[Study] Attractiveness vs Dominance As Male Sexual Selection Traits



Sep 30, 2018
Found this study long time ago, it discusses how a male's dominance (as rated by males) or attractiveness (as rated by females) correlates to their sexual success (self reported and corroborated by other men, since the participants were all frat boys who knew each other).
I thought it had some interesting results that I'd like discussing with the people on this forum. I'm also not that great at reading these, so let me know if I fuck up or misinterpret something.

I encourage you to read the study, especially the 'discussion' section, it's not very long.

Here are some excerpts I found interesting and my thoughts on them-

Male contests showed directional selection favoring increased
girth and vocal masculinity (Fig. 1,Table 1B). There was also
significant disruptive (positive quadratic) selection on facial mascu-
linity (Fig. 1,Table 1B), as well as negative correlational selection
between girth and facial masculinity (Table 1B).

'Dominance' was related to girth (IE muscularity) and a deep voice, and then you either had to have a very masculine face, or a very feminine face AND be very girthy to be judged more dominant.

Female choice exerted directional (linear) selection favoring
height (Fig. 1,Table 1A). There was also negative correlational
selection between girth and facial and vocal masculinity (Table 1A): as
girth increased, men with lower facial and vocal masculinity became
more attractive.

'Attractiveness' was related to height, (and also face of course, if you look at the tables).

Female choice exerted positive directional selection on height and
stabilizing selection on an eigenvector that was heavily weighted by
girth. These results corroborate previous research finding that women
prefer taller males particularly for short-term mating (Pawlowski &
Jasienska, 2005), and that they prefer men of intermediate brawniness
(Frederick & Haselton, 2007). Moreover, both multiple regression
analysis and canonical analysis indicated selection under female
choice for negative covariance between girth and facial and vocal
masculinity, suggesting that the brawnier a man is, the more
important it is for him to have a feminine face and voice, and vice
versa. Female choice favored more attractive, but not more masculine,
faces and voices, and facial attractiveness became more important as
height increased.
These results indicate that beyond height, masculine
features tend not to make independent positive contributions to
success under female choice, suggesting that other factors may have
operated in the selection of masculine traits in men.

So basically if you have a nerdy face, you need to lift, but if you have a good face, it's better for you not to lift (as much?).

These results suggest stronger sexual selection through male
contests than female choice in the population studied.

At the same time, these results appear incompatible with the
apparent autonomy with which Western women choose their mates.
One possibility is that female choice determines men's mating
success, but women choose dominant men (i.e., men's attractiveness
and dominance are functionally equivalent). However, women
preferred different traits from those favored under male contests,
and dominance rather than attractiveness predicted men's mating
Another possibility is that women choose from among
dominant men—that is, men's attractiveness and dominance posi-
tively interact, so that the influence of attractiveness on mating
success increases with increasing dominance. However, in predicting
mating success, we observed no statistically significant selection for
positive covariance between attractiveness and dominance: in fact, if
anything, the correlational selection gradient was negative in sign.
Nevertheless, perhaps women rate men's sexual attractiveness
differently from how they ultimately choose

It's possible that women say they find one thing but respond well to something different, but regardless, the 'dominance' trait seemed to be a better indicator of reproductive success, which seems like it's something we have a degree of conscious control over.

My take away from this is if you're not naturally masculine, you should go to the gym and talk with a lower voice, while if you'r naturally tall and handsome, you can get away with being more of effeminate (in fact it's desirable).

study link: https://www.researchgate.net/public..._and_form_of_sexual_selection_on_men's_traits
  • +1
Reactions: jefferson
Too long to read would be more interesting if you provided some pics like my high iqcel nigga @x69 . You should learn from him tbh
It's ogre ngl
Damn, cuck, you failed at this one :feelsrope:might as well report this for not suiting my taste
  • +1
Reactions: Deleted member 6401
As always DOM theory>>>>prettyboi theory

My take away from this is if you're not naturally masculine, you should go to the gym and talk with a lower voice, while if you'r naturally tall and handsome, you can get away with being more of effeminate (in fact it's desirable).
This is a demonstration of the "moderation" theory, which has some truth in it because women would be actualy scared of a 6'8" 24" shoulders 10" dick zetachad, you got to be a very high E woman to be able to uphold that man, it would be too much "man" for the average woman to handle, that's why I think that in the majority of cases chadlites get it better than full blown chads ngl (not saying that full chad is fucked, not in the least)
  • +1
Reactions: .👽. and Deleted member 6401

Similar threads


Users who are viewing this thread