Do the Clothes Make the Man?

"The findings that I have reported in the last two posts should not be construed as implying that either sex is shallow or superficial. Rather, these results demonstrate that men and women beautify themselves on the mating market in ways that are desired by the opposite sex."

In the clothing example, it depends on whether the attire is a reliable status indicator or not. If it's authentic, there's not been any attempt to "beautify", and so no deception is involved.

For example, if you work at Dunkin' Donuts, you have to wear their uniform when on the job. But this would be masked if the guy subsequently went out to a night club wearing something else after work. Then he can freely choose what his attire is, though the choice is likely to be constrained substantially by his social milieu, the type of night club it is, and maybe some other factors. At most places it's possible to be over-dressed.

The situation with "fake up" is a little different since it's always meant to enhance and thus deceive, even though it's typically sold to women on the basis that it will make them look more "natural"; maybe it does at first glance. (The only exception I can think of off hand is the Goth style, where make up and attire is intentionally used to de-enhance -- though at another level this is meant to signal that they don't "buy into" the whole beauty game, which they view as ultimately an enhancement.)

I couldn't access the full study, but my guess from looking at previous data is that the "low status" outfits worn by women, simply were not low status enough for the men's preference to be affected.

Homogamy, the desire to mate with people of similar age, class, degree of beauty, seems to be much stronger than what these studies suggest. Are people really claiming that men don't prefer higher status in women (ahem, fair skin or tanned skin depending on the community and extreme thinness)?

I would venture simply that men have a different concept of low status than women do. It's not based upon income, but rather on social class. And since Dunkin donuts outfits though are not sufficiently "low status enough" for most men, of course you won't see any difference.

A better study would be to survey our society about the clothing that signals "low status" in women. I bet things like being "too colorful" with nails and certain hairstyles and certain types of fashions would be among the responses.

The second part of the study would be to assess men's preferences based on what is indeed culturally considered "lower status" female attire.

And as an anecdotal aside, how many people have seen male business types walking hand-in-hand with a wife or girlfriend who dresses in a manner that clearly indicates she's not his economic and social equal? You just don't see it!!! You don't see it with men and you don't see it with women.

Did women want to have SEX with the better dressed guys? Or just marry them for their status?
A 3 piece suit can get you married, but can it get you laid? :)

Why is it I don't need to do a study to know that James Bond would look better in a suit (as shown in the photo) than in a Dunkin' Donuts outfit? Not just to women, but to me, a man. The suit is just sexier men's clothing. It's an expensive item of clothing specifically designed to make a man look really good, and the Dunkin' Donuts outfit isn't. So is it possible the study just proved that men look sexier in sexier clothing?

I wish you'd had more details from the study so that one could be sure. Exactly what clothes did the women wear, and how sexy were those clothes? Sometimes women in businesswear can look pretty austere and masculine. On the other hand, other female business attire is very sexy. So which type of attire did women wear, sexy or unsexy? I'd think that would make a huge difference in the outcome.

One more thought experiment: instead of Dunkin' Donuts attire, show a man wearing the clothes of a manual laborer: muscle shirt, tight blue jeans, and a tan from working in the sun. Suddenly it's not so obvious that the guy in the suit would look sexier to women.

And, one could argue, what clothes are higher status than those of a fashion model? I suspect they didn't put women in lavish, sexy gowns and check whether men found them sexier in such clothes than in Dunkin' Donuts outfits. So does that mean men are attracted to high-status women? I don't think so.