Psychology of Seduction

by Jesse James

  The pill is the most popular method of birth control in the US. Sixty-three percent of reproductive-age US women employ some form of birth control; one in three of those women consume oral contraceptives, with even higher usage among young adults. Roughly one out of every four women at a club or bar uses hormonal pregnancy prevention causing them to prefer MHC-similar genes.

  In a recent study, psychologists wanted to determine if women using hormonal birth control preferred men who shared similar MHC genes. They asked women to sniff a t-shirt that genetically similar men had worn for two nights in a row. Sure enough, the women reported the t-shirt scent as pleasant and desirable if they were taking the pill. Since the pill mimics the effects of pregnancy, scientists theorize that pill-taking women seek close, nurturing relatives to help them deal with the burdens of childbirth.

  Oral contraceptives raise a serious red flag for relationships. Exercise extreme caution when beginning a long-term relationship with a woman on the pill; if she suddenly stops taking birth control, or changes to a non-hormonal method of pregnancy prevention, her sexual preference will shift from ‘MHC similar’ to ‘MHC dissimilar’ genes. Your sexy good genes just turned sour, like wine to vinegar. The reverse is also true; if you met a woman while she was taking some other form of birth control, or none at all, and she suddenly goes on the pill, her feelings toward you may change abruptly. For many couples, such a volte-face in sexual attraction can be a tough pill to swallow.111

  TIP: The Divorce Pill

  If your lover goes on or off hormonal birth control, you could be in for a wild ride. Her mate preference may shift dramatically because women on the pill prefer men who are genetically similar to close relatives, while women not taking hormonal birth control prefer men with dissimilar MHC genes. Discuss this with your partner so both of you can prepare for possible changes in her attraction towards you. And get those divorce papers ready.

  How will you know if your dream lover is genetically compatible? You won’t, but she will. Unlike women, men are insensitive to the scent of the MHC gene complex. Avoid wasting your time seducing the wrong woman by ensuring that she can smell the ‘real you.’ Leave the cologne and chemical scents alone. Cologne, aftershave, scented shampoos and soaps will mask your natural pheromones, making it impossible for a woman to evaluate your genetic compatibility. Aim for smell-neutral. Foul body odor is obviously unattractive, but dousing yourself in chemicals is equally bad.

  Seducing a genetically incompatible woman involves Sisyphean struggle. Forget your money. Forget your status. Forget psychology. If your genes clash, fuhggettaboutit.

  Unfortunately, there is no such thing as a universally attractive scent – no ‘Brad Pitt’ smell. When a woman reacts to your odor, she is judging the compatibility of your MHC genes with her own. Every woman’s genes are different, so this is a relative - rather than absolute - comparison. Some women find your scent irresistibly appealing, while others think you smell like a public toilet.

  Pheromones might be the Fountain of Love. The sexual arousal power of pheromones may offer an end-run around the immutability of genetics. Androstenone is a sex pheromone found in high concentration in the saliva of male pigs. When sniffed by a female pig in heat, she quickly assumes the mating position. Androstenol is another sex pheromone found in large quantities in boar saliva. Responsible for the characteristic musk-like odor of fresh human sweat, humans produce androstenol in the adrenal and sweat glands.

  Pheromones trigger a sexual response in female pigs and recent studies suggest a similar role in human mating. Men dream of the day when a dash of the Anchorman’s ‘sex panther’ cologne sucks adoring women into their beds like a giant love magnet. DuPont Chemical, always ahead of the curve, markets a commercial pheromone drug called ‘Boarmate’ to pig farmers to titillate sows. Could a similar product work for humans? Some people claim men are pigs.

  Human pheromone research is a fertile subject splashed with considerable controversy, plenty of hyperbole, and much potential. Humans definitely emit and detect estrogen and testosterone-related sex pheromones. Ivanka Savic and colleagues at Stockholm’s Huddinge University Hospital discovered gender-specific activation of the hypothalamus (a brain region involved in pheromone detection in rodents) in response to synthetic forms of steroid hormones, including androstenone and androstenol.112

  Women living together or travelling together for more than a few months experience synchronized menstruation – they get their periods at the same time of the month. Dubbed the ‘McClintock Effect’ after Martha McClintock observed that women living in the same dormitory began cycling in synchrony over a college semester, this phenomenon provides conclusive evidence for human pheromone emission and detection. Interesting, sure. Mind blowing? Not really.

