Why good dancers are attractive!

[under par]

A scientic study thus reveals " Why good dancers are attractive"

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4550000.stm


interesting reading...... :wink:


Not only attractive but possibly more fertile too....

[KatieR]

A scientic study thus reveals " Why good dancers are attractive"

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4550000.stm


interesting reading...... :wink:


Not only attractive but possibly more fertile too....

Here is another one that you might find an interesting read... are you symmetrical?

http://www.livescience.com/humanbiology/051221_dance_symmetry.html

[ducasi]

I find all this linking of symmetry to genetics and supposed ability to raise healthy kids a little bit silly. Isn't it just enough to say that symmetry looks better?

[David Bailey]

It's a fairly limited study, in that it doesn't measure partner dancing - surely there's a whole aspect of attractiveness (developing a connection, confident leading, and so on), which is missed out here?

[LMC]

Connection and quality of the dance are definitely a big factor for me.

At a London venue a couple of months ago I asked someone to dance on the basis that he had seemed reasonable in the beginner's class, was chatty/friendly AND is drop-dead gorgeous. Unfortunately he bounces his hands, can't dance on time and yanks (and has been dancing longer than I have). Suddenly I wasn't so keen...

And the rather cute beginner at another venue I go to has become a whole lot less cute now he's in week 4 and (despite so much nagging during our last dance that I started to feel quite mean) has somehow acquired a death grip which he never had to start with :mad:

I'm shallow.

[KatieR]

At a London venue a couple of months ago I asked someone to dance on the basis that he had seemed reasonable in the beginner's class, was chatty/friendly AND is drop-dead gorgeous. Unfortunately he bounces his hands, can't dance on time and yanks (and has been dancing longer than I have). Suddenly I wasn't so keen....

Just an interesting theory, if you didn't dance and you met this guy out at a party or in a muggle situation, would you find him attractive?

[LMC]

Given that he is quite chatty and friendly and drop dead gorgeous, yes. But if he was a non-dancer and not prepared to give it a go then that would put me off as well...

I'm officially obsessed :blush:

[KatieR]

Given that he is quite chatty and friendly and drop dead gorgeous, yes. But if he was a non-dancer and not prepared to give it a go then that would put me off as well...

I'm officially obsessed :blush:

My angle was more of the he is attractive - tick, nice person - tick, chatty/friendly - tick. BUT he hasnt got much rhythm. Even if he was prepared to give dancing a go, you would not consider dating him as he has no rhythm.

yes, I agree it would be difficult to date someone that doesn't dance as we do spend so much time dancing, however, I am interested to know if I was presented with an opportunity of a wonderful guy, but just didn't dance, would I date them?

[Icey]

yes, I agree it would be difficult to date someone that doesn't dance as we do spend so much time dancing, however, I am interested to know if I was presented with an opportunity of a wonderful guy, but just didn't dance, would I date them?

I would do my best to convert him to the delights of the dancefloor. I would make him sit down and watch Darren Gough raving about it.

[latinlover]

Interesting that no-one has mentioned the un-arguable fact that ugly men can suddenly become attractive if they dance well...................

[Icey]

Interesting that no-one has mentioned the un-arguable fact that ugly men can suddenly become attractive if they dance well...................

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder though, so one girl might still think 'urghh' whilst another might think 'hmmm, ok, getting better'

[KatieR]

Interesting that no-one has mentioned the un-arguable fact that ugly men can suddenly become attractive if they dance well...................

So true, except if they have bad teeth...

[LMC]

Having had a couple of pretty good 'offers' over the summer, I am sorry to say that I can be reasonably convinced that not dancing would probably be a deal-breaker - unless the "smells" were really good... and even then, I quite like Icey's idea and would apply it (vigorously :devil: )

Which brings me neatly back on-topic :rofl: - are dancers' pheromones different? Clive posted a good article - I'm linking to jivecat's post (http://www.cerocscotland.com/forum/showpost.php?p=182395&postcount=30)commenting on the article as it contains the link to said article and I think it also relates...

Beauty is definitely in the eye of the beholder - as long as a guy is reasonably clean then being a dancer may make him more attractive. But for me, height is important - I just can't face the prospect of a life partner who can't at least look me in the face rather than what passes for my cleavage

[Dizzy]

Interesting that no-one has mentioned the un-arguable fact that ugly men can suddenly become attractive if they dance well...................

