Slashdot Mirror
Women Get Lots of Info From Male Faces
dtjohnson writes "Researchers
at UC Santa Barbara have found
that women have a remarkable ability to assess a man's testosterone
levels and his interest in fathering children by looking at his facial
features. Sixty-nine percent of the women were able to correctly
judge a man's interest in having children merely by looking at cues on
photograph's of his facial features. Saliva samples were also
taken from each man in the study and tested for testosterone with a
$2,000-a-pop test. The women in the study were able to correctly
identify the men with the highest testosterone levels just by looking
at their photographs. Of course, the study did not look at
what men were able to tell about women by looking at photographs
of their female body parts."
How about using a proper source for this study?
The summary (and the linked articles) are so sensationalised it is ridiculous.
The BBC have a slightly better written article:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4751501.stm
So what we have here is researchers have discovered what physical attributes of men women find attractive (whether they want short term or long term relationships). Just as it is known what physical attributes of women men find attractive.
So women don't just want a "nice on the inside" type of man.
it is only after a long journey that you know the strength of the horse.
"Researchers [CC] at U Name It have found that women have a remarkable ability to assess a man's finance levels and his interest in making women feel good by looking at how much money he spends. Sixty-nine percent of the women were able to correctly judge a man's ability to buy them diamonds merely by looking at cues in his wallet. Spending samples were also taken from each man in the study and tested for wanton spending on women with a $2,000-a-pop test. The women in the study were able to correctly identify the men with the highest spending levels just by looking at their wallets. Of course, the study did not look at what men were able to tell about women by looking at photographs of their female body parts, though further study is being considered at several men's clubs around the country."
Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
Acne, tounge hanging out, perspiration drops on forehead...
J
And men with beards? What do they want?
That which does not kill me only postpones the inevitable.
Just looking at a face? You sure women didn't look down also?
A group of 29 undergraduate students hardly seems enough to be able to generalize the results to the entire female gender.
Everything I need to know about copyrights I learned from Slashdot.
"And men with beards? What do they want?"
To overthrow the US.
we'll confirm what Maureen Dowd has always known: women can read men's minds!
--- Grow a pair, liberals... stop letting the Republicans bully you!
Alarmingly women's attractiveness judgments specifically track both men's affinity for children and men's hormone concentrations, like him?
Please stop entering code 2,2,7,6,6,4
Men can't tell what a woman wants by looking at a picture...or anything else, since women don't know what they want!
Sorry, I just couldn't concentrate.
Show me on the doll where his noodly appendage touched you.
You might want to link to a more reliable news source... Honestly, do you trust a paper whose main attraction is "The Wednesday Hump", a weekly sex column? http://www.dailynexus.com/opinion/2006/11667.html
It works like that in the animal world too. Female dogs, for example, get lots of information from male dog's feces.
Women Get Lots of Info From Male Feces
Maybe I'm spending too much time on Fark...
"Empathise with stupidity, and you're halfway to thinking like an idiot." - Iain M. Banks
I can usually tell a lot about a woman's desire to have children if I see certain body parts.
Those who know, do not speak. Those who speak, do not know. ~Lao Tzu
Women are able to judge someone with aggressive genes that can father a strong child, then pick a sucker to stand with her to raise them.
That is why you keep access codes from university to use wherever you go. I have ones that work for the last 3 insititutions I went to.
An Education is the Font of All Liberty
That says, "Preganator".
An Education is the Font of All Liberty
No wonder women are slapping me in the face all the time.
Rather then testing wich photograph someone likes better perhaps a better test to see if a male is truly intrested in being a father is to see if he is one? Baby pictures are cute. Crying shitting sex-ruining babies are not.
As for what women find more attractive. Well wasn't there another study not so long ago that claimed that it depended on the point in their cycle? So what point in their cycle where these women on?
Personally I think the result of 60% is to close to 50% wich you could easily reach by flipping a coin. Throw in a few extreme photos of men and you got a winner. Michael Jackson vs Bob Sapp (girly man vs the guy that is gonna be your bunk mate in federal jail).
Not so hard to judge the hormone levels there eh?
