This study assessed the effects of short- and long-term mating contexts on preferences for body characteristics of potential relationship partners in lesbians and heterosexual women. Lesbians (n = 41) rated figure drawings and computer-generated images of women that varied in body fat, waist-to-hip ratio, and breast size; heterosexual women (n = 95) rated computer-generated images of men that varied in muscularity and body fat. Both lesbians and heterosexual women showed a shift in preferences toward more physically attractive partners for short-term relationships. All body aspects were affected, except that heterosexual women did not show a preference shift for male body fat. The results were interpreted in terms of a mating trade-off strategy in which mate preferences are the consequence of cost/benefit analyses and suggest that preferences for physical attributes of sexual partners may be shared by members of the same sex regardless of sexual orientation.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BaileyJ. M.GaulinS.AgyeiY., & GladueB. A. (1994) Effects of gender and sexual orientation on evolutionarily relevant aspects of human mating psychology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 1081–1093.
2.
BaileyN. W., & ZukM. (2009) Same-sex sexual behavior and evolution. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 24(8), 439–446.
3.
BhasinS. (2003) Regulation of body composition by androgens. Journal of Endocrinological Investigation, 26, 814–822.
4.
BraunJ. E, & BryanA. (2006) Female waist-to-hip and male waist-to-shoulder ratios as determinants of romantic partner desirability. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 23, 805–819.
5.
BussD. M. (1994) The evolution of desire: strategies of human mating.New York: Basic Books.
6.
CohenA. B., & TannenbaumI. J. (2001) Lesbian and bisexual women's judgments of the attractiveness of different body types. The Journal of Sex Research, 38, 226–232.
7.
FletcherG. J. O.TitherJ. M.O'LoughlinCFriesenM., & OverallN. (2004) Warm and homely or cold and beautiful? Sex differences in trading off traits in mate selection. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 659–672.
8.
FrederickD. A.BuchananG. M.Sadehgi-AzarL.PeplauL. A.HaseltonM. G.BerezovskayaA., & LipinskiR. E. (2007) Desiring the muscular ideal: men's body satisfaction in the United States, Ukraine, and Ghana. Psychology of Men and Masculinity, 8(2), 103–117.
9.
FrederickD. A.FesslerD. M. T., & HaseltonM. G. (2005) Do representations of male muscularity differ in men's and women's magazines?Body Image, 2, 81–86.
10.
FrederickD. A., & HaseltonM. G. (2007) Why is muscularity sexy? Tests of the fitness indicator hypothesis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 1167–1183.
11.
FrederickD. A., & PeplauL. A. (2007) The UCLA Body Matrices: II. Computer-generated images of men and women varying in body fat and muscularity/breast size to assess body satisfaction and preferences.Memphis, TN: Society for Personality and Social Psychology.
12.
GangestadS. W., & SimpsonJ. A. (2000) The evolution of human mating: trade-offs and strategic pluralism. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23, 573–587.
13.
GangestadS. W., & ThornhillR. (1997) The evolutionary psychology of extrapair sex: the role of fluctuating asymmetry. Evolution and Human Behavior, 18, 69–88.
14.
HarrisonK. (2003) Television viewers' ideal body proportions: the case of the curvaceously thin woman. Sex Roles, 48, 255–264.
15.
HenssR. (1995) Waist-to-hip ratio and attractiveness: replication and extension. Personality and Individual Differences, 19, 479–488.
16.
JanowiakJ. M.HillE. M., & DonovanR. P. (1992) The effects of sex and sexual orientation on attractiveness judgments: an evolutionary interpretation. Ethology and Sociobiology, 13, 73–85.
17.
JasienskaG.ZiomkiewiczA.EllisonP. T.LipsonS. F., & ThuneI. (2004) Large breasts and narrow waists indicate high reproductive potential in women. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B: Biological Sciences, 271, 1213–1217.
18.
KenrickD. T.GrothG. E.TrostM. R., & SadallaE. K. (1993) Integrating evolutionary and social exchange perspectives on relationship: effects of gender, self-appraisal, and involvement level on mate selection criteria. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 951–969.
19.
LegenbauerT.VocksS.SchaferC.Schutt-StromelS.HillerW.WagnerC., & VogeleC. (2009) Preference for attractiveness and thinness in a partner: influence of internalization of the thin ideal and shape/weight dissatisfaction in heterosexual women, heterosexual men, lesbians, and gay men. Body Image, 6, 228–234.
20.
LiN. P., & KenrickD. T. (2006) Sex similarities and differences in preferences for short-term mates: what, whether, and why. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 468–489.
21.
LippaR. (2007) The preferred traits of mates in a cross-national study of heterosexual and homosexual men and women: an examination of biological and cultural influences. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 36, 193–208.
22.
MaiseyD. S.ValeE. L. E.CornelissenP. L., & ToveeM. J. (1999) Characteristics of male attractiveness for women. Lancet, 353, 1500.
23.
MarloweF., & WetsmanA. (2001) Preferred waist-to-hip ratio and ecology. Personality and Individual Differences, 30, 481–489.
24.
PawlowskiB., & DunbarR. I. M. (1999) Impact of market value on human mate choice decisions. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B: Biological Sciences, 266, 281–285.
25.
ReganP. C. (1998) What if you can't get what you want? Willingness to compromise ideal mate selection standards as a function of sex, mate value, and relationship context. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 1294–1303.
26.
ReganP. C., & BerscheidE. (1997) Gender differences in characteristics desired in a potential sexual and marriage partner. Journal of Psychology and Human Sexuality, 9, 25–37.
27.
ReganP. C.MedinaR., & JoshiA. (2001) Partner preferences among homosexual men and women: what is desirable in a sex partner is not necessarily desirable in a romantic partner. Social Behavior and Personality, 29, 625–633.
28.
SinghD., & YoungR. K. (1995) Body weight, waist-to-hip ratio, breasts, and hips: role in judgments of female attractiveness and desirability for relationships. Ethology and Sociobiology, 16, 483–507.
29.
SwamiV.SmithJ.TsiokrisA.GeorgiadesCSangareauY.ToveeM. J., & FurnhamA. (2007) Male physical attractiveness in Britain and Greece. The Journal of Social Psychology, 147, 15–26.
30.
SwamiV., & ToveeM. J. (2005) Male physical attractiveness in Britain and Malaysia: a cross-cultural study. Body Image, 2, 383–393.
31.
SwamiV., & ToveeM. J. (2006) The influence of Body Mass Index on the physical attractiveness preferences of feminist and nonfeminist heterosexual women and lesbians. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 30, 252–257.
32.
SymonsD. (1979) The evolution of human sexuality.New York: Oxford Univer. Press.
33.
ToveeM. J., & CornelissenP. L. (2001) Female and male perceptions of female physical attractiveness in front-view and profile. British Journal of Psychology, 92, 391–402.
34.
UdryJ. R., & EcklandB. K. (1984) Benefits of being attractive: differential payoffs for men and women. Psychological Reports, 54, 47–56.
35.
WaynforthD.DelwadiaS., & CammM. (2005) The influence of women's mating strategies on preference for masculine facial architecture. Evolution and Human Behavior, 26, 409–416.