  Emitting and detecting pheromones is one thing; becoming aroused by them is quite another. Yet, a growing body of clinical research suggests that male pheromones trigger desire deep in the female mind. Strong evidence exists that pheromones stimulate members of the opposite sex. Unlike the Fountain of Youth, the Fountain of Love may not be entirely mythical.

  In a recent study at University College in London, 38 student volunteers of each sex were exposed unknowingly overnight to androstenol and other human pheromones. The next day, subjects provided information about their social exchanges and interaction with other students on campus. Females exposed to androstenol displayed much higher levels of social interaction with males measured by initial contact, depth of exchange, and duration of interaction. These women grew more social around men, making an extra effort to initiate interactions with male students on campus. The researchers concluded that such behavior correlated directly with exposure to the male sex pheromone androstenol.113

  Now we’re getting somewhere. In another study, widely cited as evidence of pheromone attraction, McCoy and Pitino conducted a double-blind placebo-controlled experiment involving 36 female volunteers exposed to either synthetic human pheromones or a placebo added to their usual perfume on a daily basis for six weeks. Subjects exposed to pheromones reported much higher incidence of dating, kissing, affection, formal dates, and sexual intercourse than those exposed only to the placebo. The scientists concluded that pheromones had ‘positive sexual attractant effects.’114

  Pheromones are big business. Hundreds of online retailers offer ‘human sex pheromones’ guaranteed to attract sexy women like bears to honey. But don’t whip out your credit card just yet. The scientific verdict on human pheromones is unclear. Some experiments have shown a definite correlation, while others suggest the opposite. A major study by Vivien Wastell and David Benton at University College in Swansea found no correlation between sexual arousal and androstenol. Researchers asked groups of female subjects to read either a neutral or sexually-stimulating story in the presence of either androstenol or a placebo, finding no evidence that the pheromone influenced sexual feelings.115

  Intense research continues. Perhaps scientists will soon clarify the relationship between pheromones and sexual desire in humans. Even if pheromones really are the Fountain of Love, dousing yourself in androstenol won’t transform you into Casanova. No evidence exists that pheromones attract women to a specific man; merely that they heighten sexual arousal. Wearing such chemicals at a bar or nightclub could stimulate women in your general vicinity, but how would they know that you are the source of their titillation? Pheromones worn on a romantic date to a restaurant or movie might prove more effective, since increasing the woman’s arousal could lead to sex later in the evening. Even so, purchasing pheromones online (or from a spam email) seems like a roll of the dice; maybe you get the real thing, maybe you get cow piss. I recommend using pheromone cologne only if you can find a legitimate supplier. Look for a university conducting research into pheromones and volunteer to be their guinea pig.

  Improve your scent without pheromones by foregoing cologne. I am not suggesting that you wear a t-shirt to the gym for three days in a row, then hit the clubs. Even ovulatin
g females won’t appreciate your caked, rancid sweat. Instead, change your shirt once a day, avoid using excessive amounts of soap in the shower, and throw your cologne bottle in the garbage. Allow women to smell your natural body scent, not a hodgepodge of artificial, unpronounceable chemicals that almost certainly cause cancer in laboratory rats (and humans too). Comedian Demetri Martin says ‘I think it’s interesting that ‘cologne’ rhymes with ‘alone.’ My sentiments exactly.

  CLINIC: The 5 Biggest Myths About Seduction

  Touching is the Quickest Route to Sex

  Actually, it’s the quickest route to jail. Avoid improper touching; it’s weird and might even lead to charges of sexual assault. While women are extremely receptive to touch in certain circumstances, you cannot simply bust out a scripted formula for what pickup artists call ‘kino’ to escalate a soft touch on the arm to sex. If used properly, touch can be electric, while if used incorrectly, it is just plain creepy. Be careful.

