The Psychology of Sexual Arousal

Actually, you can't study whether men and women have different visual-spatial and verbal abilities at birth. For one, infants can't speak yet. Second, infants can't perform abstract visual-spatial problems. You can't study this stuff until kids are little bit older. So, there is a case that gender differences could be the result of socialization, but it could also be genetic. It is difficult to discern which is operative, or if it is a combination of nature and nurture.

In any case, traditionally, women have been thought to be better at tasks involving verbal ability, while men have been thought to be better at tasks involving visual-spatial abilities and quantitative and reasoning abilities.

Early studies indicates that girls outperformed boys on a variety fo verbal tasks. In a meta-analysis by Hyde & Linn (1988), they found that females were better than males at anagrams, speech production and general verbal ability, but the sum of the reliable differences were rather small.

A meta-analysis by Linn & Peterson (1985) looked at three types of spatial abilities:
--Spatial perception: spatial relationship with respect to one's own body
--Mental rotation: mentally rotating objects in space
--Spatial visualization: finding specific shapes in complex figures

They found that there were only small differences in spatial visualization. There were moderate effects for spatial perception that increased with age, and there were fairly large effects with mental rotation tasks.

Why are men better at some spatial tasks? Males have more practive with that type of task, females may display more caution and less trust in responses, and/or hemispheric lateralization, that is, men may have more lateralized brains (more specialized functions).

Maccoby & Jacklin (1974) found that boys begin to perform girls beginning at age 12 or 13. Benow & Stanley (1980;1983) used SAT scores for Junior High school students. Overall, both sexes had equivalent verbal scores, boys scores about 30 points higher on average in math, and at extremely high scores, the ratio of boys to girls was especially high (e.g., 700 = 13 to 1).

There are some alternative explanations for gender differneces. One such alternative explanation is the theory that different types of motivation account for these differences. There are two types of motivation: mastery-oriented and performance-oriented. Mastery-oriented motivation involves setting high goals for one's self and persisting when one encounters obstacles. It also involves the attribution fo failure to lack of effort and the attribution of success to ability and skill. The peformance-oriented is more likely to lead to learned helplessness: the failure to set high goals and the tendency to give up easily, as well as the attribution of failure to lack of ability and the attribution of success to luck.

These styles can be influenced, for example, by feedback from teachers. Women tend more often to be performance-oriented than mastery-oriented, which could explain the gender difference.

Another theory is the connected learning theory, which helds that men take a traditional approach to tasks, using rationality and objectivity, sometimes called "separate knowing," whereas women tend to think more intuitively and subjectively, sometimes called "connected knowing." The areas that men excel in (e.g., math) seem to rely more on rigor and proof and thus may appeal to those with a separate knowing way of knowing. Or so the argument goes.

With all that said, I don't think this tells us much about why men are more turned on by nudity.

oh, come on, now, that's too easy to prove.
whan a man walks, his entire body moves in one direction.
when a woman walks, various bits of her body move in all kinds of directions.
humans are cursorial hunters, particularly men.
that, in a nutshell, is the visual basis.

I integrated my sexuality once ...didnt care for it

you can cut open the heads of dead infants and take a look at density of linkages, you know.
you can also wire live infants up and watch neural conduction to some extent.
there are other non-invasive methods for watching CNS activity in a living organism.
so, it is possible to study this from birth.
I dunno if it has been done, though.

You nailed it.

Hunters develop higher response to visual stimulus, as well as focused attention.

Gatherers develop higher response to communication stimulus, as well as multi-tasking abilities.

Well, there are a lot of ethical concerns with neuroscientific research on infants, even if they are deceased. So, there are limits to what can be done, at least with the current technology.

