Sexual Orientation and Shifts in Preferences for a Partner's Body Attributes in Short-Term versus Long-Term Mating Contexts

Abstract

This study assessed the effects of short- and long-term mating contexts on preferences for body characteristics of potential relationship partners in lesbians and heterosexual women. Lesbians (n = 41) rated figure drawings and computer-generated images of women that varied in body fat, waist-to-hip ratio, and breast size; heterosexual women (n = 95) rated computer-generated images of men that varied in muscularity and body fat. Both lesbians and heterosexual women showed a shift in preferences toward more physically attractive partners for shortterm relationships. All body aspects were affected, except that heterosexual women did not show a preference shift for male body fat. The results were interpreted in terms of a mating trade-off strategy in which mate preferences are the consequence of cost/benefit analyses and suggest that preferences for physical attributes of sexual partners may be shared by members of the same sex regardless of sexual orientation.

Why is low waist-to-chest ratio attractive in males? The mediating roles of perceived dominance, fitness, and protection ability

“…The good genes traits that relate especially positively to short-term attractiveness tend to be physical features, especially testosterone-linked traits such as relatively masculine body, face, and voice (Li & Kenrick, 2006;Little, Connely, Feinberg, Jones, & Roberts, 2011;Lucas, Koff, Grossmith, & Migliorini, 2011;Pawlowski & Jasienska, 2005;Provost, Kormos, Kosakoski, & Quinsey, 2006;Puts, 2010). With regard to bodily traits specifically, V-shaped upper body and features indicating muscularity, strength, and physical fitness have been found to be more important in short-term than in long-term contexts (Braun & Bryan, 2006;Li & Kenrick, 2006;Little et al, 2011;Lucas et al, 2011). In contrast, traits that are especially predictive of long-term attractiveness tend to relate more to parental investment, such as social status, access to resources, and the ability to provide protection (Buss & Schmitt, 1993;Li, 2007;Li & Kenrick, 2006).…”

Comparison of Partner Choice between Lesbians and Heterosexual Women

“…There are few studies that compare the criteria for choosing partners among homosexual and heterosexual women in literature. The studies that take on to this kind of comparison, report likeness and disparity between the preferences of these women (Bailey, Gaulin, Agyei, & Gladue, 1994;Corrêa, 2011;Ha, van den Berg, Engels, & LichtwarckAschoff, 2012;Lippa, 2007;Lucas et al, 2011;Kenrick, Keef, Bryan, Barr, & Brown, 1995;Russock, 2011;Smith, Konik, & Tuve, 2011). The reasons for the differences in the choice of partners seem not to have been well understood, as yet.…”

“…Up to now, only Lucas et al (2011) did research with lesbians in short and long-term relationships. Smith, Konik and Tuve (2011) stated that their study was geared towards longterm relationships.…”

“…Lippa (2007) generally describes his sample (including men) as "well educated", for 57% held a master's degree or had a college education. Lucas et al (2011) worked with college students. The rest does not mention the education level of their participants.…”

“…These also influence the preference of attributes among women (Campos, 2005;Castro, 2009;DeWaal & Maner;Lucas, Koff, Grossmith, & Migliorini, 2011). Generally speaking, heterosexual women appear to be more attracted to attributes that relate to good genetic quality in short-term relationships (Campos, 2005;De Waal & Maner;Lucas et al, 2011). Evolutionary Psychology explains this penchant on the premises of the low probability that the offspring of this casual sexual intercourse will be able to count on care from the father, what would imply in a high cost of female investment in that child (Schmitt, 2005).…”