Globalizing Evolution: Female Choice, Nationality, and Perception
of
“Sexual Beauty” in China
Running head: China physical attractiveness
William Jankowiak, Peter B. Gray, & Kelly Hattman
Department of Anthropology & Ethnic Studies; University of
Nevada, Las Vegas
Please address all correspondence to:
William Jankowiak, PhD
Department of Anthropology & Ethnic Studies
University of Nevada, Las Vegas
4505 Maryland Parkway, Box 455003
Las Vegas, NV 89154-5003
Draft for special edition of Journal of Cross-cultural Research
1
edited by Robert Quinlan: 30 May 2007.
Please do not cite without permission.
Abstract
An evolutionary perspective on physical attractiveness suggests
that individuals find attractive those characteristics associated
with reproductive success. Theory and existing data consistent
with this view link perceptions of physical attractiveness to
traits such as symmetry, status, and reproductive value. Here,
we take this evolutionary perspective global to ask what happens
when perceptions of physical attractiveness are embedded in rapid
processes of globalization. More specifically, in rapidly
changing and globalizing China, how do men and women rate the
sexual beauty of East Asian compared with Caucasian models? To
address this question, we enlisted 74 Chinese men and women from
Hohhot, a northern city, and Chengdu, a southern city, to rank
2
photos obtained from Chinese magazines of both Chinese and
Caucasian male and female models. We also elicited emic accounts
for the ratings that subjects gave and provide relevant
participant observation as complementary sources of qualitative
data. Results revealed that Chinese women ranked as more
attractive both Caucasian male and female models over Asian
models. Moreover, Chinese men did not differentially rank Asian
and Caucasian females, though they did rank Caucasian males as
more attractive than Asian males. Combining these results with
data from emic reports and participant observation, findings best
support evolutionarily-based hypotheses based on hypergyny
(females seeking to mate up a status hierarchy) and male openness
to partner variety. We suggest that, while an evolutionary
novelty, a process of globalization can still be linked to
potentially adaptive preferences for physical attractiveness, and
call for more research in this vein.
Key words: mate choice, physical attractiveness, evolution, mate
selection, globalization
3
Introduction
An evolutionary perspective on physical attractiveness suggests
that individuals will find attractive those characteristics
associated with reproductive success (reviews in Rhodes
2006,2005; Gangestad and Scheyd 2005; Sugiyama 2005; Buss 2003;
Batten 2000; Jones 1996; Langlois et al 2000; Saad 2007). This
proposition leads to an expectation that what is considered
physically attractive will show both some similarities and
differences across social contexts (Gangestad and Buss 1993).
For example, in all contexts, we would expect individuals to
value cues of health (e.g., absence of overt symptoms of disease)
and developmental stability (ability to counteract physical
insults during development, as indexed by low fluctuating
asymmetry). In contexts of long-term mate selection, we would
anticipate individuals preferring traits indicative of
compatibility (e.g., trustworthy disposition, similar
personality, similar religious affiliation, ages within a few
years of each other). We would expect females to find physical
attractive cues of a potential mate’s social status since social
4
standing could translate into political, economic and social
benefits to herself and offspring; however, the precise cues
deemed attractive (a chubby husband if indicative of wealth; a
thinner, physically fit individual if associated with hunting
prowess) can be expected to vary across social contexts.
This latter point also raises a key facet of physical
attractiveness: sex differences in the traits viewed as
attractive are expected to emerge (Buss 2005). Males should find
attractive traits in potential mates suggestive of long-term
reproductive output if seeking an extended pair bond or immediate
fecundability (likelihood of conceiving for a given act of
intercourse) for short-term mating. This leads to the
expectation that males will value traits indicative of high
reproductive value, or future reproductive output, such as youth,
a neotenous (youthful) facial architecture, and a low waist-to-
hip ratio. This means that males can be expected to value
characteristics of physical attractiveness closely tied to
fecundability and fertility such as adequate fat reserves (in
subsistence environments) and cues to reproductive health such as
5
full lips and shiny hair. Most generally, however, males may be
open to a wider take on physical attraction since the minimal
reproductive costs to intercourse tend to be much smaller for
males (sperm) compared with females (lengthy gestation,
potentially lactation and extended childcare) (Mealey 2000; Geary
1998; Trivers 1972). The board point is males are less
discriminating than females-and this less discriminating taste
can manifest in many ways, including disregard whether mating
objects are members of one’s own group or, in exceptional
occasions even members of one’s own species.
For females, conversely, perceptions of physical attraction
can be expected to track cues indicative of complementary and
valuable male resource availability. In practice, this can
include cues to a male’s social status since his social standing
can be translated into potential social, political and economic
benefits. This can also more directly tie into cues of wealth,
advertised in conspicuous displays (e.g., expensive clothes and
cars) or other means (possessing a large herd of livestock).
Such views emphasize a highly contextualized female view of
6
physical attractiveness, one that stems from a higher minimal sex
differences in reproductive costs (alluded to above) and the
basic principle of animal socioecology that female reproductive
success tends to be ultimately constrained by access to
sufficient resources (which can include the resources males
provide), whereas males tend to be ultimately constrained by
reproductive access to females. An outgrowth of this more
contextualized female view of physical attractiveness is that
females’ views may be more readily modified in the face of rapid
social change. Certainly other contextualized aspects of
physical attractiveness exist (e.g., variable female preferences
for masculine faces depending on phase in reproductive cycle),
but some of these may apply to both men and women (e.g.,
differences in perceived attractiveness depending on one’s own
mate value).
A large body of evidence supports these general expectations
concerning sex differences in perceptions of physical
attractiveness. An early compilation of various surveys,
primarily from the U.S., suggested that men tended to seek youth,
7
health, and physical attraction, while women sought ambition,
generosity, and social and economic success when evaluating
potential mates (Symons 1979). In this same work, Symons (1979)
asserted that men favor sexual variety for its own sake, a view
that finds support from various lines of evidence: males more
commonly utilize prostitutes, consume pornography, are more
likely to consent to sex with a stranger, and display higher
rates of sex with farm animals (Mealey 2000). Cross-cultural
surveys indicate that women give greater weight to cues of status
and wealth, and men to cues of physical attractiveness when
specifying mate preferences (Buss 2003; Regan and Berscheid 1999;
Ford and Beach 1951). Studies of online dating find that women
pay more attention than men to a potential partner’s education,
profession, and income.
