like salty foods,or how much we like salty foods, or if salty foods have a bigger impact on our health than sweet foods. But does that mean we SHOULDN'T study sweets?
98
What worries me more is that, You can't keep putting something into your body and expect it not to change it eventually. Yeah, were okay now, but I'm worried more about future generations and how it's going to altar our bodies. I think it is possible that a lot of people in the future will become sterile because, over time as our enviroment changes Our body does to. When you take the pill you are blocking something natural from happening so eventually it won't happen at all. Who knows what else is going to end up happening later on. Like I said it isn't the generations now I'm worried about it is the ones after us. You can't put something in your body like that and expect for it to not have long term effects eventually. Years from now, I guarentee that something will come out that is more serious than any of us even know. That goes much deeper than liking a more feminine man.
Most Commented on Slog
-
Stephen Fry v. the Catholic Church by Dan Savage
-
Neologism Needed by Dan Savage
-
Palin's Cheat Sheet by Dan Savage
-
Straight Up by Dan Savage
-
SL Letter of the Day: The Toilet Brush Off by Dan Savage
-
Every Child Deserves a Mother and a Father by Dan Savage
-
Tea Party Crowd Believes That Only Good Spellers Should Vote by Dan Savage
-
Every Child Deserves a Mother and a Father by Dan Savage
-
The Green Police Super Bowl Commercial by Charles Mudede
-
How's That Hopey, Changey Stuff Working Out For Childhood Obesity? by Dan Savage
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (98) RSS