Andrew Huberman· PhD
We know now based on the last 20 years of scientific studies, that the cues that men find attractive women are not at all arbitrary.
Loading…
The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
We know now based on the last 20 years of scientific studies, that the cues that men find attractive women are not at all arbitrary.
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.
So physical appearance provides a wealth of information about a person's health status, but also provides for men a wealth of information about a woman's fertility, her reproductive value.
Now not that men think about that consciously. I mean you men don't walk down the street and see a woman and say I find her attractive because I think she must be very fertile. They just find those cues attractive. We know now based on the last 20 years of scientific uh studies that the cues that men find attractive women are not at all arbitrary. Things like clear skin, clear eyes, symmetrical features, uh a a low waist to hip ratio, uh uh full lips, um lustrous hair. All these are qualities that are associated with youth and health and hence have have evolved to be part of our standards of attractiveness.