Sex Appeal Explained
Sex appeal: we all want it. We all recognize it. We’re all attracted to it, but what is it? Simply put, it’s the traits that we have evolved over time to broadcast reproductive and health vitality cues to the opposite sex. This is done visually, auditorially, olfactorily and kinesthetically. We subconsciously pick up on minor cues that tell us when, for instance, a woman is more fertile, or a man’s level of testosterone. All these cues also broadcast behavioral cues about them as well as I discussed previously.
Recently I caught the program “The Science of Sex Appeal” on the Discover channel and it was really an enlightening program. The research vindicates all of the claims I’ve made about what men and women desire in each other and how assortive mating causes us to seek the best match we can in the reproductive marketplace. Time and again women refuse to concede this point, for example the debate I had here.
Is this just denial or what as it clearly contravenes the science. I’m constantly amazed how people will deny actual research in favor of ideology. Nature doesn’t care whether you approve, it just seeks optimal efficiency. Let’s all stop trying to force science to conform with our preferred flavor of pseudo-morality shall we? Your agenda has no place in science (Yes you especially, intelligent design nitwits, spare me). Science is only valuable insofar as it is objective. The science says sex appeal is universal, and biological. There’s no arguing with that.
In any case, watch the program’s clips, or better yet, find the next broadcast and view it in its entirety. It is well worth the two hours you’ll invest in it and is filled with tips to polish your game and read people more effectively. Particularly interesting to me is the discussion of Copulins. More to follow on the topic of pheromones.
Interesting post.
I don’t have discovery channel where I live, otherwise I’d catch this program on the tube.
I’d be interested to read more about pheromones and the role they play in attraction. Especially amidst an entire industry of cosmetic products devoted to convince you that your natural smell is revolting and that you need to either scrub yourself raw with various chemicals and detergents or load up on the cologne and perfume to mask your natural body scent.
Yes Carl I too am very interested in pheromones. I am researching the material and will do a writeup soon. Stay tuned!
“Nature doesn’t care whether you approve, it just seeks optimal efficiency. Let’s all stop trying to force science to conform with our preferred flavor of pseudo-morality shall we? Your agenda has no place in science…”
If you’re going to dictate what has a place in science, I’d like to see your publication list and know where you did your Ph.D.
If you don’t have a Ph.D., you don’t have a chance in hell of affecting the business rules by which science is done.
One need not produce something to study it. Nothing I discuss here requires more than undergraduate level knowledge of biology. Science is not something we dictate, like a belief, the data speaks for itself. It is the misapplication of scientific evidence to advance a cause or an agenda that I suggest is disingenuous. Professional scientists don’t typically do this because experiments have to be repeatable to have any validity. This is as it should be, unlike putting forth an assemblage of pre-selected data held together with negative arguments and sophistry and proclaiming it a “theory” such as is done by Intelligent Design proponents. If you filter your view of the world through an ideology, it prevents you from being objective. These are the people who use the phrase “I’d like to think that…” while trying to force the world to fit their ideal.
Pheromones have always interested me, but this discussion on “corpulins” or “corpulance” — the spelling seems to vary depending on the article — is downright fascinating. I have noticed that I have this effect on certain men, but not others. I also tend to prefer male bosses and leaders because of my following style, which leads them to be somewhat protective of me. It’s a bit of a symbiotic relationship.
http://www.thefutoncritic.com/news.aspx?id=20090109discovery01
Looking forward to your discussion on it.
I saw them described as copulins or copulens online, though honestly in the broadcast I (mis)heard it as copulents, as in an “agent which produces copulation.” This later actually made sense to me linguistically which may be why I heard it this way. Corpulance, on the other hand means obesity, which produces a diametrically opposed response :p
They made mention of a compound found in male sweat, for which I forget the name offhand, but which is a derivative of testosterone. Since testosterone levels influence or determine a male’s dominance and masculine characteristics (high testosterone ~ alpha male), this may be a good proxy for reproductive strategy as more masculine faces are perceived as being highly sexed men with propensity toward infidelity. Interestingly they made the point that this has a slightly acrid or sour scent that is actively repulsive to women for most of their cycle, except for when they are fertile. At this time, women were interested in this compound. This correlates with findings that women are more likely to seek extra-pair copulations with men perceived as more masculine; those with high testosterone levels. Women do all sorts of things at this time to increase their appeal such as ornamentation, increased displays of bare skin and more exaggerated movements when dancing etc.
I’m not sure copulins can be attributed causation of the correlation you are describing however. In the program they detail how they actually have the effect of reducing male discrimination, so men ranking women’s images for attractiveness when smelling them became MUCH more generous in their opinions of the women they were viewing. You might almost say that men hardly cared what she looked like when smelling them. This is key for women attempting to snare the best man she can, because a man who would normally dismiss her will be more likely to get with her then. Once the initial deed is done men on the more beta end of the spectrum will be far easier to hook into a relationship. Computer geeks beware.
The attraction you hold to men who can provide status and security is a universal one. Women with options tend in this direction, while men select women based on youth and beauty as an indicator of reproductive health. The fact that you can attract bosses and leaders tells me what I need to know about your own appeal. Were you less genetically blessed, you would need to settle for a man on a lower rung of the social ladder. We all have a biological imperative to seek the best partner available, conscious or not. If you value your security make sure not to delay too long in securing a long term partner who meets this stringent requirement, if you do not presently have one, but be prepared for the attendant increased likelihood that he will be unfaithful. If you are an American though, you hold the trump card if things didn’t work out so it’s probably better to error on the side of marriage than against, all else equal.