Saying all this, evolutionary theory needs to keep up with
the times, and in our times this means a rapid process of
globalization. In the face of tremendous international social
change and interchange, how can such evolutionary principles of
physical attractiveness inform our understanding of such novel
8
circumstances? In our specific case study, how do these
principles play out in China when Chinese men and women are asked
to evaluate the physical attractiveness of both East Asian models
and Caucasian models?
We are aware of little research that has explored sex
differences in perceptions of physical attraction in a non-
western context. There has been several notable studies conducted
primarily in the Carribean and northern Brazil that sought to
identify how folk models organized around accepted notions of
racial hierarchy shaped individuals perception of physical
attraction. This research which focused primarily on males
evaluation of females relative physical attractiveness found
ethnicity and skin color were more significant than facial
symmetricality in determining an individual’s relative ranking
(Hoetink 1967; Jones 2000; Russell 1992). Cross-cultural research
exploring culture’s preference for lighter skin found 47 out of
51 or 92 percent cultures express a preference for lighter skin
color (Russell, Wilson and Hall 1992:58). This “whiteness” bias
predates colonial expansion (Don Brown, email correspondence,
9
2007). Van de Berghe and Frost (1986) argue the preference for
lighter skin hues may be associated with reproductive vitality:
Women who are nubile and thus most fertile tend to a slightly
lighter skin color. In effect, light skin signals youthfulness
(Jones 1996). Significantly, only Doug Jones examined how these
factors also shaped women’s perception of male physical
attraction. His study (2000) conducted in northern Brazil found
individuals with lighter skin color received a more positive
evaluation. Because skin color is strongly correlated with an
individual’s relative social status, it is difficult to know if
the Brazilian bias is a manifestation of a tacit somatic
prejudice that favors an averaging of phenotypical features or
merely a reflection of relative social status. For Jones, both
factors are significant. However, his study did not probe which
of these two factors may be the more pivotal.
In east Asia we are only aware of one study that explores
sex differences in men and women’s evaluation of relative
physical attraction. For example, Rhodes et al. (2005)
investigated Japanese and Caucasian Australian men and women’s
10
assessments of computer-generated images of male and female
faces, and found a strong preference for the female photos that
provided a blend of the Japanese and Caucasian phenotype. In
addition they found that Japanese rated the Caucasian male faces
as more attractive, speculating that this could “reflect cultural
differences in ethnocentrism” (Rhodes et al. 2005: 329). Such
findings suggest that greater attention to inter-ethnic
assessment of physical attractiveness is warranted. In order to
answer this question, we derive several hypotheses from
evolutionary theory and test these alongside hypotheses
originating in interdisciplinary social science concerning
globalization. We lay out these hypotheses below.
Hypothesis I. According to the view that familiar faces or
individuals with a similar phenotype will be the most preferred
(Darwin 1871), individuals will find most attractive the faces of
models of similar ethnic background (Jones 1995). Predictions
derived from this hypothesis are that men and women in China will
find Asian faces more attractive.
11
Hypothesis II. The Westernization or unilateral cultural
hegemony model shapes the criteria used in assessing facial
attractiveness. As a result of cultural hegemony in a
globalizing world, male and female Chinese will prefer Caucasian
models over Chinese ones.
Hypothesis III. The “syncretization” or “mutual diffusion”
hypothesis holds that globalization results in a blending of
physiological traits a kind of somatic averaging (Hoetink 1967)
that results in a new appreciation of aesthetic differences
(Rhodes et al. 2005). If this is correct, subjects should not
favor a particular nationality. Instead, there should be strong
individual variation in model selection.
Hypothesis IV. Chinese females will find attractive the faces of
potential mates, and ethnic heritage may be viewed as an
important cue in a prospective mate’s material and social status
and thus his sexual desirability. The logic underlying this
12
hypothesis is hypergyny; that is, in light of global cultural
dynamics in which Caucasian models are more apt to be viewed as
sources of wealth and economic prospects, females will express
preferences for mating up this hierarchy, whereas the preferences
will be less strong for males to do the same. Predictions
derived from this hypothesis are that sex-specific attractiveness
preferences will emerge whereby Chinese will prefer Caucasian
faces due to “whiteness” being associated with higher income and
socioeconomic well-being.
Hypothesis V. Assuming males express little restriction in their
mating preferences, Chinese males will find females, regardless
of ethnicity/nationality, as equally attractive. As a subset of
this hypothesis, males may make some distinctions in
attractiveness ratings when seeking short- vs. long-term mates;
such a distinction could lead to Chinese men evaluating females,
regardless of ethnicity/nationality, as equally attractive as
long-term mates, but giving greater erotic value to “other”
(Caucasian) females as short-term mates. This possibility leads
us to separately ask subjects to evaluate models’ attractiveness
13
according to “beauty” and “sexy” with this dichotomy presumably
related to long- and short-term mating prospects, respectively
(more on this issue in the Methods).
Methods
Many studies of physical attractiveness use computer image
techniques to manipulate facial or full body physical features
such as symmetry, jaw architecture, or upper body musculature
(e.g., Rhodes et al. 2005; Yang et al. 2005; Perret et al. 1998).
This approach has been criticized as not only ahistorical but
also unreliable as it is using “composite faces instead of actual
faces” (Miller 2006:148). Because our study wanted to understand
individual’s assessment of actual faces, we did not seek to
duplicate previous research investigating effects of such
manipulated traits on assessments of physical attractiveness.
Instead, we pursued a methodological agenda complementing the
typical university- and computer-based approach to assessing
physical attractiveness. As part of our ecologically and
culturally balanced approach, we used only photos taken from
magazines people actually bought, if not read. The photos used
14
in the study were taken, therefore, from popular fashion
magazines purchased in China. Because the magazines were
produced in China and were oriented toward selling upscale
clothing, we further assumed that the male and female fashion
models were selected for their overall physical attractiveness.
In our study, individuals were shown a total of twelve
pictures: six photos were female models (3 “Asian” and 3
“Caucasian”) and six photos were male models (3 “Asian” and 3
“Caucasian”). Female fashion models wore pants, pant suits, or
dresses. Male fashion models wore casual polo shirts, turtle
neck sweater, or suit. In the case of female photos the study
was repeated with a different set of photos that showed only a
woman’s face and the top portion of her shoulder.
