Bitter much??
Posted on 05/12/2005 9:37:21 AM PDT by pissant
Women who are ovulating find other women less attractive, says Canadian research. But not everyone is convinced this means women put down other women's attractiveness as part of a competition for men.
Psychologist Dr Maryanne Fisher of York University in Toronto reported her research in the Royal Society's journal Biology Letters.
Fisher investigated an evolutionary-based theory that hormones influence competition between women for potential mates.
She looked at the relationship between women's oestrogen levels and how attractive they thought other women's faces were.
The study assumed one potential strategy of women competing for males was to make rivals appear inferior, a phenomenon Fisher called derogation.
"It is probable that women compete in terms of attractiveness since this is one of the primary criteria used by men when selecting mates," she wrote. "Furthermore, because hormones influence the mate-selection process, they may also mediate competition."
The experiment involved asking 57 female and 47 male university students to say how attractive a set of females and male faces were, shown as random photographs on a laptop computer. Fisher also asked the women which part of their ovulatory cycle they were in.
Fisher excluded homosexual and pregnant students from the study, as well as those who had recently used oral or intravenous contraceptives, antidepressants, or had missed ovulatory cycles.
"During periods of high oestrogen, competition, and hence derogation, increased, as evidence by lower ratings of female facial attractiveness. By contrast, oestrogen levels did not significantly affect ratings of male faces," reported Fisher.
She argued that while the theory of female competition was "controversial", her findings suggested a potential competitive process.
Do women really compete this way? But Australian researcher Professor Gisela Kaplan of the University of New England disagreed.
Kaplan has recently co-authored a book Gene worship: moving beyond the nature/nurture debate over genes, brain, and gender that analyses the scientific research on choosing a mate.
"[The Canadian study] looks like a good experiment, but it isn't. It really is very poor science," she told ABC Science Online.
"The methodology is fine and people get beguiled by methodology but the fallacies are in the basic assumptions."
Kaplan argued the experiment assumed that hormone levels in the body determine sexual desire and activity. She said this ran counter to "well established scientific fact".
While hormones such as oestrogen and progesterone are linked strongly to sexual activity in rats, behavioural endocrinology research had shown this was not the case in humans, she said.
"Humans and apes mate and have sexual activity throughout the year and independent of the cycle and it doesn't even necessarily increase during ovulation."
Kaplan also argued that Fisher also wrongly assumed that women are concerned with attractiveness of potential mates.
"There are countless studies to show that women choose males for a whole host of qualities, particularly honesty, income levels, interest in long-term partnerships and so forth and the attractiveness issue in all studies had played a minor role," she said.
"The main problem with that study is that it mixes up social and scientific facts and comes to conclusions that are meant to have biological relevance for the human species, when in fact the biological basis of the paper is the most questionable."
If he can't see your value, he ain't worth havin. :)
So your mother stopped demanding your eventual dad spend tons of money on her or did she finally admit that she's truly a whore?
Forgive my cynicism, but its been a bad week Betty. Its a sexist lie that only women can have emotional outbursts.
LOL, that's funny.
Sorry darlin'. :(
Life does suck sometimes.
I hope you never have to live through another week like the one that inspired that ugliness. FWIW, my first husband was always bitching about money, mostly about how much I spent at the grocery store. Trust me when I say I'm frugal. I bought very few clothes, I had two pair of shoes, one for work and a pair of tennis shoes. He OTOH had oodles of clothing and shoes. Whatever he wanted he bought, whether we could afford it or not. When I told him that we needed to buy our one year old a winter coat his response was, "Can't we just wrap her up in a blanket like we did last year?" He was serious!
And guess who was whoring around before and after we were married, not me... There are no words to describe how it feels to be 8 months pregnant with your husband's child and one day he comes home with a hickey the size of a golf ball on the front of his neck. As if adultery wasn't bad enough, a hickey! A hickey!! And no, the ex had no reason to stray (if you know what I mean). He did it because he could. Sound familiar?
I hate to see anyone unhappy Clemenza which is why I am giving you these examples of how my ex espoused all those nasty ideas you did about women but he was the one who was guilty of it all. Your outburst seems to me to be a little too close to the surface, not a one time chance occurrence because of a bad week. I hope I'm very wrong about that assessment.
If it's necessary, change your attitude about women (yes all of them) and the good ones will find you.
Take care.
....and what would that be?????this ought to be good folks!
Caroline! I'm hurt!
I'll be the judge of that! Now. . .come here and let me compare!
;-)
Well, aren't you quite the overachiever.
Tom Cruise, eh? Shirley, you are taller? I hear he's only 3'8".
Would you rather I ask someone else???
....cause I wouldn't like to hurt your itty bitty feelings #:(
After reading this article - I'm thrilled to know that the US Government didn't pay for this research.
Bitter much??
As long as you don't ask the moderator, I'm OK with it!
And you DO know me well enough. Since you've been on many of my threads for months now.
Which by the way, is much appreciated (serious).
They coulda saved a bunch of $$ and just asked the expert...ME.
Brilliant!
On the other hand...demeaning or not....some of them thar mating dances can be quite enticing, yes!?
Dance for me and I'll let you know.
Ddaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaannnnncing.........!
Provided all of the above fall within acceptable parameters, PERSONALITY was by far the most important trait for me, back when I was dating. Anybody who didn't think much of me failed to make the short list. =]
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.