:yeah:

I know quite a few men that I dance with who, if I met in a nightclub or in a pub, I would not look at twice but when I dance with them, I feel like the sexiest woman alive :drool: :flower:.

[ChrisA]

I find all this linking of symmetry to genetics and supposed ability to raise healthy kids a little bit silly. Isn't it just enough to say that symmetry looks better?
But why do you suppose it looks better?

Clue: horse, then cart.

[Andy McGregor]

Good male dancers are attractive :innocent: but I think it's more to do with the hypothesis that being a good dancer is evidence that you are a good fighter. We've discussed this before and maybe somebody (Martin Harper) could probably find it and put in a link.

I think the symmetry thing shows that symmetrical people are both good dancers and attractive but I'm not sure you can link the two as you have two variables and the design of the experiment doesn't seem to have considered both of them. There might be a theory that symmetrical good dancers are more attractive than asymmetrical ones though. Maybe this trial proves that.

[Cruella]

:yeah:

I know quite a few men that I dance with who, if I met in a nightclub or in a pub, I would not look at twice but when I dance with them, I feel like the sexiest woman alive :drool: :flower:.
That's OK if you dance 24/7. But what i don't understand is, when some fantastic dancer that's not so lucky in the attractiveness stakes always seems to manage to have a gorgeous girl on his arm. The particular guy i'm thinking of has a swarm of beauties after him! I can understand them wanting to dance with him but surely those rose tinted glasses would disappear out of a dance situation, wouldn't they? If not, can anyone explain why? Maybe i'm just blind to his qualities with me being an old married woman!:devil:

[KatieR]

That's OK if you dance 24/7. But what i don't understand is, when some fantastic dancer that's not so lucky in the attractiveness stakes always seems to manage to have a gorgeous girl on his arm. The particular guy i'm thinking of has a swarm of beauties after him! I can understand them wanting to dance with him but surely those rose tinted glasses would disappear out of a dance situation, wouldn't they? If not, can anyone explain why? Maybe i'm just blind to his qualities with me being an old married woman!:devil:

How much £££ does he have? :whistle:

[LMC]

Maybe he also has one or more of a GSOH, a fat wallet and a nice personality.

If he has impeccable personal hygiene then that plus being a good dancer would raise him above 98% of the male population even if he is less than averagely good looking.

[Cruella]

How much £££ does he have? :whistle:
Don't know, i've never got that close to his wallet!

[doc martin]

I find all this linking of symmetry to genetics and supposed ability to raise healthy kids a little bit silly. Isn't it just enough to say that symmetry looks better?
No, at least not to those of us who never grew out of asking "why" every time an answer is given.

In this case why does it look better? When you say better, you are making a subjective judgment. But a subjective judgment of what? There are many examples in the animal world of mate selection based on visual characteristics. Think of the peacock's tail. The animal is looking for a mate that will give it's offspring the best chance of survival. And to do that the animal needs to know about the genes that the potential mate will contribute to those offspring.

Clearly it is not possible for the animal to directly see the genes, so it must make it's judgment based on visible characteristics. Why choose a particular visual characteristic? Because animals that based their judgment on that characteristic in past generations produced more offspring, and the offspring also inherited the tendency to use that characteristic to judge mate quality.

Humans don't just make these judgments subconsciously and act on them as other animals. We tend to also consciously rationalise the judgment, even if we are not aware of the criteria that we are using to make the judgment.

In the case of facial symmetry many studies show that people find more symmetrical faces more attractive. They may not consciously realise that they are judging the symmetry of the face, they just say that it looks better.But they are using this visible characteristic as a method of judging the genetic quality of a potential partner.

The production of symmetry in a developing face/body is the result of successfully timed activation of many genes. Any genetic abnormality is likely to effect this process. And as most developmental genetic abnormalities are likely to effect the development of more than one system, judgment of symmetry provides a good indicator of a potential mate's genetic fitness in other areas.

So, to reiterate, no it's not silly, it's the best indicator evolution has developed.

[TheTramp]

Don't know, i've never got that close to his wallet!
Assuming (I know that's bad) that you mean who I think you mean, then he's rather loaded, if the rumours are true! :whistle:

[LordOfTheFiles]

So what you're saying is that if you are heavily interested in dance, then a person that can dance and share your hobby is a good thing. Might the same not be said of a badminton player or a chess master??

