"Men who would make good fathers look like they do, and women can tell just by looking at them."

Since when does preferring a picture of an infant to a picture of an adult classify you as a good father?

By this logic a peadophile would make a good parent.

Idiot.

There are tons of example of women who have chosen wrong and then complain about it. Just read http://www.reparateme.com/story63.html and you'll see.

This is such an interesting topic. Mens facial features and how women react to them. Women marry baby faced men (dads) and are attracted to (and have short term relationships with) dominant facial featured men. it's true.
it's painful to realize....especially as a woman who is divorced from a baby faced man (who has the kids 50% of the time-takes his dadhood very seriously) and is seeing a dominant facial featured man. one has to wonder if the variety gene is just too "dominant" in the dominant facial featured guys (the ones with higher testosterone) and that they just aren't capable of doing a long term relationship. one just wonders and wonders.....

In regard to Kanazawa's article, I find this study to be inadequate unless Kanazawa left out certain details concerning how the study was carried out. It's certainly ludicrous to attempt to ascertain the quality of men's "interest" in children by merely having them look at pictures! How would anyone be able to determine that selecting a child's photo over that of an adult means that the chooser has the interest or ability to be a good dad? Pedophiles may consistently pick childrens' photos for depraved reasons. A well-adjusted adult male may consistently pick the adults' photos because of some criterion which is only known to him (the chooser).

It's a ridiculous way to ascertain who truly has a healthy interest in parenting and a genuine capability to parent.

The theory that women are attracted to certain types of men based on what part of the menstrual cycle they are on makes more sense. That theory is backed by a substantial body of evidence. This "best-dad" face-choosing study seems unreliable at best.

Next you'll say that a cop can tell a criminal just by looking at him, or that dark skinned people are naturally "more suspicious" by virtue of their melanin content. Studies like this really don't prove anything more than prejudice is part of human nature.

Next you'll say that a cop can tell a criminal just by looking at him, or that dark skinned people are naturally "more suspicious" by virtue of their melanin content. Studies like this really don't prove anything more than prejudice is part of human nature.

Look at Kanazawas face! You can clearly see the idiotism.

A person's actual genetic makeup will have far more impact on how they look than their hormones. I have somewhat feminine features (went on my mom), angular jaw, higher eyebrows, big eyes, etc. I don't think I have a prominent brow ridge.

Except you don't even need to see any of that. I have a really thick bushy beard (thick eyebrows too) and I'm balding... in my mid-20s. Signature signs of testosterone. Everyone says I look like I'm constantly scowling. Anyone can tell that my body's got more testosterone than it knows what to do with. But if I was clean shaven and tried to just look nicer, I could completely look feminine (in that one would say I went on my mom... and normally, people say I'm a dead ringer for my dad).

I also happen to love kids like crazy. I'm more antisocial than most guys, but I love playing with my little cousins and one of the primary reasons I'd want to marry (because otherwise I don't give a damn about being that close to someone) is for the kids and family. Babies are awesome.

And there are many people like me who have other overriding factors at play. I'd break any sort of test you tried to run. So would most men of other ethnicities if run past a bunch of caucasian women. Get off your hormone worship.