Here's a nice lit review on the evolution of sexual attractiveness, from Journal of Young Investigators on-line:

Looking Good: The Psychology and Biology of Beauty

Charles Feng
Human Biology, Stanford University
feng@jyi.org

In ancient Greece, Helen of Troy, the instigator of the Trojan War, was the paragon of beauty, exuding a physical

Model Cindy Crawford, an example of symmetry
Image courtesy of www.cindy.com

brilliance that would put Cindy Crawford to shame. Indeed, she was the toast of Athens, celebrated not for her kindness or her intellect, but for her physical perfection. But why did the Greek men find Helen, and other beautiful women, so intoxicating?

In an attempt to answer this question, the philosophers of the day devoted a great deal of time to this conundrum. Plato wrote of so-called "golden proportions," in which, amongst other things, the width of an ideal face would be two-thirds its length, while a nose would be no longer than the distance between the eyes. Plato's golden proportions, however, haven't quite held up to the rigors of modern psychological and biological research -- though there is credence in the ancient Greeks' attempts to determine a fundamental symmetry that humans find attractive.

Symmetry is attractive to the human eye

Today, this symmetry has been scientifically proven to be inherently attractive to the human eye. It has been defined not with proportions, but rather with similarity between the left and right sides of the face Thus, the Greeks were only partially correct.

By applying the stringent conditions of the scientific method, researchers now believe symmetry is the answer the Greeks were looking for.

By applying the stringent conditions of the scientific method, researchers now believe symmetry is the answer the Greeks
were looking for.

Babies spend more time staring at pictures of symmetric individuals than they do at photos of asymmetric ones. Moreover, when several faces are averaged to create a composite -- thus covering up the asymmetries that any one individual may have -- a panel of judges deemed the composite more attractive than the individual pictures.

Victor Johnston of New Mexico State University, for example, utilizes a program called FacePrints, which shows viewers facial images of variable attractiveness. The viewers then rate the pictures on a beauty scale from one to nine. In what is akin to digital Darwinism, the pictures with the best ratings are merged together, while the less attractive photos are weeded out. Each trial ends when a viewer deems the composite a 10. All the perfect 10s are super-symmetric.

Scientists say that the preference for symmetry is a highly evolved trait seen in many different animals. Female swallows, for example, prefer males with longer and more symmetric tails, while female zebra finches mate with males with symmetrically colored leg bands.

Female zebra finches prefer males with symmetric colorings.
Image courtesy of www.finchworld.com/zebra.html

The rationale behind symmetry preference in both humans and animals is that symmetric individuals have a higher mate-value; scientists believe that this symmetry is equated with a strong immune system. Thus, beauty is indicative of more robust genes, improving the likelihood that an individual's offspring will survive. This evolutionary theory is supported by research showing that standards of attractiveness are similar across cultures.

According to a University of Louisville study, when shown pictures of different individuals, Asians, Latinos, and whites from 13 different countries all had the same general preferences when rating others as attractive -- that is those that are the most symmetric.

Beauty beyond symmetry

However, John Manning of the University of Liverpool in England cautions against over-generalization, especially by Western scientists. "Darwin thought that there were few universals of physical beauty because there was much variance in appearance and preference across human groups," Manning explained in email interview. For example, Chinese men used to prefer women with small feet. In Shakespearean England, ankles were the rage. In some African tribal cultures, men like women who insert large discs in their lips.

Indeed, "we need more cross-cultural studies to show that what is true in Westernized societies is also true in traditional groups," Manning said his 1999 article.

Aside from symmetry, males in Western cultures generally prefer females with a small jaw, a small nose, large eyes, and defined cheekbones - features often described as "baby faced", that resemble an infant's. Females, however, have a preference for males who look more mature -- generally heart-shaped, small-chinned faces with full lips and fair skin. But during menstruation, females prefer a soft-featured male to a masculine one. Indeed, researchers found that female perceptions of beauty actually change throughout the month.

Sizing up the wasit-to-hip ratio: In general, men prefer women with a low WHR.
Image courtesy of health.discovery.com

When viewing profiles, both males and females prefer a face in which the forehead and jaw are in vertical alignment. Altogether, the preference for youthful and even infant-like, features, especially by menstruating women, suggest people with these features have more long-term potential as mates as well as an increased level of reproductive fitness.