Participants were not given any information concerning a
particular model’s background. They were only asked to rank the
models as to their relative physical attractiveness from the best
looking (piaoliang or beautiful and hao kan or good looking) to the
least (bu hao kan or not good looking). After each participant
had rated the pictures, the interviewer listed the order of the
15
rankings. Each photo was coded for ethnicity and thus physical
ranking also included ethnicity. After completion of this task,
the participants were asked to rank the photos on a continuum of
the sexiest to the least sexy. Their responses were also
recorded.
We complement participants’ quantitative rankings of
models’ physical attractiveness with two additional sources of
qualitative data. The first of these additional sources of
information consists of emic explanations given by subjects for
their preferences. After completion of the picture rankings,
participants were asked to explain their rankings as to what
constituted beauty and sexiness.
The second additional source of qualitative data presented
includes participant observation by Jankowiak spanning several
decades in China. To some evolutionary-minded researchers
focused on lab methods and data collection, methods of
participant observation may seem less systematic; however, they
can provide another “check” on more controlled means of data
collection and additional, rich context in which to situate the
16
other types of data. The presentation of our results below thus
consists of first the quantitative rankings of physical
attractiveness followed by these qualitative sources of data
(emic reports, participant observation).
Chinese participants were men and women living in Chengdu,
capital Sichuan, and Hohhot, capital of Inner Mongolia Autonomous
Region. In 2000, field research was conducted in Chengdu, the
tenth largest city in China. During that field season,
Chengduians were invited to participate in the photo study. The
study was expanded to Hohhot, a northern city of over two million
people, in the summer of 2000. Because long-term research was
carried out in the 1980’s in the city for over a twenty-five year
period, William Jankowiak was familiar with many of the nuances
of urban life (Jankowiak 1993). Selecting a large southwestern
Chinese city and a northern city provided a way to compare local
perceptions from two different geographical regions. Given the
expansion of regional variation in China, we wanted to see is
this also pertained to perceptions of beauty and sexiness.
Subjects were recruited on an opportunistic basis from
17
restaurants, college libraries, hotels, and friendship networks.
A total of 74 Chinese (34 men and 40 women) participated in the
study. The subjects ranged in age between 18 and 56, with the
majority of the sample population being under 36 years old.
The rankings of the face pictures were tested for goodness-
of-fit between expected distribution and distribution of our
sample with the Kolomogorov-Smirnov test. We used this test to
determine if the model scores stood out from an unexpected even
distribution of scores. The test was used because it is useful
for small sample sizes and because its two-tailed design
indicates which models were least attractive (Thomas 1986: 336).
The test compares cumulative proportions of how many times a
model was scored first, second, third, etc. against an unexpected
cumulative proportion. This expected cumulative proportion is a
hypothetical situation where all models get assigned each rank
(first, second, third, etc.) the same number of times. If the
greatest difference is greater than the critical value, then the
sample of model scores is significantly different from the
expected even distribution of scores. The critical value is
18
determined: D=1.36 n. Before given the final percentage, each
table was tested for normal distribution.
Results: Subject Rankings of Models’ Physical Attractiveness
We first tested whether participants’ rankings differed by city
in China. No measurable differences appeared between the Chengdu
and Hohhot data sets. This is consistent with other findings
that compared Hohhotians with Chengduians’ response to occupation
prestige (Jankowiak 2004), gender stereotype (Jankowiak and
Parkin N.D.), and children’s street play (Jankowiak, Joiner, and
Kambia N.D.). This does not mean there are not regional
differences; however, regional differences do not apply to
perceptions of physical attractiveness. Thus, we combine the
Chengdu and Hohhot samples in presenting our results.
Quantitative rankings of models are given in Table 1. As
shown in this Table, Chinese females ranked both Caucasian male
and female models as more attractive than Asian models. Chinese
males also ranked Caucasian males as more attractive than Asian
males, but did not express an aesthetic preference for Asian or
19
Caucasian females. There is no support that Chinese men and
women make a distinction between sexiness and beauty when ranking
a person’s relative attractiveness.
These quantitative results do not support Hypothesis I
(preference for mates of similar ethnic heritage) or the subset
of Hypothesis V (assuming that beauty and sexy would be
distinguished in rankings). These results can be construed as
providing mixed support for the remaining hypotheses as follows.
The fact that Caucasian models were viewed as more attractive by
females and Caucasian males viewed as more attractive by Chinese
males supports Hypothesis II (unilateral cultural influence), but
Chinese males’ lack of a female ethnic preference does not
support Hypothesis II (though it can be construed as partial
support for Hypothesis III, or the mutual diffusion hypothesis).
Hypotheses IV (female hypergyny) and Hypothesis V (male
indifference to female rankings) were both supported. The
additional qualitative data below lend the best support to
Hypotheses IV and V, although the mutual diffusion hypothesis
cannot be ruled out (at least from the standpoint of Chinese
20
males’ rankings).
Emic Reports of Physical Attractiveness
When asked what traits made a particular male model more
“physically attractive” than another, Chinese women were inclined
to presume a male model had certain personality (qizhi) traits,
and they seldom invoked physical features. For example, a 23
year old female noted that what made male model “1U” better
looking was “his confidence” (zixin) which she also associated
with higher intelligence. Another woman noted that men with a
honest (puzhe), graceful (shuai), and straightforward demeanor
were better looking. She also thought these qualities suggested
a greater likelihood of social achievement. A 29 year old woman
provided a straightforward and highly representative perspective
in noting that “westerners are tall, have broad shoulders, and
are more confidence (zixin). These facts make them simply more
attractive!” Further probing also showed there is a presumption
that Caucasian men are considered to be uniformly taller and move
more luxurious lifestyles compared to ordinary urban Chinese.
Despite the emphasis on personality characteristics,
21
females did highlight as important physical features in
attractiveness: angular nose, wide and deep set eyes, whiteness
of skin. Some women added an additional qualification: hair
style, clothing design, or (in the case of rating men) their
positioning or associated items found in the photo that suggest
to an individual rater the model may possess a positive or
negative character trait(s). For example, Chinese females were
in good agreement in ranking a Caucasian male model “2A” (see
photo table) LOWER than most Chinese male models. The Chinese
women but not men were uniformly quick to note “how scary the
model looked” and that he was “too dangerous” and that his dark
partially hidden figure “frightens her.” This particular male
model wore a suit and tie and stood next to a bookcase with his
face partially darkened from mood lighting that cast a dark
shadow across his face.
Chinese women were adamant in their rejection of immature
males. For most, a youthful character presentation is deemed
visually unattractive. Chinese women preferred a more serious
pose which implied an intensity of focus which they associated
22
with an integrated or well-balanced character. This value was so
strong that Chinese women overwhelmingly ranked the young-looking
male model “2C” as the least attractive.
