While I read the article under discussion, concerning the pill and how it may be impacting women's choices of partners, and I was mildly discomfited by it, I was bemused by the fact that it seemed to factor out the other side of the story.

Women don't make relationships happen in a vacuum. We sort of require the cooperation of the attractive man in question, and presumably we also give off a distinctive scent that men are perfectly capable of forming an opinion on. How does this correllate into our mating and reproductive concerns.

That being said, I have also read some evidence that suggests men find women who are not on the pill, more attractive generally, than women who are on the pill.

Frankly, in light of the little information given thus far, I am not inclined to lend too much weight to these speculative conclusions. I know we are more susceptible to our biological imperitives than we are necessarily always aware of, but we are also conscious creatures who don't choose our mates solely based on scent.

In terms of men, it should be relatively obvious that men are less selective than women. For the most part, if a woman wants a relationship with a man she can almost always accomplish her goal simply by lowering her standards. This really isn't the case with men looking for women.

In terms of the overall thesis, it's interesting because relationships are one of the places where people tend to absolutely reject reason. Consider how you'd react if one of your friends declared she ran a credit check on all potential suitors. From a strictly rational standpoint, this is a good idea. After all, if you're seeking a long-term financial entanglement with a man, it pays to figure out how he handles money. But for virtually all women, checking out the quality of his shoes is considered a more 'reliable' (or, at least, less icky) way of accomplishing this goal.

This emphasis on feelings over reason in human relationships means we tend not to have a very clear idea why precisely we're attracted to someone. It's just a 'gut feeling' of some sort - something in the back of our head says "yes". So when people discover actual back-of-our-head motivations like scent, it's reasonable to suppose that they have far more impact than our rational selves would prefer.

Men are more worried about what the woman might smell - for good reason apparently!

Xando wrote: "In terms of men, it should be relatively obvious that men are less selective than women. For the most part, if a woman wants a relationship with a man she can almost always accomplish her goal simply by lowering her standards. This really isn't the case with men looking for women."

I can't completely agree with this. Lowering your standards works for both sexes but men must lower them the most.

Please tell me you guys aren't serious. Is it possible for either you to be more sexist? I find the attitude disappointing.

antiphobia wrote: "Please tell me you guys aren't serious. Is it possible for either you to be more sexist? I find the attitude disappointing."

Being sexist and accurate are often the same thing. Women are far pickier because it is easier for them to compete for the affections of the men they desire. What they seldom realize, until its is too late (they're in their 40's) is that landing the big catch is either impossible or he's "inedible".

Slawrence5:

Being sexist and

accurate are often the same thing.

Umm....no. There's a difference between incidental and corrollary information. Sexism is neither legitimate nor justifiable as an approach to human interaction. It's a flimsy generalization fraught with stubborn stereotypes that refuse to die no matter how much contrary evidence is thrown at them. And it's people like you who perpetuate these harmful mythologies.

Does it make you feel better to covert uncomfortable truths into myths?