[doc martin]

Assuming (I know that's bad) that you mean who I think you mean, then he's rather loaded, if the rumours are true! :whistle:
So it's not you Trampy? Oh well! I'll have to guess again.:devil:

[doc martin]

So what you're saying is that if you are heavily interested in dance, then a person that can dance and share your hobby is a good thing. Might the same not be said of a badminton player or a chess master??
Nah, most chess players are move monsters.

[under par]

So it's not you Trampy? Oh well! I'll have to guess again.:devil:
:tears: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[LordOfTheFiles]

Nah, most chess players are move monsters.

Definitely true in my case

[ducasi]

I find all this linking of symmetry to genetics and supposed ability to raise healthy kids a little bit silly. Isn't it just enough to say that symmetry looks better?

But why do you suppose it looks better? Also...

No, at least not to those of us who never grew out of asking "why" every time an answer is given.

In this case why does it look better? When you say better, you are making a subjective judgment. But a subjective judgment of what? To me the attraction of symmetry can be accounted for simply as a result of the brain's unstoppable desire to find patterns in things. Symmetry makes good patterns.

In the case of facial symmetry many studies show that people find more symmetrical faces more attractive. They may not consciously realise that they are judging the symmetry of the face, they just say that it looks better. But they are using this visible characteristic as a method of judging the genetic quality of a potential partner. Or they may just find it more attractive subconsciously.

The production of symmetry in a developing face/body is the result of successfully timed activation of many genes. Any genetic abnormality is likely to effect this process. And as most developmental genetic abnormalities are likely to effect the development of more than one system, judgment of symmetry provides a good indicator of a potential mate's genetic fitness in other areas. Is there evidence that highly symmetrical people are actually genetically superior? (Do they raise more, healthier kids?)

So, to reiterate, no it's not silly, it's the best indicator evolution has developed. Apart from all the other less subtle ones.

This particular study says because a dancer makes more symmetrical shapes, that makes them sexually more attractive, I'm not so sure of this. But would you claim that evolution has actually made us attracted to symmetrical dancers?

Does it also make us more attracted to symmetrical hair cuts? (Serious question.)

[spindr]

Is there evidence that highly symmetrical people are actually genetically superior? (Do they raise more, healthier kids?)
A quick google shows at least a study on asymmetries being induced by parasites in some animal species -- no studies on humans tho'.

A symmetric individual may actually indicate that they haven't been parasitized -- or have some resistance thereto -- both desirable characteristics.

SpinDr.

[Rebecca]

A symmetric individual may actually indicate that they haven't been parasitized -- or have some resistance thereto -- both desirable characteristics.

SpinDr.

I've watched far too many Zombie flicks for that image not to be hilarious :rofl:

and strangely reminiscent of a dance or two I've experienced :whistle:

[ducasi]

A quick google shows at least a study on asymmetries being induced by parasites in some animal species -- no studies on humans tho'. Surely the asymmetry introduced by a parasite would be fairly dramatic, and would not require subtleties of subconscious recognition?

[MartinHarper]

Wikipedia:Facial symmetry (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facial_symmetry)

Opening up a fresh google search - 16 seconds
Finding a useful resource - 5 minutes
Avoiding a pointless rehashing of biology on the "Let's talk about dance" forum - priceless

[ducasi]

Didn't find any proof there...

Found this, emphasis mine:

Symmetry is an important concept in biology, being related to mate selection strategies, health, and survival of species. In human faces, the relevance of left-right symmetry to attractiveness and health is not well understood. We compared the appearance of facial attractiveness, health, and symmetry in three separate experiments. Participants inspected front views of faces on the computer screen and judged them on a 5-point scale according to their attractiveness in Experiment 1, health in Experiment 2, and symmetry in Experiment 3. We found that symmetry and attractiveness were not strongly related in faces of women or men while health and symmetry were related. There was a significant difference between attractiveness and symmetry judgments but not between health and symmetry judgments. Moreover, there was a significant difference between attractiveness and health. Facial symmetry may be critical for the appearance of health but it does not seem to be critical for the appearance of attractiveness, not surprisingly perhaps because human faces together with the human brain have been shaped by adaptive evolution to be naturally asymmetrical. Note that they did not say that they actually judged the health of any of the participants whose faces were being considered, so this study doesn't tell us anything about the relationship between actual health and facial symmetry.