Did the study look at how these women that guessed right actually did in there personal lives? Any single mothers or battered women? Oh they were students. Any of them been date raped?
Frankly this study seems totally worthless. Offcourse you can tell hormones from facial features. Duh, everyone knows that it is hormones that decide your body build. Just swallow the opposites sex hormones for a while to find out.
And testing men for the desire to be a father by showing them cute baby pictures is just stupid. Ask them "It has been 8 months since you last had sex, 2 months since you last had a full nights sleep, the baby is crying and your wive asks you to get out while she has been at home all day doing shit all and you been working hard to pay for that bloody nurse that costs a fortune and need to go to work again in 2 hours. Do you love your baby now (that probably ain't yours anyway because women like guys with manly faces not saps like you) sucker?".
That would be a proper test. If women were capable of doing such a test we wouldn't have so many single mothers living of benefits. Social security is a good thing and I am willing to pay for it but only if I am allowed to think people who need it are a bunch of fuckwads.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
I have a problem with these studies, mainly, that the method used to "test" a particular factor often does not take into account other factors. For example people with higher testosterone levels tend to have more square faces. Can this account for women being able to tell whether a man has higher levels of testosterone?
Fool me once...shame on you, fool me twice...won't be fooled again (our president)
I've heard of those.
// oops
++nerdMythLevel;
Words cannot express my bewilderment.
http://outcampaign.org/
... then why are we so often told the female initiated divorce rate is so high (over 50% when I heard last. sorry no sources). If they were *that* good at picking spouses, then you'd think that you'd see more guys initiating divorces than women, right ?
... more than a little harsh in my view).
Am I missing something ? (and please spare the "women don't know what they want" comments
Servlet v2.4 container in a single 161KB jar file ? Try Winstone
69% of women were able to correctly identify their husbands purely by the sound and odor of their flatulence.
More at 6...
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
"Sit on my face and tell me that you love me." --Monty Python
The usual pale face with the dark shadows under the eyes and the three days growth or the nasty sunburn I'm wearing right now?
And why do I automatically reduce all such topics to "who can I get a woman?"?. Oh right, I'm posting on /.!
"Of course, the study did not look at what men were able to tell about women by looking at photographs of their female body parts."
Well, I can look at a chick's beard and tell she's got lotsa testosterone.
"I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)
From TFA
Additionally, researchers presented the male subjects with a picture of a baby and a picture of an adult, and were asked which picture they preferred: About nine out of 10 men chose the baby picture, roughly 12 percent expressed no interest in the baby picture, and the remaining subjects had a range of interest.
When I last did maths nine out of ten = 90%, so
It makes you wonder how good the research is when the can't get the basic maths right!
init 11 - for when you need that edge.
How about using a proper source for this study?
The summary (and the linked articles) are so sensationalised it is ridiculous.
The BBC have a slightly better written article
Better yet, here's the actual research abstract and article published in the Proceedings of the Royal Society B. The article seems to be accessible without an institutional subscription, but just in case, here's the abstract text:
Reading men's faces: women's mate attractiveness judgments track men's testosterone and interest in infants
James R. Roney, Katherine N. Hanson, Kristina M. Durante, Dario Maestripieri
This study investigated whether women track possible cues of paternal and genetic quality in men's faces and then map perception of those cues onto mate attractiveness judgments. Men's testosterone concentrations served as a proxy for genetic quality given evidence that this hormone signals immunocompetence, and men's scores on an interest in infants test were chosen as prima facie markers of paternal quality. Women's perceptions of facial photographs of these men were in fact sensitive to these two variables: men's scores on the interest in infants test significantly predicted women's ratings of the photos for how much the men like children, and men's testosterone concentrations significantly predicted women's ratings of the men's faces for masculinity. Furthermore, men's actual and perceived affinity for children predicted women's long-term mate attractiveness judgments, while men's testosterone and perceived masculinity predicted women's short-term mate attractiveness judgments. These results suggest that women can detect facial cues of men's hormone concentrations and affinity for children, and that women use perception of these cues to form mate attractiveness judgments.
