TLDR: Looks count, bitch!
Chants: D.N.A., D.N.A., D.N.A., D.N.A.
“Data from almost 600 participants show that women’s perceptions of male attractiveness do not vary according to their hormone levels, in contrast with some previous research.”
Told. You. So.
A better question, how did I know this?
Years ahead of time.
(Apart from my own sample size of numero uno).
They aren’t controlling for male beauty!
In an ATTRACTIVENESS study.
It isn’t just something nurture, perceived, externally, it’s innate, it’s nature!
It’s BONE STRUCTURE.
HORMONE CYCLES DON’T DAMAGE THEIR EYE SIGHT!
The natural looks of a man draw the woman, it’s genetic fitness FFS!
(And no, packing on the muscle doesn’t really change your face).
“”We found no evidence that changes in hormone levels influence the type of men women find attractive,” say lead researcher Benedict C. Jones of the University of Glasgow.
You know, I know this might sound controversial, but someone told me once that, well, water is wet? Big if true.
Who might women find more attractive?
The richer ones? The weirder ones?
THE MORE ATTRACTIVE ONES.
[Fuck’s sake, people.]
“This study is noteworthy for its scale and scope — previous studies typically examined small samples of women using limited measures,” Jones explains. “With much larger sample sizes and direct measures of hormonal status, we weren’t able to replicate effects of hormones on women’s preferences for masculine faces.””
With a solid method, lookism is real.
We don’t like a higher-T lesbian compared to a low-T man, do we?
They’re scared to offend ugly men. It’s the current year.
Your beauty is objective and the opposite sex care.
Sorry if the social construct upsets you but we can’t help evolution, cry in a safe space free of GI Joes to trigger you about your terrible stature.