  The Neg Works

  But it mostly does not. As an opener, fuggedaboutit. Under limited circumstances, the neg might work to reduce a woman’s self-esteem, making her receptive to lower-status males, but you are playing with fire.

  You Must Be Cocky Funny

  The ‘cocky funny’ attitude is probably the best template for seduction, but that does not mean that every girl wants a cocky funny man. Tune in to her desires and personality, rather than simply adopting a convenient persona.

  Neuro-Linguistic Programming, aka Hypnosis, Actually Works

  NLP, popularized by Ross Jeffries, is almost entirely mythical. None of these techniques have been empirically verified or tested.

  Bars & Clubs Are the Best Places to Pick Up Girls

  Dead wrong. Women erect their strongest defenses at bars and clubs to fend off the horde of suitors. The best time to seduce a woman is to catch her with her defenses down, not up.

  The 4.49 Man

  ‘The average man feels like Clark Kent but longs to be superman,’ observes one researcher investigating perceptions of attractiveness. Men mistakenly believe that women desire a more muscular lover than they actually do. In experiments, men consistently express dissatisfaction with the muscularity of their own bodies.

  The media – TV, Hollywood and magazines - bombards men with images of heavily-muscled men representing the ideal male body type. In the movie ‘300,’ King Leonidas (played by Gerard Butler) and virtually all his warrior underlings boasted amazing ’12 pack’ abs. Butler claims to have trained for almost a year prior to the film, pumping iron for hours each day in a grueling regimen to build muscle. Yet even a highly-paid, professional actor with all the time in the world to train could not live up to the Hollywood ideal of muscularity; in the end, producers used computer-generated graphics to touch up the muscle tone of actors in the movie, including the King himself.

  According to the Physical Health Overvaluation Hypothesis, media such as television and magazines overemphasize male muscles and female thinness, stoking competition for bigger muscles in men and smaller waistlines in women. Researchers note that ‘The resulting competitive escalation creates a disconnect between the preferences of one gender and the personal aspirations of the other.’ Male oriented magazines fuel intra-gender prestige competition over muscularity, depicting more muscular bodies than the average female actually prefers. Such misrepresentations of the ideal male form lead to ‘a runaway process through which male body ideals diverge from women’s preferences,’ often ending tragically in steroid abuse.116

  Comparing popular publications including Cosmopolitan, Men’s Health, Men’s Fitness, and Muscle & Fitness, scientists discovered that the ideal male body marketed to men in male magazines differs dramatically from the male body promoted to women in magazines with predominantly female readership. Male magazines depicted muscular bodies which were significantly larger than those preferred by the average female. Researchers conclude that ‘the media plays a role in the misfit between the body form perceived by members of one sex as attractive and that which is actually most attractive to members of the other sex.’117

  Scientists have quantified the disconnect between male and female preference for muscularity. Using the figure on the opposite page as a reference, researchers found that females preferred a 4.49 level of muscularity, while men mistakenly believe that women desire a 5.04 body type. Not quite a Mustang to a Honda, but individual preferences vary much more significantly.

  Magazines enhance this disconnect in body preference by pandering to the ideal form preferred by their readers. In one study, researchers compared the muscularity of men’s bodies in Cosmopolitan (which has an 89% female readership) with Men’s Health, whose readership is predominantly male at 85%. Cosmopolitan depicted roughly a 4.26 level of muscularity, very close to the ideal that women prefer in a sexual partner. Men’s Health portrayed men with an average of 5.77 muscularity, even higher than the 5.04 that men think women prefer.118

  Scientists discovered that the more time men spent reading male-oriented magazines like ‘Muscle & Fitness,’ the less satisfied they became with their own bodies, and the more they contemplated the use of steroids.119 Representations of Schwarzenegger-style bodies in male-oriented magazines influence a man’s desired body type, leading to dissatisfaction with his level of muscularity. Such dissatisfaction manifests itself in overtraining, steroid use, or depression.

