[anonymouswhitefemale]

Offshoot discussion from circumcision thread:

Sexual attraction is natures way of finding strong genetics for offspring, eg, large breasts are associated with fertility, and the same goes for more subtle details like facial structure/hair etc.

Have to disagree to a point here. If that were the case then all men would be attracted to the same females as clearly they aren't. Some men find rail thin women with zero body fat attractive, some men prefer women with curves.

As unromantic and pragmatic as it may seem, nature's programming of our brains to select out and respond to stimuli as sexually compelling or repelling simply makes good reproductive sense" . Recent studies have indicated that certain physical characteristics stimulate a part of the brain called the hypothalamus, which is followed by sensations such as elevated heart rate, perspiration, and a general feeling of sexual arousal. So what visual queues instigate these feelings of sexual arousal in men? How does it differ from what women find attractive? "A preference for youth, however, is merely the most obviously of men's preferences linked to a woman's reproductive capacity"(2). The younger the female the better the capacity for reproduction, hence attributes that males find attractive and contingent on signs of youthfulness. "Our ancestors had access to two types of observable evidence of a woman's health and youth: features of physical appearance, such as full lips, clear skin, smooth skin, clear eyes, lustrous hair, and good muscle tone, and features of behavior, such as a bouncy, youthful gait, and animated facial expressions"(2) . Cross-cultural studies have found that men, despite coming from different countries find similar traits attractive in females. Men's preferences are biologically and evolutionarily hardwired to find signs of youth and health attractive in women in order to determine which females are best suited to carry on their gene, and legacy. Healthier and more youthful women are more likely to reproduce, and be able to take care of the children after birth, hence ensuring a perpetuation of the male's gene.

Men produce sperm by the thousands, yet women produce about 400 eggs in their lifetime, and the trials of pregnancy and child rearing are long and arduous, hence their preferences and what they find sexually attractive in a male are based more on security and longevity of relationships. Athletic prowess is an important attribute to most women that hearkens back to the beginning of man. An athletic and well-muscled male is more likely to be a good hunter hence provide for a family. Large and athletic male can also provide physical protection from other males. I was speaking to one of my male friends the other day when he mentioned that when he was in a bar speaking to an attractive girl, he always lied about his profession, telling them he was either a lawyer, doctor, or investment banker. What do all of these professions have in common? Money. Women are attracted to a successful male because this is indicative of his ability to provide for a family. This is a desirable trait that is shared by females thought the animal kingdom. "When biologist Reuven Yosef arbitrarily removed portions of some males' (Gray shrike, a bird that lives in the desert of Israel) caches and added edible objects to others, females shifted to the males with the larger bounties". Yet a man has had more than just the resources to attract a female, he also has to be willing to share them. Women tend to be attracted to more generous men because this is indicative of how they will treat them in the future, a man cannot withhold his resources from a female and their offspring.

Some truth to it but it is not the end all be all of truth. If it were, then how is it that those that are considered the lesser attractive find mates? Wouldn't they be left out in the cold so to speak? How is it that what one man/woman finds attractive another may snub their nose to?

Those that are less attractive are taken as mates to those who are of less worth. Remeber, instinct isn't blind, it's adaptive. The drive is to best ensure the existance and success of your children. Therefore, if one cannot achieve success with a partner of high value, priorities shift from ideal to possible. Which is why less-attractive people still procreate. Other variations account for confidence, as one's own opinion of self worth is very important, and as such couples of unequal worth will still crop up a bit.

As for why men might prefer brunettes, or those with smaller breasts... A certain amount of sexual preference is developed through rearing, formative years etc. and are too complex for me to disect and categorise, but presumably these are small variations, similar to more prominent taste-twisting events, such as fatherless girls seeking replacement father figures, some people getting off on "damaged" people, etc - basically varying levels of fetish I suppose.

[Guest]

That's all really interesting, but all I know is that an appealing man makes me feel good. In more ways than one. It's that simple for me.

[Fallen1]

Those that are less attractive are taken as mates to those who are of less worth. Remeber, instinct isn't blind, it's adaptive. The drive is to best ensure the existance and success of your children. Therefore, if one cannot achieve success with a partner of high value, priorities shift from ideal to possible. Which is why less-attractive people still procreate. Other variations account for confidence, as one's own opinion of self worth is very important, and as such couples of unequal worth will still crop up a bit.

Nope .... still not convinced. There are plenty of "beautiful people" that choose partners that are just average and it has nothing to do with their self esteem.

