Sex Roles

, Volume 32, Issue 5–6, pp 375–391 | Cite as

What types of men are most attractive and most repulsive to women?

  • Stephan Desrochers


This study investigated the effect of gender role related characteristics in men on romantic and platonic attraction in women. Ninety-six female college students (approximately 70% Caucasian; 20% Mexican American; and 10% African American) were given a booklet containing descriptions of stimulus males. Feminine males were preferred as friends and romantic partners over masculine males. Feminine and masculine males were more attractive as friends than as dates. Income and occupational status did not affect platonic attraction, and occupational status did not affect romantic attraction. Income had a positive effect on romantic attraction only for those participants who were presented with males having socially desirable personality traits, suggesting that college women only consider men's income after personality criteria have been met.


Income College Student Social Psychology Personality Trait Gender Role 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Brannon, R. (1976). The male sex role: Our culture's blueprint of manhood, and what it's done for us lately. In D. S. David & R. Brannon (Eds.).The forty-nine percent majority: The male sex role. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  2. Burnett, J. J., & Dunne, P. M. (1986, August). An appraisal of the use of student subjects in marketing research.Journal of Business Research, 14, 329–343.Google Scholar
  3. Farrell, W. (1986).Why men are the way they are. New York: Berkeley.Google Scholar
  4. Gerber, G. L. (1988). Leadership roles and the gender stereotype traits.Sex Roles, 18, 649–668.Google Scholar
  5. Howell, D. C. (1987).Statistical methods for psychology (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: PWS-Kent.Google Scholar
  6. Ickes, W. (1993). Traditional gender roles: Do they make, and then break, our relationships?Journal of Social Issues, 49, 71–85.Google Scholar
  7. Jean, P. J., & Reynolds, C. R. (1984). Sex and attitude distortion: Ability of females and males to fake liberal and conservative positions regarding changing sex roles.Sex roles, 10, 805–815.Google Scholar
  8. Johnson, D. J., & Rusbult, C. E. (1989). Resisting temptation: devaluation of alternative partners as a means of maintaining commitment in close relationships.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 967–980.Google Scholar
  9. Kenrick, D. T., Sadalla, E. K., Groth, G., & Trost, M. R. (1990). Evolution, traits, and the stages of human courtship: Qualifying the parental investment model.Journal of personality, 58, 97–116.Google Scholar
  10. Kimlicka, T. A., Wakefield, J. A., & Goad, N. A. (1982). Sex-roles of ideal opposite sexed persons for college males and females.Journal of Personality Assessment, 46, 519–521.Google Scholar
  11. Kulik, J. A., & Harackiewicz, J. (1979). Opposite-sex interpersonal attraction as a function of the sex-roles of the perceiver and the perceived.Sex Roles, 5, 443–452.Google Scholar
  12. McCutcheon, L. E. (1988). Sex roles and interpersonal attraction for opposite-sex persons.Psychological Record, 38, 527–532.Google Scholar
  13. McWilliams, S., & Howard, J. A. (1993). Solidarity and hierarchy in cross-sex friendships.Journal of Social Issues, 49, 191–202.Google Scholar
  14. Spence, J. T., Helmreich, R., & Holohan, C. K. (1979). Negative and positive components of psychological masculinity and femininity and their relationships to neurotic and acting out behaviors.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 29–39.Google Scholar
  15. Sprecher, S. (19889). The importance to males and females of physical attractiveness, earning potential, and expressiveness in initial attraction.Sex Roles, 21, 591–607.Google Scholar
  16. Townsend, J. M. (1987). Sex differences in sexuality among medical students: Effects of increasing socioeconomic status.Archives of Sexual Behavior, 16, 427–446.Google Scholar
  17. Townsend, J. M., & Levy, G. D. (1990). Effects of potential partners' physical attractiveness and socioeconomic status on sexuality and partner selection.Archives of Sexual Behavior, 19, 149–164.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stephan Desrochers
    • 1
  1. 1.California State UniversitySan BernardinoUSA

Personalised recommendations