Scientists have also found that the body's proportions play an important role in perceptions of beauty as well. In general, men have a preference for women with low waist-to-hip ratios (WHRs), that is, more adipose is deposited on the hips and buttocks than on the waist. Research shows that women with high WHRs (whose bodies are more tube-shaped) are more likely to suffer from health maladies, including infertility and diabetes. However, as is often the case, there are exceptions to the rule.

Psychologists at Newcastle University in England have shown that an indigenous people located in southeast Peru, who have had little contact with the Western world, actually have a preference for high WHRs. These psychologists assert that a general preference for low WHRs is a byproduct of Western culture.

Beauty and choosing a mate

Psychological research suggests that people generally choose mates with a similar level of attractiveness. The evolutionary theory is that by mating with someone who has similar genes, one's own genes are conserved. Moreover, a person's demeanor and personality also influences how others perceive his or her beauty.

Psychological research suggests that people generally choose mates with a similar level of attractiveness.

In one study, 70% of college students deemed an instructor physically attractive when he acted in a friendly manner, while only 30% found him attractive when he was cold and distant. Indeed, when surveyed for attributes in selecting a mate, both males and females felt kindness and an exciting personality were more important in a mate than good looks. Thus, to a certain degree, beauty truly is in the eye of the beholder.

Douglas Yu of the University of East Anglia in Norwich, England, agrees. "It's true by definition. Beauty is always judged by the receiver," he says. At the same time, he says in an email "there is inter-observer concordance, a measure of objectivity," so that individual perceptions of beauty, factoring in other characteristics such as personality and intelligence, can often be aggregated to form a consensus opinion. One of the offshoots of Yu's work in ethnobiology was a piece in Nature in 1998 that showed that the hourglass-body standard of beauty in women, previously thought to be `universally' preferred, was in fact likely swayed by advertising.

The halo effect

In society, attractive people tend to be more intelligent, better adjusted, and more popular. This is described as the halo effect - due to the perfection associated with angels. Research shows attractive people also have more occupational success and more dating experience than their unattractive counterparts. One theory behind this halo effect is that it is accurate -- attractive people are indeed more successful.

Research shows attractive people also have more occupational success and more dating experience than their unattractive counterparts.

An alternative explanation for attractive people achieving more in life is that we automatically categorize others before having an opportunity to evaluate their personalities, based on cultural stereotypes which say attractive people must be intrinsically good, and ugly people must be inherently bad. But Elliot Aronson, a social psychologist at Stanford University, believes self-fulfilling prophecies - in which a person't confident self-perception, further perpetuated by healthy feedback from others - may play a role in success as well. Aronson suggests, based on the self-fulfilling prophecy that people who feel they are attractive - though not necessarily rated as such - are just as successful as their counterparts who are judged to be good-looking.

Whatever the reason, the notion that attractiveness correlates with success still rings true. Yet beauty is not always advantageous, for beautiful people, particularly attractive women, tend to be perceived as more materialistic, snobbish, and vain.

For better or worse, the bottom line is that research shows beauty matters; it pervades society and affects how we choose loved ones. Thus, striving to appear attractive may not be such a vain endeavor after all. This isn't to say plastic surgery is necessarily the answer. Instead, lead a healthy lifestyle that will in turn make you a happier person.

Suggested Reading

Aronson, Elliot. 1999. The Social Animal. New York: Worth Publishers, Inc.

Cowley, Geoffrey. The biology of beauty. Newsweek. 1996 (127): 60-67.

Dion, Karen. 2002. Cultural perspectives on facial attractiveness. Facial Attractiveness: Evolutionary, Cognitive, and Social Perspectives. Eds. Rhodes, Gillian, Zebrowitz, Leslie. Westport, CT: Ablex Publishing.

Hill, C.T. et al. Breakups before marriage: the end of 103 affairs. Journal of Social Issues. 1976 (32): 147-168.