It did show that symmetry and attractiveness are not as related as people have been claiming.

[KatieR]

Does it also make us more attracted to symmetrical hair cuts? (Serious question.)

I think it does... I like a guy with shoulder length hair but it all has to be the same length..

[marty_baby]

....ah.... now we are onto a man's hair style..... :rofl:

Only ribbing Katie! :hug:

[KatieR]

....ah.... now we are onto a man's hair style..... :rofl:

Only ribbing Katie! :hug:

I cant help it if I like long hair, its got to be nice thick hair, slightly wavy... then when its put back in a half pony tail... very sexy....:whistle:

[marty_baby]

Dear Katie,

Do you mean a Stud like this?.... :rofl:

[doc martin]

Also...
To me the attraction of symmetry can be accounted for simply as a result of the brain's unstoppable desire to find patterns in things. Symmetry makes good patterns.
Again, IMO, you have missed the underlying reason. Brains are good at pattern recognition because the ability to extrapolate to the whole of an object is useful in avoiding predators and finding foo.

Symmetry is not a pattern in the same way. In fact you are presented with the whole object and no pattern recognition from incomplete data is required. The brain simply compares across an axis of symmetry. You could say pattern recognition is involved in determining the axis, but not in determining the degree of symmetry.

Or they may just find it more attractive subconsciously.
It is all done subconsciously. It occurs in animals which do not have consciousness in our terms. I tried to explain in my previous post why we assign a conscious label of attractiveness to this entirely unconscious process.

Is there evidence that highly symmetrical people are actually genetically superior? (Do they raise more, healthier kids?)
Apart from all the other less subtle ones.
That is difficult to determine in humans for at least two reasons. Firstly, humans take a long time to breed (no sniggering please) and these ideas have not been around long enough to study several generations. Secondly the conditions under which symmetry evolved as a fitness indicator do not apply in modern society. The number of offspring we have is unlikely to be related to our ability to catch our dinner when most food comes in ready processed packages out of the freezer.

This particular study says because a dancer makes more symmetrical shapes, that makes them sexually more attractive, I'm not so sure of this. But would you claim that evolution has actually made us attracted to symmetrical dancers?
I would suggest, and this is pure speculation, that symmetricality of movement implies symmetricality of limb development and that this is what is really being assessed when observing movement.

Does it also make us more attracted to symmetrical hair cuts? (Serious question.)
Many people think humans are not at present evolving. I would suggest that they are missing the evolutionary pressure applied by hairdressers. In common wisdom it was the advent of the contraceptive pill in the 1960s which has led to the current decline in birth rate. It is possible that the decline in birth rate could be linked to the similarly timed decline in complex coiffure.

The disappearence of the Marcel wave may well have led to a fall off in partner dancing. As I am sure a survey on this forum would show, one of the main criteria for choosing a dance partner is asymmeticality of hair style. The au naturel, symmetrical, hippy style would then result in less partner dancing leading to fewer marriages and therefore fewer children.

Note that they did not say that they actually judged the health of any of the participants whose faces were being considered, so this study doesn't tell us anything about the relationship between actual health and facial symmetry.
Good find. This is the first article I have seen that does not show a link between symmetry and attractiveness.

The actual health of the people whose pictures were used does not matter in this experiment and is also a very hard thing to objectively score. The experiment is showing the link between perceived health and symmetry. I would have expected there to be a correlation with attractiveness as most evolutionary theories link attractiveness to health. In other words, when you find a potential mate attractive, you are making a judgement of their state of health.

[KatieR]

Dear Katie,

Do you mean a Stud like this?.... :rofl:

heh, looks like my ex...

[marty_baby]

heh, looks like my ex...


Meowwwwww! :na:
You do pick them Katie! :whistle:

I hope you have a great xmas and new year... regardless of being pony-less...!


right... I'm diving for cover now! :rofl:

[marty_baby]

hiya doc,

Is this is a prize wind up?
Decline in partner dancing related to hairdos???


Rest of it was interesting reading :wink:

[doc martin]

hiya doc,

Is this is a prize wind up?
Decline in partner dancing related to hairdos???


Rest of it was interesting reading :wink:
Well it could be taken seriously... at least as seriously as intelligent design and astrology anyway.

