|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Sexual attraction article.|
|Sexual attraction has been listed as a level-4 vital article in Life. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as Start-Class.|
|WikiProject Sexuality||(Rated Start-class, Top-importance)|
|WikiProject Philosophy||(Rated Start-class, Low-importance)|
- 1 Pheromones
- 2 Reproduction
- 3 Serious NPOV issue: sexual attraction in humans is not distinct from other forms of attraction
- 4 Sexy
- 5 Definition issue
- 6 Pending changes
- 7 Photos
- 8 Edit request on 3 December 2011
- 9 Edit request April 13, 2012
- 10 Describing sexual attraction
- 11 Discrimination
- 12 Physical attraction without sexual arousal
Pheromones are controversial, actually modern scientific community tend to go in the "humans no longer use pheromone" category. Also physical attractiveness or the way you intake somebody through your senses is not the only way to have sexual attraction, culture have shown us that Social Status(and thus the understanding of behaviors) plays a big role too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 15:32, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
Regarding the assertion "Although in many species it serves no immediate reproductive goal" - I'll suggest that it does not serve any reproductive "goal" in most species. For example, oysters do not set "goals", although they do have sex. My guess is that oysters and other animals have sex because they enjoy doing so. Sexual activity is a step in sexual reproduction, but I think it's safe to say that oysters, birds, cats etc. (and for that matter, a substantial number of humans) do not know this, much less set it as a "goal." -- Gyrofrog (talk) 20:15, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
Serious NPOV issue: sexual attraction in humans is not distinct from other forms of attraction
Is Wikipedia seriously attempting to say that sexual attraction is an attribute *only* of humans? Not even of primates or other mammals but only humans? This article needs to be named human sexual attraction and even more correctly modern human sexual attraction. A more correct factoring of articles would be:
- sexual attraction covering the subject the way, say National Geographic Wild Sex would, each species being treated as interesting in its own right - part of biology not specific to humans
- primate sexual attraction covering what is known about monkeys, Great Apes especially bonobos (nearest human relative) and any theories of early human sexuality that predate our involvement in tame civilized modern societies - part of primatology not specific to humans
- modern human sexual attraction acknowledging that we know absolutely nothing about pre-modern or pre-state-society humans because we didn't test them before we wiped them out, and have inexorably altered sexual attraction in all human societies we have encountered - evidence suggests that we'd have to make this part of sociology as well as sexuality because we can't separate social from other influences given we are the products of many generations of domestication.
Also there is human sexual behavior and physical attractiveness (another bad name as "physical" implies even less human specificity than "sexual" and could bloody well mean gravity) which need a total refactoring in this process. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 23:15, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
- Should also mention sexy son hypothesis and rewilding (anarchism) as the latter is a movement in which primitive skills are elevated in social desirability.
Quote: For example, a gay or lesbian would typically find a person of the same-sex to be more attractive then one of the other gender. A bisexual person would typically find both sexes to be equally attractive.
A bisexual person does not necessarily find both sexes equally attractive. Bisexuals are sexually attracted to both sexes, but may have a greater preference towards one sex than the other. The preferences may also fluctuate in intensity. Homosexuality and heterosexuality in a clinical senh m jh b h jghd cj bgdvbc bse is an exclusive attraction to one sex (either your own or of the opposite sex). 188.8.131.52 (talk) 12:22, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
- Agreed this is nonsense, Kinsey had at least a scale of 1 to 6, and that should probably be referenced in this context.
This article is one of a small number (about 100) selected for the first week of the trial of the Wikipedia:Pending Changes system on the English language Wikipedia. All the articles listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Queue are being considered for level 1 pending changes protection.
The following request appears on that page:
|Many of the articles were selected semi-automatically from a list of indefinitely semi-protected articles.
Please confirm that the protection level appears to be still warranted, and consider unprotecting instead, before applying pending changes protection to the article.
However with only a few hours to go, comments have only been made on two of the pages.
