Sexual Detraction
LONDON (April 9) - Members of the opposite sex can spot whether someone is after a one-night stand or something more permanent just by looking at their face, scientists said on Wednesday. On men, a square jaw, large nose and small eyes are more likely to betray the look of lust than of love. Women found men with softer features more likely to opt for commitment.
But the Durham University -led research found that while men can judge whether a woman is footloose-and-fancy-free or not, there is no common facial detail to explain it.
About 700 heterosexual people took part in the survey carried out by Durham , St. Andrews and Aberdeen universities. In one study, 72 percent of the 153 participants correctly identified the sexual attitudes of a group of men and women in their 20s after being shown photographs or facial images. Published in the journal "Evolution and Human Behaviour," the research also showed that women who were open to short-term sexual relationships were usually seen as more attractive. They tended to have wide eyes and large lips, such as the actress Angelina Jolie. Women were usually interested in men who appeared to be more likely to want a long-term relationship. The research tended to confirm earlier findings which found that women see masculine men as more likely to be unfaithful and worse at parenting. The men and women also tended to opt for complete opposites. Dr Lynda Boothroyd, from Durham University 's Psychology Department, said: "This shows that these initial impressions may be part of how we assess potential mates -- or potential rivals -- when we first meet them.
"These will then give way over time to more in-depth knowledge of that person as you get to know them better, and may change with age."
Dr Ben Jones, from the University of Aberdeen's Face Research Lab, said: "Lots of previous studies have shown that people can judge a lot about a person from their face, including things like health and even some personality traits like introversion, but this really is the first study to show that people are also sensitive to subtle facial signals about the type of romantic relationships that others might enjoy."
CHANGE FOR A BUCK?
So, this is possibly the greatest relationship loophole ever. George Costanza from ‘Seinfeld’ once made the argument that he and Jerry, if teamed up, could take on one woman in a relationship because a single man can’t do it alone. But TWO men would be better. This theory is now possibly true. Here’s my reason why. And yes, for once I’m NOT getting down on it. The reason is because guys have two sides (I know, I’ve gained many of the male sense since the operation). Let me put it into a sort of pie chart for you:
SIDE 1: Sweetness, love, kindness, adoring, happy
SIDE 2: SEX SEX SEX SEX SEX
We, as a species, are always said to have sex on our minds CONSTANTLY. And if this is true, that means with twins it may get split up. One guy is the really sweet guy and the twin is the sex crazed one. That means, they could know, because one’s all about sex and one’s all about love, that without the other half inside them, they can’t handle a woman alone. They don’t have both halves. They’re separate. This means, however, that being twins, they could hook up with a SUPER hot model or something, and the sweet guy could take the time to be there adoring her and taking care of her, while the sex crazed one comes in for the sweet down home lovin’.
And while we're at it, what do you say to an ugly person who's hitchiking on the road?
"Hey, does your face need a lift?"
I am fully aware that my logic has holes in it, especially this one. This is a HUGE leap. So let’s tear down this article a bit now, check this out:
‘About 700 heterosexual people took part in the survey carried out by Durham , St. Andrews and Aberdeen universities.’
This is ridiculous. In MANY ways. For one, apparently heterosexuals are the only ones this kind of project applies to. I’m not gay, I just appreciate their culture and think they should have the same rights. But do you ever notice in these types of surveys that it’s always HETEROSEXUAL folk? There’s a commercial that’s going around right now that really bugs me. Mostly because it’s the same kinda thing. It’s a commercial about Meth and how it can destroy your life, and in the commercial, they have all these different men sit down and talk to, what I’m assuming, is a webcam. However, they all say at some point, “I lost my man” or “my family didn’t care that I was gay” or “and because of meth, me and my boyfriend contracted HIV”. This commercial has one of two objectives.
That only gay people do meth
That they’re trying to kill two birds (probably gay birds) with one stone. They’re saying, “Don’t do meth, it will destroy your life, and by the way, don’t be gay too, that’s bad also.”
THAT’S F’ING BULL! I hate this kind of thing, it’s like racism. Racism is such a stupid idea, because it’s basically a generalization about a whole group of people based on one or two people, that to ME does not make sense. The twin thing has always confused me. Just the idea of it, sorry that I got a bit off track there for a few minutes. The twin thing. How do you deal with that? Just having twins I mean. ‘Cause it certainly can’t be an easy thing to handle. First off, do you give them both the same name so they’re identical in every single way? There are some parents who dress their twins the same, same haircuts, EVERYTHING. The cool thing about having a twin, and my life in fact, is that you can get into the most AWEFUL trouble with the law and blame it on your twin! My life, as another example, is the same way. Because I was named after my biodad (sounds like a superhero). So his name is Mark Wiland, and MY name is Mark Wiland. The same thing though! I could do the absolute worst thing in the world, and then blame it on him, and actually, mine’s better because he has a great criminal record and is still wanted, and so they’d HAVE to believe it was him! I would get off totally scott free, the only downside is that in a heartbeat he would no doubt do the same exact thing right back to me. And one more thing on the tearing down of this article before I wrap this whole thing up, this one REALLY gets to me:
‘In one study, 72 percent of the 153 participants correctly identified the sexual attitudes of a group of men and women in their 20s after being shown photographs or facial images.’