On a related note, this reminds me of research previously done linking finger-length ratios with things like testosterone levels, sexual orientation, and male aggressiveness.
Worth a try?
In another study it has been found that women are very able at reading a man's williness to have sex from his face.
One participant in this study commented: "I just kept saying 'is willing' for each and every photo they showed me. In the end they told me i got every one of them right."
Another participant said that "this was just too easy" and that "the hanging drewling tongues and the eager looks or their [the men in the photos] faces where dead giveways".
Undisclousured sources told us of having overheard the main researcher on this study comment to his assistant that "this is our best scheme for getting girls phone numbers ever".
I think I need glasses. I read "Women Get Lots of Info From Male Feces". Can't they just ask?
A saliva test for testosterone level doesn't cost "$2,000-a-pop".
From the article: "The men's testosterone tests were around a couple thousand dollars", Psychology Assistant Professor James Roney said. That means all the pops totaled $2K.
(||) Nehmo (||)
...gives research a bad name.
Who funded their work? Who do they answer too? Why aren't they FIRED, FIRED FIRED!?
More importantly- what legitimate research was overlooked so that this heaping, steaming pile of dung could be funded?
Wonder why we haven't cured AIDS or have an engine that gets 100 MPG? Well, there's your answer.
Is that a SCSI connector or are you just glad to see me?
Which percentage of *men* were able to judge the men with the highest testosterone levels by looking at the photographs? I would not be surprised if guessing this by looking at someone's physical traits (jaw squareness, beard growth, ...) does not require some special capability specific to women.
But let the record show that I laughed long and hard at that.
And even now, having wiped the coffee from my KVM, I am snickering.
Thanks!
Did anyone else read this as Women Get Lots of Info From Male Faeces?
Women have faces? Never noticed.
LOL. The only post to say something sensible about the crap pseudo-science study and the state of science funding in the US in general, and it gets modded as flamebait.
That's not Science, Feynman would spin in his grave.
Par for the course for Slashdot moderators not to realize that though.
Old Slashdotter to young slashdotters: do not get saddled with a ready made family. Do not get in the situation of being financially responsible for an alpha's seed.
... then you not interested. ... then you not interested.
When a single mother coworker hits on you
When a female coworker tries to set you up with her single mother (friend/daughter/neighbor)
Trust me and not your penis! Avoid these women like the avian flu. They'll stop f*cking you a month after the wedding. They will ruin your life and drain you financially.
yeah.... guys looking at body parts of women can affect testorone levels in guys.
anyone want to join in that testing?
disclaimer: joining such a test group doesn't mean it'll be pictures of playboy models....
You don't need to look at the face, just the fingers. (Queue hundreds of Slashdotters staring at their hands)
Women Get Lots of Info From Male Faeces
Apparently the study hasn't been peer reviewed or published yet. Its not listed in PsychINFO, or ebsco. Even if it was published a few days ago it should be listed. Although James Roney does have about 10 other studies to his name - all appearing to do with human mating behaviors. I tend to not trust things until they've been peer-reviewed. Call me picky.
As a woman, I am as insulted by the suggestion that I'm just out to find a man to be a good father as many men are at the suggestion that they just looks for big breasts and the like. This study wasn't looking at which men women would really date - it looked at their reaction to pictures. Whooptefreakingdo.
Perhaps I'm spoiled by having a lot of intelligent female friends, but we're looking for someone to spend time with, not just someone to make a baby with.
While our crack team of experts work to dig up the sketchy source of this disinformation, I would like to announce that researchers at U of Billco have discovered that men have a remarkable ability to assess a women's bitchiness levels and their interest in no-string-attached sex merely by looking at their facial features. 69 percent of men were able to correctly identify psychos based on early skin wrinkling and fake tans. Saliva samples were also taken from each woman in the study and tested for rabies with a $20-a-pop test. Of course, the study did not look at what women were able to tell about men by conniving with their exes.
-Billco, Fnarg.com
"Maybe because testosterone level and willingness to have children are not the most important things when it comes to a happy marriage?"
True, but any theory that starts with "survival of the fittest" doesn't concern itself with things like "happy marriage".
