The Daily Mail on Seducing Men
I’ll cut out the fat and separate out the meat from this Daily Mail article on seducing men. This article is itself adapted from a book by Andrew Trees called Decoding Love.
Studies show that women who are seen as blatantly taking the initiative with men are perceived negatively.[...]
In a 1985 study, researchers made an attractive woman target a man roughly 10ft away and then see what it took to get him to approach her within 10 minutes.
[...] Even making eye contact multiple times, if that signal wasn’t accompanied by a smile, had only a modest success rate of less than 20 per cent.To be highly successful, a woman needed to make eye contact multiple times and accompany that eye contact with a smile.
When she did this, 60 per cent of the men eventually approached her and struck up a conversation.
Actually, I’m not sure if the original research bothered differentiating between attractiveness and approachability of the woman in question. It definitely didn’t bother checking man’s attractiveness compared to speed of approach: increasing reluctance of approach might indicate being taken, uninterested or lacking confidence. I wonder if there’s a sweet spot to when you time an approach in the rare event a woman is interested without a man interacting with her first.
Men’s first impression of a woman’s attractiveness has been shown to be much higher when she wears lipstick.
A menstruating [lap] dancer made an average of £22 an hour, while a woman who was neither ovulating nor menstruating averaged £32 an hour.
During their fertile period when the women were ovulating, the dancers’ tips escalated to a whopping £45 an hour.[...]According to the lap dancer study, the dancers who were on the Pill averaged only £24 an hour in tips, while those not taking it averaged £34 an hour – you can be sure that the Pill has a similar effect on the appeal of women in general.
45 per cent of men objected to women who talked about their weight or their newest diet.