Andrew Huberman· PhD
"men respond more favorably to a woman’s scent (Kuukasjärvi et al., 2004) or facial appearance (Roberts et al., 2004) during the preovulatory phase of the woman’s cycle"
Loading…
The evidence is convergent. Multiple independent sources reach the same conclusion, the underlying mechanism is well-characterized, and even the field's most cautious voices treat it as worth doing.
"men respond more favorably to a woman’s scent (Kuukasjärvi et al., 2004) or facial appearance (Roberts et al., 2004) during the preovulatory phase of the woman’s cycle"
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
a woman is taking oral contraception, it prevented that peak and perceived attractiveness by the men, meaning men no longer perceived a woman to be more attractive at a particular phase of their cycle. And also women taking oral contraception no longer preferred the odors of more symmetrical men during the pre-ovulatory phase of their cycle.
But the basic finding is that depending on where women are in their menstrual cycle, influences both men's perception of them as attractive and their perception of men as attractive and oral contraception eliminates that effect.
but when women were on oral contraception presumably estrogen progestin type oral contraception that that effect um was smeared they had a not a statistically significant tendency to choose the quote unquote more masculine faces