[Way off topic] btw some good news on the ID front:
unconstitutional for schoolteachers to teach so-called “intelligent design” (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,19269-1957467,00.html)
[/Way off topic]

[ducasi]

Again, IMO, you have missed the underlying reason. Brains are good at pattern recognition because the ability to extrapolate to the whole of an object is useful in avoiding predators and finding foo.

Symmetry is not a pattern in the same way. In fact you are presented with the whole object and no pattern recognition from incomplete data is required. The brain simply compares across an axis of symmetry. You could say pattern recognition is involved in determining the axis, but not in determining the degree of symmetry. I disagree. The "comparison across the axis" is pattern matching.

Many people think humans are not at present evolving. I would suggest that they are missing the evolutionary pressure applied by hairdressers.

...

The disappearence of the Marcel wave may well have led to a fall off in partner dancing. As I am sure a survey on this forum would show, one of the main criteria for choosing a dance partner is asymmeticality of hair style. The au naturel, symmetrical, hippy style would then result in less partner dancing leading to fewer marriages and therefore fewer children. I think further research is needed here. I think we need to get funding from one of the research councils to study this further.

Good find. This is the first article I have seen that does not show a link between symmetry and attractiveness.

The actual health of the people whose pictures were used does not matter in this experiment and is also a very hard thing to objectively score. The experiment is showing the link between perceived health and symmetry. I would have expected there to be a correlation with attractiveness as most evolutionary theories link attractiveness to health. In other words, when you find a potential mate attractive, you are making a judgement of their state of health. An assessment of actual health though could have given us a comparison between it and any of perceived health, symmetry and attractiveness. Useful information, though I agree it'd be difficult to score.

In a study that was on the BBC web site they showed two pictures of a person, but one had been adjusted to make the person look paler. The intention was determine whether the paler skin would rate as more attractive to men and women – the theory being that men prefer a paler, more feminine appearance, while women would prefer a darker, more masculine look.

Unfortunately, for me the pale appearance just made each person look ill, and most of the time I judged the more "ruddy" picture more attractive. Thus the BBC decided I had a very female brain.

In my mind the BBC study was flawed, but it shows that what one person can think of as attractive can be seen by someone else as the opposite. And judging health based on attractiveness is a tricky thing to do.

[doc martin]

I disagree. The "comparison across the axis" is pattern matching.
I think we are using pattern recognition/matching in different ways. I mean recognising the whole of an object just from some parts.

I think further research is needed here. I think we need to get funding from one of the research councils to study this further.
You'll have some stiff competition. This is a pretty popular topic in psychology these days.

An assessment of actual health though could have given us a comparison between it and any of perceived health, symmetry and attractiveness. Useful information, though I agree it'd be difficult to score.

In a study that was on the BBC web site they showed two pictures of a person, but one had been adjusted to make the person look paler. The intention was determine whether the paler skin would rate as more attractive to men and women – the theory being that men prefer a paler, more feminine appearance, while women would prefer a darker, more masculine look.

Unfortunately, for me the pale appearance just made each person look ill, and most of the time I judged the more "ruddy" picture more attractive. Thus the BBC decided I had a very female brain.

In my mind the BBC study was flawed, but it shows that what one person can think of as attractive can be seen by someone else as the opposite. And judging health based on attractiveness is a tricky thing to do.
True, this is why you need large numbers of people in such studies, and carefully chosen controls to get any sort of statistical significance. It is also useful that we don't all find the same things attractive - vive la difference.

[Gladrags]

Putting another slant on this, presumably by their nature, symmetrical people are well balanced - in the mechanical, rather than emotional sense. People who are balanced (or with an excellent sense of balance) have always been the most successful in any sporting/physical arena (e.g. the sidestep in Rugby, or indeed a simple balanced spin in dance).

Having said all this, there are not too many dancers with an appearance which leaves them looking unbalanced, so perhaps sense of balance is more important?

Symmetry has always been something which is "easy on the eye", so perhaps it is a balanced dancer, who are often the co-ordinated ones, who seem attractive. Dancing could be seen as the framework within which this balance can be illustrated.

I remember a quote once that someboday said "Talent is the most amazing aphrodisiac". Dancing talent defintely could be seen to have these qualities, as talent in one gender has the potential to impact on the other.

Too many points....not sure what I am trying to say.....I'll stop.