The Chinese females interviewed agreed with a 27 year old
female’s observation that “western women are prettier than
Chinese girls due to their long nose.” Another 23 year old woman
thought Chinese girls were not as “healthy as European women who
are sexy and better looking.” Chinese females also thought a
female’s eyes convey a sense of sexiness along with height, hair
style, fashionable clothes, demeanor (fengdu), and health. A 23
year old shop assistant noted that she “assumed European women
are sexy as they are tall. Tall is sexy, unlike Chinese who are
short.” Significantly, there is no difference in responses
between 15 year old teenagers and those of 40 year old women in
views of female sexiness.
Hohhotians do not believe that valuing certain western
phenotypic features is evidence of being ashamed of one’s
culture. As one 23 year old woman noted “I have no bias. If a
westerner is ranked the highest, it is because she or she (ta) is
23
the better looking [model in the sample]!” For most, this is a
straightforward acknowledgment of the “natural order of things.”
Participant Observation
For many Chinese women, Australians, Europeans, Canadians,
Americans, Japanese, and Taiwanese men form an attractive pool of
potential mates, with the western male being seen as the most
attractive. The strength of this conventional wisdom was
repeatedly demonstrated whenever I was invited into homes that
sold Amway products. I was usually asked to view a promotional
video that showed the CEO’s Texas multimillion dollar home which
always was greeted by someone announcing: “See this is how
Americans live.” My comments to the contrary were greeted with a
polite, albeit not necessarily believed, acknowledgment. In this
way, the local conventional wisdom that Caucasians, especially
those from America, are fabulously wealthy is a belief that few
people want to clarify or reject. Further evidence of this
conviction is readily found in listening to Chinese women’s
conversation about what makes for a desirable mate. In 2006, a
29 year old woman told me that she wanted a western boy friend
24
(to marry) as it would “make all her friends jealous knowing she
got a westerner as a husband.” Another 29 year old women readily
admitted that “Europeans are more physically attractive than
Asians.” She added “westerners have a sexier figure with broader
shoulders and nice faces. That is quite obvious.” Concurring, a
40 year old woman noted that for her and many of her friends
westerners compared to Chinese men “are so sexy.” A recent study
conduct in Xian, a large northwest Chinese city, lends further
support to the representativeness of the above women’s comments.
The Xian women found males with “broad chests and narrow waist”
more physical attractive (Dixson et al 2007:93). Hohhotian men
are less aware of this phenotypical bias as they are of the
ethnic bias in Chinese female perception. In the summer of 2007,
young unmarried working class men (n=11) readily acknowledged
that young Chinese women (guniang) found “westerners very
attractive and wanted to marry them.” Working in southern Chinese
cities, Aihwa Ong (1999) observed Chinese women breaking off
“their marriages in order to take up relations with a foreigner”
(2006:235).
25
This is not recent perception or behavior. In 1987, I
overheard Chinese female students discussing male attractiveness
in the dorm. Everyone thought western men compared to Chinese
men were more physically attractive. One female student simply
sated “Chinese men are too weak.” For this student and many of
her classmates, the change in government policies that enable
“foreigners” to visit and work in China combined with emerging
market conditions brought a new status object into town and thus
into their purview: the western or Caucasian male. No longer
regarded as an abstraction or unapproachable, the western male
was assumed to possess immense wealth, talent, and social
standing. Within this milieu, many Chinese women found the
Caucasian male not only socially attractive but also physically
attractive.
Although Chinese women retain an immense interest in
assessing a potential mate’s overall social status, it is not the
only value. This is a change from earlier eras. For example, in
my 1983 survey of Hohhotian’s mate selection criteria I found
Chinese women overwhelmingly preferred a tall male who had
26
achieved or had the potential to achieve a prominent social
position. By 1987, the nascent market economy had introduced a
new criterion: income. The ability to purchase luxury products
(e.g., refrigerator, washing machine, and electronic merchandise)
had become important. In the mid 1990’s, Tang and Parish (2000)
conducted an urban study that found a shift away in mate
selection criteria and with it a de-emphasizing of material
factors in favor of personality traits. In 2006, I revisited
Hohhotian’s mate selection criteria and found strong agreement
with Tang and Parish’s survey: personality or character traits
are now voiced more readily compared to the 1980’s. It is
significant that in contemporary urban China personality traits,
emotional connections, and deep intimacy are valued qualities
women and men desire in a potential mate. Marriage is no longer
about being married but rather about being involved in an
intimate relationship (Hirsch and Wardlow 2006).
The emergence of these new values does not mean, however,
that material factors have been replaced by spiritual values. In
probing Hohhotians’ mate selection evaluations, I found young
27
women tended to adopt dual criteria: one that idealized
personality traits and another than retained a strong pragmatic
interest in enhancing their material well-being. Whenever the
two values were in opposition or could not be integrated, most
women opted for the value of material well-being. The keenest of
this pragmatic strategy was aptly revealed to me when I discussed
the film Titanic with several female high school students. One
woman admitted the story was, in her words, “so romantic. The
way the poor boy fell in love and fought for his love.” But she
added, “of course, it would never have lasted—they were from
different social classes.” It was an observation everyone at the
table agreed with. For most women material and psychological
factors are not necessarily in opposition. Most women expect
they can fit together but not always automatically so.
Hohhotian women’s position toward a westerners’ physical
attractiveness is contrary to the trend found in China’s
magazines that prefer to use East Asian cover models. A
longitudinal survey (2000-2006) of magazine photos sold at street
corner kiosks found a de-emphasis on the use of western models in
28
favor of Chinese or East Asian models. For example, in May 2000
I counted 20/23 of the magazine cover models featured a European
male or female. In the winter of 2002 the proportion had dropped
(18/64) dramatically of the magazine covers featuring a Caucasian
model. By July 2005 only 10/72 displayed a Caucasian cover
model. To identify the representativeness of this pattern, the
study was expanded to include a survey of advertisement photo
displays in three large Hohhot department stores. Of the
advertisement photos in the cosmetic section (usually on the
first floor), 28/56 were East Asian. The models on the other
department stores, however, were overwhelmingly Caucasian
(58/60). Presumably, Caucasian models continue to be associated
with modernity and technological progress. Significantly, the
association of “Caucasianness” but not “whiteness” is less
important for selling cosmetic products.