Because, and correct me if I’m wrong, isn’t this the entire idea behind PORNOGRAPHY?! Pornography, images, video or just plain images, sometimes even just audio (yes, that DOES exist, braille sex), is based upon one theory that all you have to do is watch the images or see the images and it has a few effects.
A. That it harms you and makes your relationship worse
B. That it degrades women/makes men aroused, and some women
C. Teens see it and therefore attempt to incorporate some of what they see into their own sex lives
This is another point of F’ING STUPID! I’ll take each one down with flawless logic. Okay, not flawless, but logic that’s better than YOURS. Admit it. Bitch. Point A makes the statement that it harms you and makes your relationship worse. Um, no. Sometimes couples rent/buy (I don’t know anyone who still honestly rents movies anymore) those movies to watch together, and therefore, have a healthy and fun sex life! Point B makes the argument that it degrades women. Same theory for strip clubs. Actually, it’s degrading to MEN. Who are the ones going in and throwing away money they’ve worked hard for to women just for taking their clothes off? EXF’INACTLY. Men are going broke while the women make a wonderful living, and most of these women are actually very intelligent women, which is why they have decided to pursue this career. Easy money. And finally, point C is the worst. Mostly because that can apply to ANYTHING! So, if a teen also saw in that porn flick, them rolling joints, murdering babies and sending nukes, that would make them want to do all those things? NO! It’s a bad argument by these fuckin’ soccer moms who want their kids safe from a world that they, clearly, were once involved in. Teens try stuff because it’s new, risky and adventurous. New experiences is what makes teens who they become in their adult years! Watching porn makes some realize that women should be treated with respect, and some just don’t like it and it may make other women like them more! So ya see, people are always trying to find new ways of saying teens are evil, and before you fuckers judge me, yes, I really AM on the teen side for once.
Alright, so I guess this wasn’t really about the article, it was more of the effect the article had on me. They showed me the words, and I got pissed off. Huh, what do ya know? Their idea works.
M@RK
But the Durham University -led research found that while men can judge whether a woman is footloose-and-fancy-free or not, there is no common facial detail to explain it.
About 700 heterosexual people took part in the survey carried out by Durham , St. Andrews and Aberdeen universities. In one study, 72 percent of the 153 participants correctly identified the sexual attitudes of a group of men and women in their 20s after being shown photographs or facial images. Published in the journal "Evolution and Human Behaviour," the research also showed that women who were open to short-term sexual relationships were usually seen as more attractive. They tended to have wide eyes and large lips, such as the actress Angelina Jolie. Women were usually interested in men who appeared to be more likely to want a long-term relationship. The research tended to confirm earlier findings which found that women see masculine men as more likely to be unfaithful and worse at parenting. The men and women also tended to opt for complete opposites. Dr Lynda Boothroyd, from Durham University 's Psychology Department, said: "This shows that these initial impressions may be part of how we assess potential mates -- or potential rivals -- when we first meet them.
"These will then give way over time to more in-depth knowledge of that person as you get to know them better, and may change with age."
Dr Ben Jones, from the University of Aberdeen's Face Research Lab, said: "Lots of previous studies have shown that people can judge a lot about a person from their face, including things like health and even some personality traits like introversion, but this really is the first study to show that people are also sensitive to subtle facial signals about the type of romantic relationships that others might enjoy."
CHANGE FOR A BUCK?
So, this is possibly the greatest relationship loophole ever. George Costanza from ‘Seinfeld’ once made the argument that he and Jerry, if teamed up, could take on one woman in a relationship because a single man can’t do it alone. But TWO men would be better. This theory is now possibly true. Here’s my reason why. And yes, for once I’m NOT getting down on it. The reason is because guys have two sides (I know, I’ve gained many of the male sense since the operation). Let me put it into a sort of pie chart for you:
SIDE 1: Sweetness, love, kindness, adoring, happy
SIDE 2: SEX SEX SEX SEX SEX
We, as a species, are always said to have sex on our minds CONSTANTLY. And if this is true, that means with twins it may get split up. One guy is the really sweet guy and the twin is the sex crazed one. That means, they could know, because one’s all about sex and one’s all about love, that without the other half inside them, they can’t handle a woman alone. They don’t have both halves. They’re separate. This means, however, that being twins, they could hook up with a SUPER hot model or something, and the sweet guy could take the time to be there adoring her and taking care of her, while the sex crazed one comes in for the sweet down home lovin’.