Actually, in my half vast experience, women do know what they want. Eventually. It's a question of timing. They know what they want when they know what they want. The rest of the time, well, they don't even know that they want anything at all.
Here's an example. I know a female who owned a very nice, late model automobile. It had low miles, all the options, looked great and ran like it was brand new. She never talked about cars, let alone getting a new one.
One day, while she was out to lunch, she happened to drive past the Mercedes-Benz dealer. Two days later, she shows up in a new SLK 350. Apparently, she didn't even know she wanted a new car until she saw this one. Then it became an imperative. She didn't just want this car, she needed this car. More importantly, she deserved this car because of all the hard work she'd been doing and her diligence in maintaining her finances.
The key here is that she didn't know she wanted a new car until she wanted a new car. See?
--
High L
--- Jason Olshefsky
Karma: Poser (mostly affected by adding this line long after everyone else did)
Seriously, if you have to make major alterations to your lifestyle in order to keep your wife/girfriend happy, then you chose the wrong wife/girlfriend.
Your signifigant other and you should share goals and lifestyles; you should click into each other's lives with little to no behavioural modification for either party.
Your primary disagreements should be about *timing*, not philosophy - ie, you both want to do X, and the only real question is "when?". If you want X and she wants Y... problem.
Note that I'm talking in broad strokes here. Both of you will have to modifiy little bits of your behaviour as "social grease" to help make it easier to get along. There is plenty of give and take in a good marriage. But the give and take should be over small stuff, not major life issues & choices.
I was one of those guys who tried to overhaul his personality to fit the needs and wants of the Girl of the Moment, and that only ever led to tears. Once I decided to be me, and to find a girl that fit me the way I was (and vice versa) I met my wife and I've been blissfully happy (on the marital front at least) ever since.
I think a lot of guys, particularly technical, goal-oriented guys, get focussed on "making the relationship work" and start making these big personal sacrifices to that end, thinking that it gets them points. It doesn't. If you have to make radical alterations to who you are in order to keep your girlfriend, then let her go and find one who likes you as you are.
DG
Want to learn about race cars? Read my Book
I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word
Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me
Believe in the LORD your God, so shall ye be established; believe his prophets, so shall ye prosper
By inviting logic into your realm, you have forsaken your own holiness and been cast down to the depths of Slashdot! Whither in thine own trolldom, and despair!
..and someone better than me has already ripped it apart.
The general rule is that if you want to find the source you just follow the river. That rule applies to streams of bullshit, too.
I scream. You scream. I assume that means we're both acquainted with the problem. We proceed.
Let's face it... the equation goes like so:
- Chick screws rugged non-provider.
- Non-provider runs off to screw some other dumbass broad.
- Chick hooks some poor slob into raising knuckle-dragger's offspring.
- Nice guy teaches kid to play catch.
- Kid flips out and bludgeons nice guy screaming, "You're not my real father, you fucking dodo!"
- Kid grows up and finds dumbass chick to breed.
- Rinse and repeat.
I scream. You scream. I assume that means we're both acquainted with the problem. We proceed.
...this magical dope-smoking, playstation-playing, tech-mad, sex-loving female?
"Of course, the study did not look at what men were able to tell about women by looking at photographs of their female body parts."
...mmm beer... ...football game on... ..oh man look at the hooters on her..."
Manthought, "Boy! I'd like to stick my...
Slashdotmanthought, "I better get some Kleenex."
"You'll get nothing, and you'll like it!"
All they'd get from it is "man, he is UGLY"!
Not to turn the snark abruptly off, but Malcolm Gladwell wrote a hella good article about facial cues a few years ago: http://www.gladwell.com/2002/2002_08_05_a_face.htm
I don't find any of this hard to believe. If we didn't subconsciously give away cues to our personalities, how would animation work? Or for that matter, acting? I think it's easy to be scared at just how much we do give away.
I think we are in perfect agreement on the core concepts, but we seem to differ on the terminology.
:) but life is too short to try and make major changes to somebody else's personality, and the attempt almost NEVER works.
