Women who lop their hair short are no longer interested in bedroom action, say researchers, who claim that deliberately reducing ones attractiveness can sometimes be a way of repelling mens interest.
London, Dec 6 : Women who lop their hair short are no longer interested in bedroom action, say researchers, who claim that 'deliberately reducing one's attractiveness' can sometimes be a way of repelling men's interest.
Initially, the claim was made by sex therapist and former comedian Pamela Stephenson, 59, who said that ladies who cut their hair are deliberately making themselves less sexy to blokes.
However, now the theory has got scientific backing after experts claimed that the links between long hair and sex go back to caveman times, reports the Daily Star.
Dr Pam Spurr, a relationships expert, said: "The woman who no longer wants sex uses a haircut to show she's reclaiming power in the bedroom.
"For women, hair is a reflection of the person, of her moods and her self-esteem."
Relationship psychologist Anjula Mutanda added: "Cave paintings celebrated long-haired women - the longer the hair the more fertile and, therefore, desirable she was."
But body language and behaviour expert Judy James disagrees, saying: "The only thing it symbolises these days is the shutting off of childhood. In terms of sex, I would argue it has the opposite effect."
Being an aggressive macho male doesn’t mean that you will always get the girl, for according to a new study, the fainthearted do also have a good chance of winning the heart of the fair damsel.
Researchers have for long been puzzled by the knowledge that if aggression makes men more likely to father kids, then all males should be selected to be very aggressive. However, this is not the case.
In a study on fruit flies, the boffins carrying out the study noted that the females of the species sometimes choose males who do not fight, and sometimes choose males for no obvious reason.
This, they say, may help explain the large variation in aggressiveness in most species, including humans.
One reason for this variation, they added, could be that no fighting strategy works all the time.
“We showed in fruit flies that even the most genetically aggressive flies can have an Achilles heel, and lose against males who are (for the most part) wimps,” study leader Brad Foley, from the University of Southern California.
“There’s no single way to win a fight, or win mates. Females didn’t necessarily prefer aggressive males -- some males mated less when they lost fights, but some males mated more if they didn’t fight. Moreover, different females preferred different males.
“Unexpected interactions between individuals can define winners and losers (so-called ‘chemistry’). In order to understand why flies, and humans, and other animals, are so genetically different from each other, we need to stop imagining there's a ‘best’ kind of strategy,” he added.