And while we're at it, what do you say to an ugly person who's hitchiking on the road?
"Hey, does your face need a lift?"
I am fully aware that my logic has holes in it, especially this one. This is a HUGE leap. So let’s tear down this article a bit now, check this out:
‘About 700 heterosexual people took part in the survey carried out by Durham , St. Andrews and Aberdeen universities.’
This is ridiculous. In MANY ways. For one, apparently heterosexuals are the only ones this kind of project applies to. I’m not gay, I just appreciate their culture and think they should have the same rights. But do you ever notice in these types of surveys that it’s always HETEROSEXUAL folk? There’s a commercial that’s going around right now that really bugs me. Mostly because it’s the same kinda thing. It’s a commercial about Meth and how it can destroy your life, and in the commercial, they have all these different men sit down and talk to, what I’m assuming, is a webcam. However, they all say at some point, “I lost my man” or “my family didn’t care that I was gay” or “and because of meth, me and my boyfriend contracted HIV”. This commercial has one of two objectives.
That only gay people do meth
That they’re trying to kill two birds (probably gay birds) with one stone. They’re saying, “Don’t do meth, it will destroy your life, and by the way, don’t be gay too, that’s bad also.”
THAT’S F’ING BULL! I hate this kind of thing, it’s like racism. Racism is such a stupid idea, because it’s basically a generalization about a whole group of people based on one or two people, that to ME does not make sense. The twin thing has always confused me. Just the idea of it, sorry that I got a bit off track there for a few minutes. The twin thing. How do you deal with that? Just having twins I mean. ‘Cause it certainly can’t be an easy thing to handle. First off, do you give them both the same name so they’re identical in every single way? There are some parents who dress their twins the same, same haircuts, EVERYTHING. The cool thing about having a twin, and my life in fact, is that you can get into the most AWEFUL trouble with the law and blame it on your twin! My life, as another example, is the same way. Because I was named after my biodad (sounds like a superhero). So his name is Mark Wiland, and MY name is Mark Wiland. The same thing though! I could do the absolute worst thing in the world, and then blame it on him, and actually, mine’s better because he has a great criminal record and is still wanted, and so they’d HAVE to believe it was him! I would get off totally scott free, the only downside is that in a heartbeat he would no doubt do the same exact thing right back to me. And one more thing on the tearing down of this article before I wrap this whole thing up, this one REALLY gets to me:
‘In one study, 72 percent of the 153 participants correctly identified the sexual attitudes of a group of men and women in their 20s after being shown photographs or facial images.’
Because, and correct me if I’m wrong, isn’t this the entire idea behind PORNOGRAPHY?! Pornography, images, video or just plain images, sometimes even just audio (yes, that DOES exist, braille sex), is based upon one theory that all you have to do is watch the images or see the images and it has a few effects.
A. That it harms you and makes your relationship worse
B. That it degrades women/makes men aroused, and some women
C. Teens see it and therefore attempt to incorporate some of what they see into their own sex lives
This is another point of F’ING STUPID! I’ll take each one down with flawless logic. Okay, not flawless, but logic that’s better than YOURS. Admit it. Bitch. Point A makes the statement that it harms you and makes your relationship worse. Um, no. Sometimes couples rent/buy (I don’t know anyone who still honestly rents movies anymore) those movies to watch together, and therefore, have a healthy and fun sex life! Point B makes the argument that it degrades women. Same theory for strip clubs. Actually, it’s degrading to MEN. Who are the ones going in and throwing away money they’ve worked hard for to women just for taking their clothes off? EXF’INACTLY. Men are going broke while the women make a wonderful living, and most of these women are actually very intelligent women, which is why they have decided to pursue this career. Easy money. And finally, point C is the worst. Mostly because that can apply to ANYTHING! So, if a teen also saw in that porn flick, them rolling joints, murdering babies and sending nukes, that would make them want to do all those things? NO! It’s a bad argument by these fuckin’ soccer moms who want their kids safe from a world that they, clearly, were once involved in. Teens try stuff because it’s new, risky and adventurous. New experiences is what makes teens who they become in their adult years! Watching porn makes some realize that women should be treated with respect, and some just don’t like it and it may make other women like them more! So ya see, people are always trying to find new ways of saying teens are evil, and before you fuckers judge me, yes, I really AM on the teen side for once.
Alright, so I guess this wasn’t really about the article, it was more of the effect the article had on me. They showed me the words, and I got pissed off. Huh, what do ya know? Their idea works.
M@RK