Is the claim that the pill changes what kind of men women are attracted to true?

[Alfred001]

 I've heard this claim many times and I'm curious whether this has ever been studied and what has been found. I think I've also heard that it has been refuted or failed to replicate, but I may be making that up.

[exchemist]

2 minutes ago, Alfred001 said:

 I've heard this claim many times and I'm curious whether this has ever been studied and what has been found. I think I've also heard that it has been refuted or failed to replicate, but I may be making that up.

I've never heard this and it seems extraordinarily unlikely to be true. Can you cite any examples of this claim being made? 

[Phi for All]

Anti-birth control spin? Claims like this are purposely nebulous so you fill in the blanks with either your beliefs or your fears. 

[swansont]

52 minutes ago, Alfred001 said:

 I've heard this claim many times and I'm curious whether this has ever been studied and what has been found. I think I've also heard that it has been refuted or failed to replicate, but I may be making that up.

“I’ve heard”? Why should we do the search for you? What efforts have you made to evaluate this?

[MigL]

Attraction is a mental phenomenon.
Birth control pills are a hormonal modifier.

A little knowledge dispels many rumors.

[Peterkin]

4 hours ago, Alfred001 said:

I've heard this claim many times

Where? From whom? On what platform?

What, exactly, is being claimed by these unnamed persons?

It sounds as if the availability of an oral contraceptive has changed how all women (most women? a statistical majority of women?) respond to men. What does this entail? Was there one particular type of man that women in general found attractive for 6000 years? May we know that that type was? Is it then the case, that from 1960 to the present, women in general ceased to be attracted to that archetype and selected a different one? What is the new preference?

4 hours ago, Alfred001 said:

but I may be making that up.

I think you may.  

[OldChemE]

My wife and I are of the generation that was dating and getting married when the "pill" was just becoming available.  Not at all scientific, but I didn't notice any changes going on in our or our many friends' relationships when the wives starting taking birth-control pills.

[John Cuthber]

Re. "Is the claim that the pill changes what kind of men women are attracted to true?"
The men should not be taking it.

There have been reports  that the pill changes women's (apparent ) attractiveness to men.
https://www.unm.edu/~tybur/docs/dancers.pdf
I have no idea if the report is accurate or not.

[MigL]

That only applies to drunk young men and desperate and dateless older ones who frequent those types of establishments, John.
And yes, I've fit both descriptions a few times and many years ago 😄 .

[CharonY]

2 hours ago, MigL said:

That only applies to drunk young men and desperate and dateless older ones who frequent those types of establishments, John.
And yes, I've fit both descriptions a few times and many years ago 😄 .

It is also part of psychology that roughly falls into the framework of evolutionary psychology. Unfortunately any studies there suffer from reproducibility, coupled with theoretical overreach. I.e., a system where far-ranging hypotheses and even theories are propped up by insufficient data. It does not mean that the theories are wrong per se, but the studies that are supposed to support them are too limited to actually achieve that.

The study in question has multiple issues right off the bat. The menstrual cycle and fertility is based on fairly rough estimates (no blood tests, for example), and while the authors acknowledge some perimenstrual issues (e.g. cramps, nausea, irritability, thermoregulation and so on) they kind of waved it off by assuming that they are only happening in the luteal phase. What more recent has shown is that focusing only on the fertility aspect creates blinders for the wide range of hormonal changes which affect overall physiology in an array of ways. Mood changes are likely caused by relative fluctuations of steroids throughout the menstrual cycle, which in turn affect the ability or interest in individuals to draw out money from their customers. 

[LuckyR]

There isn't a firm understanding of who women are attracted to and why without medications, let alone on medications.

[Night FM]

Romantic attraction isn't purely physical to begin with. Being attracted to a "person" is multifaceted (e.x. it can include attraction to elements of their character, personality, life experiences, and so forth).

This is why most people don't consider porn a substitute for dating, since the desire to be in a relationship goes beyond merely the desire to achieve orgasm.

Maybe we can reference Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs again. Purely physical needs (e.x. orgasm) are at the lowest end of the hierarchy, and the needs people achieve through relationships (as perhaps opposed to one-night stands) likely relate to needs (e.x. love) which are higher on the hierarchy.

It's a common marketing fad to claim that something will make you sexually irresistible to the opposite sex (or perhaps have the opposite effect), generally requiring money in exchange. But application of a bit of common sense (such as the fact that people have free will and can't be made to do things they don't want by a "magic pill") generally refutes this.