The Fernandez quote you used may be an initial "rule of thumb" but I certainly don't think it is the absolute rule. A man or woman may be initially attracted to someone based on looks but once they find out what that person is all about (personality) they move on. I believe someones character/personality is the final standard at which a mate is chosen.

[libertas]

I find all of this psycho-analogy babble interesting and amusing enough, but it is by no means an entirely accurate claim ... I, for example, am attracted to both older and younger women ... both brunettes and blonds, tall and short, ect ... I find both larger and smaller breast appealing. To me, and many others I'm sure, looks certainly play a large part in initial attraction, but a woman's personality will end up playing just as large and sometimes larger role in whether or not some one is found to be attractive as a potential mate.

In my opinion, what any one person finds appealing in others is just about as unique as we are as individuals. And for that reason, it is impossible to claim any one is universally attractive or unattractive.

Just my thoughts on it.

[anonymouswhitefemale]

Nope .... still not convinced. There are plenty of "beautiful people" that choose partners that are just average and it has nothing to do with their self esteem.

Choosing life partners is a different kettle of fish to chosing a sexual partner, although sure we try to compromise as best we can. There are many reasons and factors to form a partnership, sexual attraction being one of them.

The Fernandez quote you used may be an initial "rule of thumb" but I certainly don't think it is the absolute rule.

Very little is absolute, I never claimed that these are 100% truths, laws of nature, just that it is the disposition of human programming.

A man or woman may be initially attracted to someone based on looks but once they find out what that person is all about (personality) they move on. I believe someones character/personality is the final standard at which a mate is chosen.

Yes, but remember the discussion is about sexual attraction, not attraction as a life partner.

And remember, we're talking about trends, and trends have exceptions.

[CHANDLERS WISH]

But then "sexual attraction" can be about looks, consequently chemistry and then you meet them as a person and go ahhhh.

Similarily, "sexual attraction" can come after the math, meeting a personality, getting to know the soul, then finding them sexually attractive.

I can't see where that has anything to do with the animal kingdom of whether her boobs are the best for suckling or whether he has sufficient funds to share to ensure security.

Which you state and which pertains to life long partnership.

[C]

Back years ago I had a strong sexual attraction...If I did not have this at that time, I would be telling you that this could not happen to me...Not me...I am not the type of woman that would let sex rule her...Yet I did....I was in love with my husband to be, and have always been but the animal part of me got to me and I let it all roam free....Do I regret it....NO....It was a part of me that was good and had to escape...

This was during an escape part of my life...The woman was awakening and the male showed his sexual prowess....He flirted and got bold...Open invitation and the attraction was there...The hormones raced and caution was thrown out the door...Being he was married meant nothing..Being that I was hot and wanting the unknown part of me aroused and awaken, meant everything....So I let him awaken me....Quite a few times I let him awaken me, until it stopped....

This was raw sex with a man 30 years older, nice looking, well experienced in the magic world of finance and sex...Not married until he was 38...Was I his conquest, yes.....But it was one hel* of a sexual attraction and I remember it well.....And I smile as I write this...These were my days of wine and roses and all are a part of making me who I am today....

[anonymouswhitefemale]

Chandler, evolution and the animal kingdom underpin our every facet as human beings.

And Caroline, we're talking about which elements create and/or fuel sexual attraction, not examples of it.

[C]

In the answer above it was purely hot sexual attraction...Nothing pertaining to love or the thought of love but only sex...Good or bad that is what it was....With my husband our sexual attraction was looks, we were both great looking, personality, we are both so much the same in so many ways and confidence in ourselves...plus in heat for each other the first moment we laid eyes on each other and danced....God, he was something else...

On this question by the OP I doubt that there can really be a good answer to what is sexual attraction as I, myself, feel that love leads to this wonderful feeling that you have called sex.....

Sometimes I love it having the mind of a 20 something year old woman, in the body of an older woman....It just makes me feel so young...The sad part is that youth on the Forum has to ignore and tolerate....So goes life......TC, C

[CHANDLERS WISH]

Chandler, evolution and the animal kingdom underpin our every facet as human beings.

And Caroline, we're talking about which elements create and/or fuel sexual attraction, not examples of it.

What I'm having difficulty with is your using "sexual attraction" as what both species, forsee as beneficial for the future, yet in the same breathe, it is not about partnership...

The Animal Kindgom "choose" their mates, mate them... Do the "animals" look for which one has the most appealing stripes, i mean dogs just "do it", so do rabbits... There is no rules as to looks, body size, shape...