Why is muscularity sexy? Tests of the fitness indicator hypothesis
- PMID: 17578932
- DOI: 10.1177/0146167207303022
Why is muscularity sexy? Tests of the fitness indicator hypothesis
Abstract
Evolutionary scientists propose that exaggerated secondary sexual characteristics are cues of genes that increase offspring viability or reproductive success. In six studies the hypothesis that muscularity is one such cue is tested. As predicted, women rate muscular men as sexier, more physically dominant and volatile, and less committed to their mates than nonmuscular men. Consistent with the inverted-U hypothesis of masculine traits, men with moderate muscularity are rated most attractive. Consistent with past research on fitness cues, across two measures, women indicate that their most recent short-term sex partners were more muscular than their other sex partners (ds = .36, .47). Across three studies, when controlling for other characteristics (e.g., body fat), muscular men rate their bodies as sexier to women (partial rs = .49-.62) and report more lifetime sex partners (partial rs = .20-.27), short-term partners (partial rs = .25-.28), and more affairs with mated women (partial r = .28).
Similar articles
-
Human physique and sexual attractiveness in men and women: a New Zealand-U.S. comparative study.Arch Sex Behav. 2010 Jun;39(3):798-806. doi: 10.1007/s10508-008-9441-y. Epub 2009 Jan 13. Arch Sex Behav. 2010. PMID: 19139985
-
Human physique and sexual attractiveness: sexual preferences of men and women in Bakossiland, Cameroon.Arch Sex Behav. 2007 Jun;36(3):369-75. doi: 10.1007/s10508-006-9093-8. Epub 2006 Nov 30. Arch Sex Behav. 2007. PMID: 17136587
-
The preferred traits of mates in a cross-national study of heterosexual and homosexual men and women: an examination of biological and cultural influences.Arch Sex Behav. 2007 Apr;36(2):193-208. doi: 10.1007/s10508-006-9151-2. Arch Sex Behav. 2007. PMID: 17380374
-
Sociosexuality in women and preference for facial masculinization and somatotype in men.Arch Sex Behav. 2006 Jun;35(3):305-12. doi: 10.1007/s10508-006-9029-3. Epub 2006 Jun 24. Arch Sex Behav. 2006. PMID: 16799836
-
[Body image in homosexual persons].Psychiatr Pol. 2009 Jan-Feb;43(1):99-107. Psychiatr Pol. 2009. PMID: 19694404 Review. Polish.
Cited by
-
The Value of Integrating Evolutionary and Sociocultural Perspectives on Body Image.Arch Sex Behav. 2022 Jan;51(1):57-66. doi: 10.1007/s10508-021-01947-4. Epub 2021 Mar 9. Arch Sex Behav. 2022. PMID: 33751287 No abstract available.
-
The Influence of Body Composition Effects on Male Facial Masculinity and Attractiveness.Front Psychol. 2019 Jan 4;9:2658. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02658. eCollection 2018. Front Psychol. 2019. PMID: 30662423 Free PMC article.
-
Darwin Versus Wallace: Esthetic Evolution and Preferential Mate Choice.Front Psychol. 2022 May 25;13:862385. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.862385. eCollection 2022. Front Psychol. 2022. PMID: 35693523 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Human roars communicate upper-body strength more effectively than do screams or aggressive and distressed speech.PLoS One. 2019 Mar 4;14(3):e0213034. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0213034. eCollection 2019. PLoS One. 2019. PMID: 30830931 Free PMC article.
-
Adaptations in humans for assessing physical strength from the voice.Proc Biol Sci. 2010 Nov 22;277(1699):3509-18. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2010.0769. Epub 2010 Jun 16. Proc Biol Sci. 2010. PMID: 20554544 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Research Materials
Miscellaneous