In exploring some of the meaning of male sexual attraction,
Chinese males thought that a man’s “clothes made his sexy.” In
addition, males thought sexiness (xinggan) could be conveyed in
body posture or posture that conveyed a sense of confidence which
29
implies higher social standing. In evaluating a female’s
relative sexiness there was disagreement concerning the
relationship between skin exposed and “sexiness.” Some men,
reflecting attitudes common in imperial China, thought that it
was not that sexy, while other men stressed the amount of skin
exposed enhanced a woman’s sex appeal. Chinese males also stress
that a woman’s smile, eyes, and lips were also indicators of
sexiness. In the case of female lips: the more open the lips the
more suggestive the sexual invitation. A 22 year old male noted
that “sexiness is found in the way a woman looks at you.”
Another young male admitted that “it is her eyes—the way they are
focused on you. Her eyes say ‘come here! I want (i.e., sexually)
you!’.” Still another 25 year old man thought sexiness had an
eroticized spiritual component. He noted that sexy was something
that “makes you want to fuck, to masturbate, and entice you from
your penis to your soul.” Significantly, the heightened value
given to sexual desire has not resulted in the fetishization of
the Caucasian over the Asian female. In fact, the opposite
occurred: Chinese men were adamant in their appreciation and
30
sexual interest in the Chinese female, a point illustrated when a
Chinese youth who had always wanted to look at Playboy magazine
returned it to his American friend with the comment “It is not
that interesting as it has no Asian women in it.”
In 1983, Jankowiak showed several Vogue magazines to
friends in Hohhot, and pointed out that the cover models were
beautiful. His Chinese friends were astonished and disagreed by
replying—“If you like American women.” Another Chinese male
noted that he did not find “the picture pleasing.” Because
Jankowiak had often listened to them discuss positively American
females’ relative physical attractiveness, he was puzzled at
their reaction. He later realized that it stemmed from their
unfamiliarity with women wearing cosmetics. For example,
Hohhotians considered the Vogue models who wore scarlet lipstick,
dark eye liner, and reddish facial powder to be odd, garish, and,
thus, aesthetically displeasing. By the 1990’s, however, urban
Chinese have become familiar with women wearing makeup, a pattern
vividly revealed in my observation that almost every middle-aged
and younger women in Chengdu and Hohhot were wearing lipstick in
31
public. In this new context, present day Hohhotian Chinese males
perceive western women to be just as physically attractive as
Chinese women. An attitude expressed by a 34 year old male
admitted “if they look good who cares what their nationality is.”
Discussion
Hohhotian and Chenguian men and women do hold a bias that favors
the Caucasian phenotypic male over the female, with Chinese
females extending that bias favoring Caucasian females. There is
no aesthetic bias, however, in Chinese males’ preference for the
Caucasian female over the Asian female. As sided from those
societies that have a well institutionalized racial hierarchy
that idealized the western or “white” women over local women of
color (Hoetink 1967; Jones 2000), women from any ethnic group,
are more often than not, perceived to be of sexual value, if not
also of equal aesthetic valued. Our finding when taken in
combination with emic reports and participant observation,
findings best support the evolutionarily-derived hypotheses based
on hypergyny and male openness to partner variety. This is not to
deny that other somatic factors (e.g. broad shoulders, tallness,
32
phenotypical averaging) can not also influence an individual’s
perception and, thus, evaluation of relative physical
attractiveness. Nonetheless, our emic and participant observation
data clearly indicate support for the hypergyny hypothesis too.
Our results do not support Lousia Schien’s widely cited
(Nagel 2003) position that there is no aesthetic bias or
preference for the Caucasian phenotype or, in her words,
“whiteness.” Rather, Chinese men and women favor Caucasian male
phenotypes, and Chinese women further favor Caucasian female
models. The grounds for these biases do not necessarily reflect
cultural hegemony since results seem best accounted for by
evolutionary-based, individual-choice perspectives on which we
further elaborate.
Chinese female assessments of male physical attractiveness
appear to make sense from the standpoint of adaptive mate choice.
Chinese women view Caucasian males as wealthy, and this presumed
wealth makes them attractive. Emic evidence strongly supports
this assertion. Other lines of evidence are consistent with this
view too; for example, several web dating and marriage sites
33
feature Chinese women wanting to marry a man who is financially
well off and living in a country other than China. This chain of
thought is consistent with the findings reviewed in the
introduction that women tend to value male status and resources
in prospective mates, and thus gives rise to a form of desired
hypergyny. And it is consistent with every mate selection survey
conducted on the Chinese mainland (Jankowiak 1993; Parish and
Whyte 1984, as well as cross-cultural research see Jones
2000:138-139).
Such views may also account for why Chinese males rank
Caucasian male models as more attractive than Asian ones: Chinese
males may be giving their rankings based on what their
perceptions of Chinese women’s views of attractiveness. In other
words, if Chinese men assume that Chinese women believe that
Caucasian men are wealthy and attractive, then Chinese men will
also express a bias toward Caucasian male models.
Apart from these broad strokes, results of this study show
that Chinese female views of physical attraction are context-
dependent. There was variation across the Asian and Caucasian
34
male models on which women commented and that affected rankings.
For example, women ranked lower the shadowy Caucasian model than
other Asian male models on the basis of assessments of negative
character. So while Caucasian male models may be more
attractive, all else being equal, a shadowy one like this image
provides a notable exception to the overall pattern. This
interpretation is also consistent with Constable’s (2003)
research showing that Chinese and Filipino women used multi-
faceted criteria in selecting a western or local mate.
Preferring a long-term mate may account for the lower
ranking of the youngish highly playful male who was thought to be
immature. Unlike South Korean women, who prefer images of
immature young men who have a “pretty face with big eyes and fair
skin and a moderately masculine body” (Flower 2005: B1). It is a
criteria shared by young Japanese women ( Miller 2006:126-158).
In contrast, Chinese women are adamant in their rejection of
immature males. Chinese women preferred a more serious pose
which implied an intensity of focus which they viewed as
associated with an integrated or well-balanced character. Since
35
China remains a rapidly modernizing country where most of its
population continue to live economically modest lives, it is
reasonable to assume that women’s material realities would impact
their evaluation of a man’s relative physical/sexual
attractiveness (and age would be an important cue in this
regard).