Langlois, J.H. et al. Maxims or myths of beauty? A meta-analytic and theoretical review. Psychological Bulletin. 2000 (126): 390-423.

Little, A and D. Perrett. Putting beauty back in the eye of the beholder. Psychologist. 2002 (15): 28-32.

Manning, JT, RL Trivers, D Singh, R Thornhill. The mystery of female beauty. Nature. 1999 (399): 214-215.

Moller, A.P. and R. Thornhill. Bilateral symmetry and sexual selection: a meta-analysis. American Naturalist. 1998(151): 174-192.

Perrett, David et al. Symmetry and human facial attractiveness. Evolution & Human Behavior. 1999 (20): 295-307.

Tovee, MJ and PL Cornelissen. Is beauty in the eye of the beholder? Nature. 1998 (396): 321-322.

Zebrowitz, Leslie. 1997. Reading Faces: Window to the Soul? Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press.

Websites related to this topic

Try out FacePrint

Calculate your WHR

ABC News: Faces Like Our Own are the most Attractive

BBC News: Beauty is in the eye of the beerholder

Brain Study Shows Difference Between Beauty, Desire

It is my experience that a general trend exists in which men are much more likely to be aroused by the visual and the physical than are women.

YUP! I get a SCHWING alert whenever I see a pic of Petra Verkaik. OTOH, the turtle retracts instantly back into its shell whenever I see a pic of Madeline Albright.

It appears that the most fulfilling sexual response, for both men and women, is inevitably a merging of the two: values and physical attributes.

Maybe but if I had to give one of them up, it would definitely be values. I mean, do I really give a hoot what Petra Verkaik's "values" are? I'm too busy staring at her physical attributes.

AAAaaahhhhhhhhh...

(EEwwwww)

Well, I dunno. I think that anyone who tries to intellectualize nekkid ladies is thinking with the wrong head.

My understanding is that you may be somewhat out of date in some of your excellent analysis.

I understand that MRI's and PET scans of infants presented with different types of stimuli and monitoring the different portions of male vs female brains which "light up" has shown quite a bit of what I said earlier in extremely young infants.

But, as I said, I haven't read much professional literature on it recently.

OTOH, the turtle retracts instantly back into its shell whenever I see a pic of Madeline Albright.

Margaret Thatcher naked on a cold day. Margarat Thatcher naked on a cold day.

THAT is awesome!

Why do men seem to enjoy viewing women naked (e.g., in photos, real life, etc.) much more than women seem to enjoy looking at naked men?

Hell, that's an easy question.
It's because naked women are a helluva lot better looking then naked men.
Sheeeeesh. I thought EVERYBODY knew that!
Ya gotta be a really sick weenie to enjoy looking at naked men.

Ugh! A Hildebeast pic in a sex related thread! That has to be upsetting some sort of balance..

good cull. thanks.

additional lines of thought:
development of the human breast specifically as a means to distinguish sexually adult but progressivly neotenic women from children

fibonaccian ratio expressed in pentagonal architecture as related to the "ideal" human face.

As to beauty being only skin deep - any serious thinker would say "hogwash"
The skin rides on what? Bones and muscles. Those bones and muscles do specific jobs. It stands to reason that there is an ideal range of comprimises between the various functions (sensor platform, brain housing, breathing, mastication, ingestion, expression, etc...) which would in turn lead to a rather narrow ideal set of proportions and surface appearance.

didn't say it was ethical, just possible.
I know there is non-invasive scanning technology available that allows doctors to monitor brain region activity - like an epileptic fit for example.
don't know what it is called. not CAT or NMR/MRI. Positron emission tomography might be it, but I dunno.

Men are visual FIRST then emotional second. Women are emotional first.

Yes, we are wired that way from birth, and it isn't going to change in the lifetimes of our great great grand children.

i'd like a beer, and i'd like to see somethin' naked.
--Jeff Foxworthy