Ah, I added an r and got confused. The substance is spelled “copulance” on the Discovery Channel website. Regardless of the terminology, it is quite clear that some biochemical agent with this effect exists, and it seems to make perfect sense given observable data. <a href=”http://www.copulins.freeservers.com/catalog.html”.This page in particular struck me as interesting.
Being “pussy-whipped” is a commonly known phenomenon. This may be partially why some men seem so beholden and smitten with their partners who do not have exquisitely beautiful looks, even after years of being together and the initial passion may have faded. All behavior have some neurological or chemical root, and this probably acts in concert with oxytocin/dopamine to aid in male “bonding” to females.
This is a two-way biochemical warfare, though. Women also often go nuts after having sex with a man. As in the later books of the Dune series, sexual imprinting can go both ways. It is interesting that you mention the “acrid and sour” male smell, and that women tend to dislike it. I’ve smelled that on pillows in very concentrated forms, and I seemed to feel positive towards the smell at all points of my cycle.
By the way, to the original poster who mentioned “masking” with cologne and perfumes — I do not think it is quite that simple. The same perfume worn by different women will smell slightly differently. It may also be that these help intensify one’s scent, and helps the scent’s travel distance. Ordinarily you would have to be extremely close to someone in order to smell them, but with lightly worn perfume, conversation distance is sufficient. Also, wearing cologne can increase a man’s self-confidence (and the same theory likely applies to women).
Pussy whipped indeed, ha. I think there is more at work here, and of course many pheromones/hormones work in concert to generate the result. Also as you suggest we each have a unique odor, like a fingerprint, that is a cue of our immune health. We have an imperative to pair with individuals whose MHC’s are the most different from our own, and we can detect this via scent. I didn’t get into it above but this plays a strong role in the degree to which a woman responds to a man’s sweat scent. If he has a high degree of similarity, he is perceived as kin and his scent is repulsive to her regardless of cycle, but if it’s very different she will be more receptive/interested.
Your more permanent attraction to your man’s scent likely is a result of a good MHC match. Bear in mind too that in the study the scents were of strangers, in a relationship there is the factor of scent association to emotion. Scent is the sense most closely linked to the limbic system in our brains where emotions are processed. Good associations with your partner will probably trigger good feelings upon smelling him even at other times in the cycle. Also, there is the sexual imprinting as you suggest and the impacts of the bonding hormone oxytocin, the the reward center driven by vasopressin and dopamine among others. It is difficult to tease apart all of these interactions in a relationship, which is why studies typically use people unknown to each other to gauge interest.
As for perfume use, remember that most are made with some natural substances that include pheromones like musk and civet. These are probably used because the compounds within them are sufficiently close to those of humans to generate a subconscious response.
So I looked at that website you linked to for Copulins, and I must say I am skeptical. Ostensibly a “researcher” the author neither identifies herself, nor cites ANYTHING to support her claims, and they are indeed fantastic. The vast majority of sites referencing this pheromone are trying to sell it to you. I have my reservations as to whether it has anywhere near the impact this veiled researcher suggests. The scientific literature is woefully lacking from what I can find on google, but I will continue to see if I can winnow through the obvious BS and find something that can be backed by scientific literature. Otherwise I say it’s hogwash. Any valid researcher would cite sources.
As for the male testosterone derivative I mentioned was covered in the program, it is Androstenone.
I agree, there is a lot of pseudo-science in there. Any time someone says “mind control” and my skeptic radar starts going off big time. However, if you’ve read Predictably Irrational, there are various processes that can affect behavior without the person’s conscious awareness. The research cited in that book would not exactly be considered rigorous science, but the observations remain.
Darwin did not know about genomes or DNA replication processes when he developed his theories of evolution. This could just be some wack-job’s pet theories, but in concert with Discovery Channel’s program, I’m more inclined to think there is something to this. Everyone has seen and known of the result — a man seems to become “whipped” and even enjoys it — but the exact process is unknown.
All processes are ultimately biological, chemical or physical in root. Nothing is transcendent, so it’s just a matter of pinning down the exact cause or set of causes.
Agreed, the claims made there go far beyond what was mentioned in the program. I would posit a different mechanism for becoming whipped based on what I already know. It is that a beta male typically has a mate-guarding reproductive strategy, low testosterone and often lower self esteem. He’s a born follower. When a man doesn’t lead the woman typically steps up and takes control. The party with the more powerful frame sets the tone of the relationship. Many beta men have such difficulty attracting women that they get “one-itis” and lose sight of the fact that this woman is just one of many. They put them up on a pedestal and worship them. I think this dynamic can be explained psychologically without resorting to mind-control as an explanation. It is simply control period. The problem is that a man in this situation, far from perpetuating a healthy relationship tends to lose his independence and the respect of his woman and is more likely to lose her to infidelity. I’ll look into this further but I maintain this hypothesis until faced with published research to the contrary. Remarkably few results come up for any spelling variant of copulins/copulents/copulans, except for the surfeit of companies trying to sell get laid perfume additives. I’m interested to see further rigorous research however.
I liked that last comment. It made me laugh.
How ya doing? You picked the ones closed to my heart too, despite the fact I know I am guilty of #1 when I don’t pay attention.
INGENEOUS!?