  Unnatural, bulging muscles do not attract women – Hulk Hogan be damned. Chugging supplements called ‘freak’ will turn you into one, but they won’t help you get the girls.

  All other things being equal, women prefer a 4.49 on the muscularity scale. That’s a far cry from Arnold Schwarzenegger, but it’s not exactly Jack Black, either. Of course, all other things are not equal – not by a long shot. Wealth, fame, status, personality, height, confidence, dominance and scent all rate higher than muscle tone on the attractiveness index. Chester Yorton defeated Schwarzenegger in 1966 at the Mr. Universe competition in London, but what woman would prefer a mere bodybuilder like Yorton to a real-estate mogul, a president, or even a jabba-the-hut-looking oil executive like Lee Raymond? Although they lived during the same era, it’s a fair bet that John F. Kennedy enjoyed more success with the ladies than Chester Yorton.

  Most studies examining the traits women find attractive in men rate muscularity toward the bottom of the list for a husband and around the middle of the list for a short-term lover. An unconscious evolutionary calculus drives female mating decisions, helping the woman choose a sex partner who will either provide good genes for her children or invest in her, sometimes both.

  Muscles matter more for casual sex. A woman who obtains investment from a low-status, weak or timid husband might be tempted to score genes for her child somewhere else, especially from a handsome young stud with bulging biceps. Remember Emma Bovary?

  In the natural world, strong and fit animals outperform weaker ones. Physically large alpha wolves intimidate smaller members of the pack. Powerful chimpanzees dominate (and often abuse) their lesser companions.

  The female preference for muscularity in a sexual partner evolved during the Pleistocene era, when stronger men enjoyed some advantage in slaying Woolly Mammoths (and other humans). Raw strength mattered for survival. But other factors mattered more. Intelligence and personality define human achievement more than muscle mass. We think our way to the top of the social latter.

  TIP: The Mind is Sexier than the Body

  In 1905, the great French philosopher, Jean-Paul Sartre, began his life humbly enough as the son of a French Navy officer. Universally considered ugly by his peers, Sartre soon realized that he would have to use his high intellect as a weapon to attract women. He thought of himself as a ‘scholarly Don Juan, slaying women through the power of his golden tongue.’120 An inveterate seducer, Sartre was more interested in the thrill of the hunt than sex, preferring croissants to coitus. ‘I was less keen on the woman than on the play-acting she gave me the opportunity for …Possessing her cou
nted for less than the prospects of possession,’121 admitted the existentialist. Using his monumental intellect to attract mates, the scrawny philosopher bed dozens of women despite his asymmetrical features. After meeting the love of his life in 1929, a beautiful and brilliant young philosophy student named Simone de Beauvoir, he convinced her to abandon the idea of ‘bourgois monogamy’ as he continued his philandering ways into old age.

  If intelligence correlates more directly to prosperity than biceps, why do women prefer a 4.49 on the muscularity scale to a 1.0? Why is a buff surfer more physically attractive than a scrawny computer nerd?

  Amotz Zahavi’s ‘handicap principle’ answers the question. Big muscles represent an ‘honest signal’ of genetic fitness because building and maintaining muscularity entails real costs measured in time and energy. Furthermore, reproductive hormones like testosterone - required for building muscle tone - actually damage the immune system, rendering the individual more susceptible to disease. Big muscles serve the same function as the Peacock’s tail, advertising an ability to survive – even thrive – in the face of a major handicap, useless muscle.122

  For women to benefit from mating with muscular men, however, the ability to build muscle must be heritable. And it is. One study involving 90 pairs of monozygotic twins and 68 pairs of dizygotic twins assessed gains in strength during a 10-week training period, concluding that the ability to build muscle beyond one’s baseline degree of muscularity is, indeed, heritable.123

  Women who visit nightclubs and bars on the weekends want short-term encounters, rating muscularity more attractive than women seeking long-term mates. Muscularity is less important in a husband than a casual lover. Fabio offers only his biceps (and maybe something lower down), while a husband provides resources, security, knowledge and companionship.