Does size matter? Height? Shoulder width?

Yes, apparently it does. Penis size interacts with body shape and height to influence male attractiveness. And so does height, and shoulder-to-hip width ratio (masculine bodies).

Now I generally don't care so much for things that people can't change, and we know that there are many other things that one can do to significantly improve one's attractiveness. It is however important to see things for what they are - the relative importance of each trait or improvement I'll leave up for debate. Below may be a blaring glimpse of the obvious to some perhaps, but read on as the study was of good quality, fairly conclusive, and the nuances in the findings are interesting.

“There are numerous psychological studies directly asking females for their preference regarding male penis size. The results are mixed, with studies finding that females prefer longer penises, wider penises, or that penis size is unimportant. These studies, however, all use self-reported, direct questioning and are therefore susceptible to biases of self-censorship and pressure to conform to socially desirable responses to sensitive issues.”

So, in order to control for the Hamster, the following study was performed. Based upon female assessment of digitally projected life-size, computer-generated images, it was determined that penis size interacts with body shape and height to determine male sexual attractiveness. The life-size wireframes of the men varied by three degrees: penis size, height, and shoulder-to-hip ratio. All measurements used were within the natural ranges of the general population.

Some highlights:

• “There were highly significant positive effects of height, penis size, and shoulder-to-hip ratio on male attractiveness.”

• “We found that flaccid penis size had a significant influence on male attractiveness. Males with a larger penis were rated as being relatively more attractive. This relationship is nonlinear, however, indicating that the proportional increase in attractiveness begins to decrease after a size of 7.6 cm, which is an under-average penis size based on a large-scale survey of Italian men. Although we detected quadratic selection on penis size, any potential peak (i.e., the most attractive penis size) appears to fall outside the range used in our study.”

This means that the bigger the penis, the more attractive the man was when controlling for other factors such as height, and shoulder-to-hip ratio. Interestingly, for those less fortunate, the proportional increase in attractiveness (slope of curve) started to slow down once the penis reached the near average size. However, the attractiveness just kept increasing to the point where they did not have models with cock sizes big enough to determine if the attraction would ever plateau!

• “Surprisingly, larger penis size and greater height had almost equivalent positive effects on male attractiveness.”

• “We detected correlational selection between all three traits, so the effects of each trait on attractiveness were not independent of one another. The effect of penis size on attractiveness varied with both height and body shape. After controlling for the shoulder-to-hip ratio, larger penis size had a greater effect on attractiveness for taller men. This result could be because perceived penis size was smaller when assessed relative to the height of a taller man; or because of general discrimination against short men irrespective of the value of other traits, so that even a larger penis did little to increase their net attractiveness. A similar relationship between penis size and shoulder-to-hip ratio was also detected.”

• “The finding suggests that selection on penis size is potentially as strong as selection on stature. The shoulder-to-hip ratio, however, accounted for a much larger proportion of variance in attractiveness in our model (79.6%). This result might be because of our figures extending too far into the feminine range of body shapes, as those with a low shoulder-to-hip ratio were highly unattractive. However, given increasing waistlines, the values we used are well within the range now seen in many Western countries.”

However gentlemen, shoulder to hip ratio is something you can somewhat control: LIFT!! Linear selection was very strong on the shoulder-to-hip ratio, with weaker selection on height and penis size.

• “Our results directly contradict claims that penis size is unimportant to most females. Some studies indicate that preference for a larger penis might arise because penis size is associated with higher rates of vaginal orgasm. In turn, vaginal orgasms are associated with higher levels of associated sexual satisfaction. The proximate basis of the decisions leading to the reported attractiveness scores is unknown. General preexisting aesthetic preferences, either innate or acquired through cultural norms, might account for the observed patterns. Another possibility is that females use previous sexual experiences to infer a link between penis size and desirable male properties [e.g., the likelihood of (vaginal) orgasm]. Arguing against this theory is the lack of a correlation between a woman’s age and the magnitude of the effect of penis size on her rating of male attractiveness.”

• “Our results support the hypothesis that female mate choice could have driven the evolution of larger penises in humans.”

A few other interesting tidbits from the study:

• The average age of female participants was 26.2 +/- 6.8 years old. The participants were 71.8% European, 20.9% Asian, and 7.3% from elsewhere with respect to ethnic origins.

• Controlling for baseline variation in response time among women, the response time was significantly greater for figures with a larger penis, greater height, and a greater shoulder-to-hip ratio. This means that the more attractive the wireframe model (i.e. tall, or big cock), the more time women spent in its evaluation compared to looking at the less attractive ones.

Finally, the female’s own phenotype might have influenced her mate choice decisions. Hence, it is likely that how a female rates a male’s attractiveness will partly depend upon her own phenotype:

• Female height was positively correlated with the linear effect that male height had on her rating of his relative attractiveness. The taller the woman the more important was male height.

• Females that were “heavier than expected for their height”, showed a stronger linear effect of penis size on their rating of a male’s relative attractiveness. Apparently fat bitches are size-queens - good news for the less well endowed. Maybe they need more cock to account for reach, and the thigh-barrier?

• Female age was not correlated with the linear effect that any of the three male traits had on her rating of a male’s relative attractiveness. These indicators of attractiveness appear to be universal.

• And interestingly, there was no effect of either the use of hormonal contraception or menstrual state on the linear effect of any of the three male traits on how a female rated relative attractiveness. “…We note, however, that these tests have limited power to detect a cycle effect, as women were not repeatedly surveyed during both the high and low fertility phases.”