Please update the Queue page as appropriate.
Note that I am not involved in this project any more than any other editor, just posting these notes since it is quite a big change, potentially.
Edit request on 3 December 2011
|This edit request has been answered. Set the
Scents have an important role in sexual behaviour of primates whith vertebrates. The scent of either male of females is used for recognizing the opposite sex and it can also attract opposite sex which inceases potential mating. Usually females are more attracted towards male scents which is an important interaction between the main and accessory olfactory systems.
Jane L., Hurst . "Female recognition and assessment of males through scent." Behavioural Brain Research 2 (2009): 295-303 . Scholars portal Journals. Web. 1 June 2009. 999212150.utsc (talk) 18:44, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
Edit request April 13, 2012
If you could add this section below 'Enhancement' I feel the page could be expanded a bit to include some research on sexuality/sexual orientation differences in sexual attraction. If you feel there is somewhere better this belongs, feel free to inform me.
Sex and Sexuality Differences in Sexual Attraction
Men have been found to have a greater interest in uncommitted sex compared to women  as well as a greater interest in visual sexual stimuli . Additional trends have been found with a greater sensitivity to partner status in women choosing a sexual partner and men placing a greater emphasis on physical attractiveness in a potential mate, as well as a significantly greater tendency toward sexual jealousy in men and emotional jealousy in women. 
Bailey, Gaulin, Agyei, and Gladue (1994) analyzed whether these results would vary according to sexual orientation. In general, they found biological sex played a bigger role in the psychology of sexual attraction than orientation. However, there were some differences between homosexual and heterosexual women and men on these factors. While gay men and straight men showed similar psychological interest in casual sex on markers of sociosexuality, gay men showed a larger number of partners in behaviour expressing this interest (proposed to be due to a difference in opportunity). Self-identified lesbian women showed a significantly greater interest in visual sexual stimuli than heterosexual women and judged partner status to be less important in romantic partnerships. Heterosexual men also had a significantly greater preference for younger partners than homosexual men.
- Buss, D. M., & Shmitt, D. P. (1993). Sexual strategies theory: A contextual evolutionary analysis of human mating. ‘’Psychological Review’’: 100, 204-232.
- Ellis, B.J., & Symons, D. (1990). Sex differences in sexual fantasy: An evolutionary psychological approach. ‘’Journal of Sex Research’’, 27, 527-555.
- Wiederman, M. W., & Allgeier, E. R. (1992). Gender differences in mate selection criteria: Sociobiological or socioeconomic explanations? ‘’Ethology and Sociobiology’’, 13, 115-124.
- J.M. Bailey, S. Gaulin, Y. Agyei, B. Gladue. (1994). Effects of gender and sexual orientation on evolutionarily relevant aspects of human mating psychology. ‘’Journal of Personality and Social Psychology’’, 66(6), 1081-1093
Describing sexual attraction
I think this page could potentially be improved with a description of what sexual attraction feels like, or at least more description of the physiological symptoms associated with sexual attraction. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Galingy (talk • contribs) 06:00, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
Physical attraction without sexual arousal
Let's say a male finds other males physically attractive, to the point where he may be more inclined to check out men than women, but is not sexually aroused by men, and he only has sex with women. Do you think physical and sexual attraction could easily be confused by some people (particularly those who don't experience [significant] physical attraction for those they aren't sexually attracted to), and that explicitly differentiating the two might be worth a few sentences in this article?--Xagg (talk) 16:29, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
- I don't see why that needs to be in this article. We have the Physical attractiveness and Sexual attraction articles because these topics are distinct, though they do significantly overlap. That stated, if what you propose is WP:Reliably sourced, it can be added to this article and/or to the Physical attractiveness article. It is not WP:Lead material, however. And, per MOS:Paragraphs, a few sentences generally do not warrant a heading. Flyer22 (talk) 16:37, 14 February 2015 (UTC)