The power of context to shape Chinese aesthetic judgment is
further revealed in a smaller restudy conducted in Hohhot in
2006. Using a different set of photographs of three male
Caucasian and three Chinese males Jankowiak asked 17 women to
rank and discuss reasons for the ranking. In his haste to doing
the study unknowingly Jankowiak selected three photos of well-
known Chinese male actors or entertainers. This fact did not
influence, however, the judgments of women over forty years of
age whose ranking replicated the earlier study and, thus, all the
Caucasians were considered to be more physically attractive.
However, the same photo set was shown to shop assistants in their
20’s. Eight of 11 (or 73 percent) ranked the Chinese males as
the more physically attractive! When he inquired why, everyone
36
readily commented that the Chinese males were famous and that
they liked them. For example, two shop assistants showed him
copies of the male performers’ new CD album or DVD film. The
forty-something cohort was unaware of the younger Chinese males’
identity and thus ranked them as strangers, whereas the younger
female cohort recognized and admired the male performers. This
smaller 2006 restudy of physical attractiveness lends further
support to the interpretation that women’s preferences are highly
contextualized.
How can Chinese female biases toward Caucasian female models
over Asian models be explained? This bias does not fit within a
hypergyny account; instead, at first glance it appears to support
cultural hegemony. Emic accounts suggest Chinese women view as
more attractive Caucasian facial features and height. Other
lines of evidence point in similar directions: China has a
growing plastic surgery industry that does rhinoplasty to produce
a more angular or western nose, breast augmentation, and
operations to remove epicanthal eyelid fold. Yet the studies of
magazine covers and advertisements suggest a more mixed story.
37
Magazine covers show a rapidly increasing use of Asian models,
albeit many with surgically reconstructed angular noses, at
expense to Caucasian ones, but in department store advertisements
Caucasian models remained common outside of the cosmetics
section. All of this may lend mixed support to a view of
Caucasian cultural hegemony ( Luo, Parish and Laumann 2005;also
see Miller 2006 for diffusionary discussion on Japanese
aesthetics).
Another view is that Chinese women are expressing
preferences that include Caucasian female models not because of
external, top-down sociocultural forces, but because these women
also associate Caucasian models with correlates of modernism,
wealth, and other desirable characteristics—a more individual-
and agency-based interpretation. Consistent with this latter
view, Schien (1994), Adrian (2003), and Brownell (N.D.) point out
that the Chinese do not believe their culture or the “Chinese are
an inferior race” (Zhao 2004). In particular, Taiwanese,
Beijingers, and Chenguians do not believe that valuing certain
western phenotypic features is evidence of being ashamed of one’s
38
culture. As Constable (2003: 30) put it, “[W]omen are not pawns
of global forces but shrewd [in their calculations] about
[life’s] possibilities.”
Chinese males’ indifference to Asian or Caucasian female
models also speaks against a strict cultural hegemony view. If
cultural hegemony were the full story, we would expect Chinese
men to prefer Caucasian female models, but they did not. If
anything, longitudinal participant observation suggests that
Caucasian models might have been somewhat biased against in past
decades (the exotic stranger, especially when depicted with
strange cosmetics), but that they have more recently been folded
into the social scope of Chinese life. An influx of media
exposure has led to an increase in transnational interaction and
associations. Caucasian “foreigners” are no longer an
abstraction but have been made tangible through daily
interaction. As a result, Chinese men may find Caucasian females
as less abstract, and in turn express an openness to partner
variety that incorporates both Caucasian and Asian females. Taken
together, we concur with Doug Jones observation that skin “color,
39
averageness, and status markers are all components of
attractiveness” (2000:139). Our study finds, however, that there
is sex differences in the way these three components are weighted
and thus valued.
While results of this study are consistent with arguments
laid out above, they are also subject to limitations. The sample
size of 74 participants is modest, though not greatly different
from most other studies of physical attractiveness (e.g., a 1998
Nature study with 56 subjects). The magazine photos used in
ranking procedures were less standardized though potentially more
ecologically relevant than other methods based on computer-based
facial morphing techniques. Emic accounts may be useful, but
researchers point out that we cannot always believe what people
say. For example, participants may give answers they think a
Caucasian male ethnographer might want to hear. Current
neuroscience also indicates that people can be self-deceived
about their own biases! We feel that the combination of
quantitative and qualitative methods employed in the field by a
long-time culturally fluent ethnographer (Jankowiak) attenuates
40
some of these possible problems, though of course still urge the
appropriate cautions.
Results of this study raise questions for future research.
As China continues to prosper economically, we suspect there will
be greater variation in associating a specific phenotype with
wealth. We predict that perceptions of attractiveness of Chinese
females living in more affluent regions (e.g., Guangzhou,
Shanghai, Shenzhen, Hong Kong) will differ from those held by
women in less affluent cities like Chengdu and Hohhot. In an
international perspective, comparison of our findings with East
Asian perceptions of physical attractiveness according to
ethnicity should reveal interesting contrasts; for example, Kaw
(2003), focusing on the U.S., argues that Asian American females’
preference for cosmetic surgery is evidence of an implicit
American racial ideology that holds the Asian phenotype inferior
to the European one. Lastly, it is our anecdotal impression from
experience in sub-Saharan Africa, the Caribbean and elsewhere
that similar issues addressed in this study (e.g., cultural
hegemony, preferring similar or different phenotypes, hypergyny)
41
can be addressed in many contexts of global social change, and we
argue for the utility of evolutionary-based hypothesis testing in
such cases.
Endnotes:
1) We would like to thank the following people for their
encouragement, suggestions, and assistance: Donald Brown, Susan
Brownell, Dan Benyshek, Carol Ember, Vanessa Fong, Andy Kipnis,
Libby Hinson, Amber Joiner, Cynthia Khalba, Kam Louie; James
Mackenzie, Gordon Matthews, Jeff Parkin, Ben Orlove, Jennifer
Thompson, Robert Quinlan, Marsha Quinlan, and two anonymous
reviewers.
2) Evolutionary psychologists have yet to investigate the factors
that impact the bifurcation between relative physical
attractiveness and relative sexiness.
3) Men were noticeably more uncomfortable in ranking men in terms
of sexiness (xing gan). In the 1980's it was common for male to be
in physical contact with one another. However, by 2000 it was
increasing rare to find Chinese men physical touching as in
holding hands. This was not so for women who continue to hold
42
hands or drape arms around each other shoulder. Clearly, there
has been a more pronounce shift in favor of coupleness, erotic,
and emotional intimacy. We suspect this shift has had a
corresponding impact on the way males, but not necessarily
females, evaluate male/male physical interaction.