And maybe on this - yes, maybe you really are an arrogant asshole who NEEDS to change in order to become a better person. But that is YOUR responsibility, and you will have to realize the necessity and then actualize the change more or less on your own, or it'll never take.
Because if your girlfriend is attempting to change you away from that sort of behaviour... flip it around to her perspective. Now SHE is breaking the "I can change him!" rule and SHE is in danger of having it end in tears.
You cannot force major changes in behavioral philosophy in the context of a relationship. You can help someone who *wants* to change themself, and you can make minor changes (for example, I'm a lot better about leaving dirty socks lying around than I once was
You time is much better spent finding the person who is a match for your personality - or if it is YOU who are the problem, making the changes to your personality yourself.
Big agreement on "deep mutual respect and completely honest communication" though. If that respect and honesty are not there, LEAVE.
I know a lot of guys who got into horrible relationships because they convinced themselves that the girl was their last chance, and they made sacrifice after sacrifice after sacrifice to try and keep her around - and then one day the boom gets lowered and they are heartbroken ON TOP OF all those months/years of suffering. There's no such thing as a "last chance" or "only hope" - learn to walk away! It's not personal failure to realize that the relationship isn't working.
While I'm at it, the phrase "she's out of my league" needs to be stricken from the language: the concept is fundamentally bogus. Why be self-limiting? Chase the one you want. And if she isn't interested, shrug and move on.
DG
Want to learn about race cars? Read my Book
"deities and their buddies"
If you were a deity, that would be "deities and our buddies". Though omnipotence means the power to make mistakes in every post.
--
make install -not war
Hmm, it looks like the researches only tested woman for perception of these features. I wonder whether men would be as good?
All the publicity makes this out as a kind of mate selection, battle of the sexes thing -- when there's nothing in this research to show that it isn't just that all humans are good at perceiving hormone levels and infant attentiveness.
So why did they only use women in their perception sample group? Sheesh.
Even correcting for the usual high background levels of bitter misogyny on Slashdot -- and I've been reading it so long I seldom even notice it anymore -- you are in serious need of help.
This kinda reminds me a quote about Reganomics. It went something like: "Pretend this apple is our National income. Take the apple and cut it in half. The first half of the apple is for the National Budget, the second half is for National Defense, and the other half is for the National Debt."
Karma: NaN
I'm probably the only one, but I read the title as "Women Get Lots of Info From Male Feces". Which did seem a lot more interesting than the actual subject. A subject that I have seen tested at least 5 years ago. Not to mention that it seems like common sense that the #1 hormone effecting male development effects the features of the face, and that women would be able to detect the differences.
Swoogan
sigs are for losers...and ppl who can think of one.
I know that there are people who like me with "all settings set to default", yet I stick to the approach you guys have been criticizing. The interesting thing is that I have conducted a minor research on the topic ( http://area51.cimaea.nl/arhiva/2006/03/perfect.ht
The weird part is that I do understand that this is a bad|inefficient|not-optimal|.. strategy (not only judging by your comments, but also as a conclusion I made from the things I've been thru), but deep inside I believe that I am flexible enough to be with anyone...
Eh well, I just wanted to thank you for the informative posts, I'll have new material for analysis
* minor usually becomes major, according to
The saddest poem
What do men with beards want? They want GNU!
... laugh ;-)
It's funny
OS X, Linux, Tivo, Amiga, my fascination with cult-like technologies would intrigue any psychiatrist.
It totally IS a fluff piece. The findings may be perfectly valid, but did you see those sample sizes? TFA doesn't talk about their methods hardly at all, but this appeared on the front of YESTERDAY's St Paul Pioneer Press, and there were less than 50 of each gender of test subjects, and all the females were college age. I'd like to see a study done on women 35-46, the category I date in.
O~ Him that studies revenge keeps his own wounds green. -- Francis Bacon
My stats may be a bit rusty, but jesus! A sample size of 29 undergraduate students? Come on. And we draw conclusions from this? A sample of size of 29K with 50K mens faces, then maybe I'd look twice.
PUA, sarging, dd, style, mystery, rj etc
get ahead in the game