https://bit.ly/3TG55xh
https://bit.ly/3TE1D66
https://bit.ly/3W6VbpS
https://bit.ly/3TYMaxe
https://bit.ly/3N9C4re
https://bit.ly/3Na0PDI
https://bit.ly/3WjxTxg

I don’t see why the observation that there is a gender difference in the effect of emotional display on attractiveness rating tells us anything at all about why there is a gender difference. (In other words, it doesn’t tell us that the cause is nature, but it doesn’t tell us that the cause is nurture either. Insofar as that distinction makes sense–I’m not ready to claim it does.) There were three samples. Sample A consisted of 341 Canadian undergraduates, median age 21, Sample B consisted of 120 North American adults, median age 29, and Sample C consisted of 396 Canadian undergraduates, median age 20. So we don’t know whether this difference is cross-cultural; the results are compatible with the claim that something in North American culture causes the observed gender differences.

There are some explanations of the gender differences that the data suggest are false: the observed gender differences are not explained by the fact that undergraduates are in a weird phase of life, because they also exist just as strongly among people who are not undergraduates. (I don’t know whether “undergraduates are in a weird phase of life” is a “nature” explanation or a “nurture” explanation in the first place, which is one of the many reasons I doubt the distinction is all that useful on the ground.) The data also disconfirms the hypothesis that (most of) the gender differences are caused by anything that differs between Asian people who live in North America vs. white people who live in North America, because those groups showed the same overall patterns in their responses. (Some of the studies showed subtle ethnic differences which are reported in the endnotes; these are a bit hard to parse.)

Like most sexual attractiveness studies, this one excluded participants who were not primarily heterosexual, so if you’re looking to date somebody of the same sex, it doesn’t tell you whether to smile or not. This information does not distinguish between effects caused by the sex of the person doing the ratings and effects caused by the sex of the person in the picture being rated, because only men rated women and only women rated men. (The researchers are upfront about this limitation of their study.)

35Jason May 25, 2011 at 3:36 pm
My smiles generally amount to a slight twist of the lips, almost a sneer.

36Rae May 25, 2011 at 3:41 pm
I have suspected this and I I think it sucks. It is some of the worst news I have read ever about sexual attraction. Feeling confident is good but going around in a confident but not very happy state all the time is not very pleasant at all. I am convinced it is also unhealthy. This really feels like having to do all the dirty work for women while they enjoy life.

I agree that this rule sucks for men. I assure you, the rules also suck for women; we’re not all sitting up on velvet princess cushions laughing at you. (Plenty of suckitude to go around. Joy.) Nobody has the right to tell you that walking around confident yet unsmiling a requirement for attracting women. At best, it’s something that, all other things being equal, will make it more likely that a randomly selected woman will find you more attractive than she would otherwise. But there is plenty of individual variation among women, and there are plenty of other factors that determine your happiness. Trying to stuff yourself into a mold that makes you miserable (or letting other people stuff you into that mold) sounds like something that will ultimately backfire.