4) Our finding suggests that Gladney’s influential analysis of
the erotization of minority females as an index of social
inferiority may be over stated. It may not even have been a
primary means to foster what Gladney calls (the homogenization
of Han identity). This does not mean the Han Chinese did not
regard its minority populations as socially backward and
inferior. They most certainly did so. However, Gladney may be
mistaken when he asserts that because minority women were
perceived as sexy this meant that the Han thought of their women
as sexually chaste, albeit physical beautiful. Gladney’s analysis
focused only on the relationship between ethnicity and erotic
display of females in film and magazines. He did not discuss
whether Han males also considered Han females equal to or more
physically attractive than minority females, nor did he examine
43
whether Han male and female perceived Han females as equally sexy
compared to minority females, it is difficult to know for sure.
Our findings do suggest an alternative explanation for Han
Chinese perception that some southern minority women were sexy
and physically beautiful. If minority women were regarded as
equally physically beautiful to Han women, then they may have
been also perceived as desirable long term mates (certainly that
was the perception Han had of Mongolian women in Inner Mongolia)
and, thus, in the realm of marriage and family, social equals.
Today, the distinction is moot. By the 1990's the Chinese erotic
impulse has expanded and is now projected, regardless of
ethnicity, onto everyone. The ethnic discrepancy between the
(sexually conservative) Han female and the (sexually open)
minority female has vanished from the Chinese landscape. The Han
continue to distinguish themselves from ethnic minorities. As in
the past, they use differences in language and custom to create
and (we verse us) dichotomy.
5) Louisa Schein (1994) argued that by the mid-1990's urban
Chinese women were no longer fetishizing the westerner and, thus,
44
(whiteness) was no longer, if it ever had been, a core aesthetic
value. Bonnie Adrian (2003) found a similar trend in Taipei,
Taiwan. Adrian believes there has been a blending of Asian and
Western phenotypical aesthetic characteristics. Although
(whiteness) or Euro-American models are prominently featured in
Taiwanese and mainland magazines, does not mean, she points out,
that a westernization in aesthetics has taken place. To the
contrary, China has a long pre-colonial history in which fair
skin women were highly valued.. Nonetheless, Susan Brownell
(n.d.) points out that the Chinese interest in cosmetic surgery
to enhance breast size, eye fold deletion, and nose shape are
clear signs that Chinese women have embracement some aspects of
western aesthetics. Adrian is also aware of this, but believes
China’s cultural framework is sufficiently vibrant to redefine or
blend western( images into a local framework of relative
significance (Adrian 2003:244). From this perspective,
contemporary Chinese aesthetics is a byproduct of larger
globalizing processes and, thus, should be viewed as something
the people ( wish to absorb rather than something foisted upon
45
them) (Adrian 2003:155). In this way, the Taiwanese and by
extension the mainlanders (appropriation of images of white
women may be seen as colonizing these images, not only as being
colonized by them) (Adrian 2003:155). In effect, if people
consciously choose an object, there can be no cultural
domination.
In focusing on the transformation of Chinese women’s
aesthetic perceptions, the above researchers have overlooked
globalizing forces impacted on men’s aesthetic framework
(Jankowiak 2006; 1999a, 1993). If women have incorporated certain
western aesthetic features into their own cognitive framework, it
can be assumed that males have also. This assumption remains
unexamined. It is an assertion that has not been systematically
documented, refuted, or modified. Our study was designed to
address this gap in the literature.
References
Adrian, B.(2003). Framing the bride: globalizing beauty and romance in
Taiwan’s bridal industry. Berkeley: University of California.
46
Ang, I. (2001).On not speaking Chinese. London: Routledge.
Bercheid, E. and E.Walster. (1974).Physical attractiveness. In E.
Berkowitz (Ed.) Advances in experimental social psychology ( pp.157-
215).New York: Academic Press.
Brownell, S.(N.D.) The “Oriental eye”: From the nineteenth-
century anthropology of race to contemporary Chinese cosmetic
surgery.
Buss, D. and D. Kenrick .(1998). Evolutionary social psychology.
In DT Gilbert and S T Fisher and G. Lindzey (Eds.) The handbook of
social psychology (4th ed, Vol. 2, pp 982-1026). New York: McGraw
Hill.
Buss, D. and D. Schmitt. (1993). Sexual strategies theory: An
evolutionary perspective on human mating. Psychological Review, 100,
204-232.
Constable, N. (2003). Romance of a global stage: pen pals, virtual ethnography,
and “mail order” marriages. Berkeley: The University of California
Press.
Comaroff, J. and Comaroff, J. (1991). Of revelation and revolution:
Christianity, colonialism, and consciousness in South Africa. Chicago: University
47
of Chicago Press.
Cunningham, M. R., M. R. Druen, and A. P. Barbee.(1997). Angels,
mentors, and friends: Trade offs among evolutionary, social, and
individual variables in physical appearance. In J.A. Simpson and
D. T. Kenrick (EDs.)Evolutionary Social Psychology ( pp. 109-140).
Mahwah, N.J: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Dixson, B., A. Dixson, B. Li, and M. J. Anderson.(2007). Studies
of human physique and sexual attractiveness: Sexual preferences
of men and women in China. American Journal of Human Biology 19,88-95.
Dion K.L., E. Berscheid, and E. Walster. (1972). What is
beautiful is good. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 24, 285-
290.
Flower, George. (2005). “Asia’s lipstick lads.” Wall Street Journal,
May 21:B1.
Gangestad, S. W. (1993). Sexual Selection and Physical
Attractiveness: Implications for mating Dynamics. Human Nature,
4, 205-235.
Gangestad, S.W. and D.Buss (1993). Pathogen prevalence and human
mate preferences. Ethnology and Sociobiology. 14,89-96.
48
Gangestad, S.W. and Scheyd, G.J. (2005). The evolution of human
physical attractiveness. Annual Review of Anthropology 34, 523-548.
Gilmore, D.C., T. A. Beehr ,and K. G. Love. (1986). Effects of
applicant sex, applicant physical attractiveness, type of job on
interview decisions. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 59,103-109.
Goldman, W. and P. Lewis. (1977). Beautiful is good: Evidence
that the physically attractive are more socially skillful. Journal
of Experimental Social Psychology13,125-130.
Hitsch, G, Hortacsu, and D. Ariely. (2007). What Makes You Click:
Mate Preferences and Matching Outcomes in Online Dating. New York
Times, web paper.
Hoetink, H. (1967). The two variants in Carribean race relations: A contribution
to the sociology of segmented societies. London: Oxford University Press.
Jankowiak, W. (2006). Gender, power, and the denial of intimacy
in Chinese studies and beyond.” Reviews in Anthropology, Sept: 1-25.
_____________(2004). Market reform and the expansion of China’s
moral horizon. In Well Being, Family Affections, and Ethical Nationalism in Urban
China. In William Jankowiak (guest Editor) Special Joint issue
The Journal of Urban Anthropology and Studies of Cultural Systems and World
49
Economic Development Vol 33, No. 24: 167- 210.
_____________(1999). “Review essay on gender, sexuality and
Chinese studies.” The Bulletin of Concerned Asian Scholars (Now Critical Asian
Review). Vol.31, No.1, 31-47.
_____________(1993). Sex, death and hierarchy in a Chinese city: An
anthropological account. New York: Columbia University Press.
Jones, D. (2000). Physical attractiveness, race and somatic
prejudice in Bahia, Brazil. In Adaptation and Human Behavior, Lee
Cronk, N. Chagnon and W. Irons, (Eds). New York: Aldine De
Gruyter.
_______.(1996). An evolutionary perspective on physical
attractiveness. Evolutionary Anthropology 5, 97-109
________. (1995).Sexual selection, physical attractiveness and
facial neoteny: Cross-cultural evidence and implications Current
Anthropology Vol. l36 No. 5,737-738.
Kaw, E. (2003). Medicalization of racial features: Asian-
American women and cosmetic surgery. In The Politics of Women’s Bodies
Rose Weitz, (Ed). New York; Oxford University Press,184-200.
Kang, Liu. (2004). Globalization and cultural trends in China. Honolulu:
50
University of Hawaii Press.
Kenrick, D. E.K. Dadalla, G. Groth, and M.R. Trost.1990.
Evolution, traits and the stages of human courtship: Qualifying
the parental investment model. Journal of Personality, 58, 97-116.
Fisher, R. (1958). The General Theory of Natural Selection. Oxford:
Clarendon.
Masica-Lees, F. and Nancy Black (2000).Gender and anthropology.
Prospect Heights, Il: Waveland Press.
Miller, L.( 2006). Beauty up: Exploring contemporary Japanese body
aesthetics. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Langlois, J.H., L, Kalakanis, A.J., Rubenstein, A. Larson, M.M.,
Hallam, and M., Smott. (2000). Maxims or myths of beauty? A meta-
analytic and theoretical review. Psychological Bulletin, 126,390-423.
Little, A. C. & Hancock, P. J. (2002). The role of masculinity
and distinctiveness on the perception of attractiveness in human
male faces. British Journal of Psychology, 93(4), 451-464.
Little, A. C., Penton-Voak, I. S., Burt, D. M., Perrett, D. I.
(2002) Evolution and individual differences in the perception of
attractiveness: How cyclic hormonal changes and self-perceived
51
attractiveness influence female preferences for male faces. In
Advances in visual cognition, vol. 1,1-5.
Lu, Sheldon.(2001). China, transnational visuality, global postmodernity.
Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Luo,Ye, W. Parish, E. Laumann. (2005). A population-based study
of body image concerns among urban Chinese adults. Body Image
2,333-345.
Lutz, C. and Abu Lughod, A. (Eds).(1990).Introduction In C. Lutz
and A.Abu Lughod (Eds) Language and the politics of emotion . New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Thomas, D. (1986). Refiguring anthropology: first principles of probability and
statistics. Prospect Heights, Il: Waveland Press.
Ong, Aihwa.(1999). Flexible citizenship. Durham: Duke University Press.
__________. (2006). Neoliberalism as Exception: Mutation in Citizenship and
Sovereignty. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Perrett, D., K.J. Lee, I., Penton-Voak, D.Rowland, S. Yoshikawa,
D. M. Burt, S.P. Henzil, D.L. Castles, and S. Akamatsu. (1998).
Effects of sexual dimorphism on facial attractiveness. Human
Nature Vol. 394,884-887.
52
Schien, L. (1994). The consumption of color and the politics of
white skin in post-Mao China. In Lancaster, Roger N. and M. di
Leonardo ( Eds.) Gender and Sexuality Reader New York: Routledge, 473-
486.
Sugiyama, L.S. (2005). Physical attractiveness in adaptationist
perspective. In Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology D. Buss (Ed), 292-
343. Hoboken, N.J.: John Wiley and Sons.
Rack, M. (2005). Ethnic distinctions, local meanings. London: Pluto Press.
Regan, P. and E. Bercheid. (1999). Lust: What we know about sexual
desire. Thousand Oaks, Ca: Sage Publications.
Rhodes, G. (2006). The evolutionary psychology of facial beauty.
Annual Review of Psychology 57, 199-236.
Rhodes, G., Lee, K. Palermo, R. Weiss, M.,Yoshikawa, S., Clissa,
P. Williams, T., and Peters, M. (2005). Attractiveness of own-
race, other race and mixed-race faces. Perception, 34,319-340.
Roberts, S. Craig, Jan Havlicek, Jaroslav Flegr, Martin Hruskova,
Anthony Little, Benedict Jones, David Perrett, and Marion Petrie.
Female facial attractiveness increases during the fertile phase
of the menstrual cycle.(2004). Proceedings in the Royal Society of London,
53
271-272.
Russell, K. M. Wilson and R. Hall. (1992). The color complex: The
politics of skin color among African Americans. New York: Harcourt Brace
Jovanovich Publishers.
Triver, R. (1972). Parental Investment and sexual selection. In
B. Campbell (Ed.)Sexual selection and the descent of man,136-179. Chicago:
Aldine.
Van den Berghe, P. L. and P. Frost. (1986). Skin color
preference, sexual dimorphism and sexual selection: A case of
gene-culture coevolution? Ethnic and Racial Studies 9,87-113.
Watson, J. (Ed).(1997).Golden arches east: McDonald's in East Asia .
Stanford, Calif: Stanford University Press.
Watson, James and M. Caldwell.(Eds).( 2005). The cultural politics of
food eating. New York: Blackwell Publishing.
Wright, R. (1994). The moral animal: The new science of evolutionary
psychology. New York: Pantheon.
Zebrowitz, L. and A , Rhodes (Eds).(2002). Nature let a hundred
flowers bloom: The multiple ways and wherefores of
attractiveness. In L. Zebrowitz, A , Rhodes (Eds) Facial attractiveness:
54
Top Related