Here's the dirt: a bunch of Swiss scientists analyzed armpit samples from 24 men and 25 women. It seems we smell of onions (men generate a "cheese-like" smell, although, between "cheese" and "onion", onion was found to be less appealing.) Based on this, the team hopes to use its findings to create deodorants that combat these specific smells. Says one scientist, "We could make inhibitors that neutralise the precursors, or block the bacterial enzymes that do the conversion."

We say, why stop there? We'd like to see some complementary smells — say, Steak and Onion! Onion and Garlic! Cheese and Bacon! (And let's not forget fondue!) And seriously, if they're looking to make a buck, it seems like this could be catnip to the whole "eccentric perfume" industry, that gets off on eaux de Funeral Parlors and Laundromats. Heck, Demeter already makes "Tomato" and "Gin and Tonic!" Christopher Brosius, the nose behind Demeter (who describes traditional scents as "a childish masque hiding the timid and unimaginative") counts the cryptic "Walking in the Air" and "Secret History" series amongst his boutique label; could a savory pheromone recipe be far behind?

Men Smell Of Cheese And Women Of Onions [New Scientist]

Don't get me wrong: these studies are fascinating, and I'm sure they illuminate a great deal about evolutionary psychology, development, and doubtless have implications for medicine, product development and other, sinister things I don't know about. From a layman's perspective, it's always interesting to know to what extent we are at the mercy of ancient forces, and can even provide a welcome measure of relief in cases. Certainly the science of attraction has resulted in any number of fascinating discussions — not least of them why Love Potion Number Nine is not on cable far more often.

Of course, studies like this one are almost never purely based on biology; societal influences cannot be ignored. In the case of the color red, Dr Jo Setchell, an anthropologist from Durham University, tells the BBC that red — the color of blood — is "the easiest signal for an animal to produce externally, and had become a handy method of advertising fertility," such as in the case of monkeys' "bright red sexual swellings" during ovulation. Adds Andrew Elliott to the Telegraph, "It could be this very deep, biologically based automatic tendency to respond to red as an attraction cue given our evolutionary heritage."

In the study, the hundred young subjects were asked to rate pictures of a woman on prettiness, kissability, and sexual attractiveness. In some images she was pictured in a blue top, in others red. They were also shown pictures of the same woman bordered by different colors. Not only did the men gravitate towards the red-clad dame, they said they'd be more inclined to spend money on her in a dating situation. (Women, natch, didn't favor one color over the other.) "The researchers noted that the color red did not alter how men rated the women in the photographs in terms of likeability, intelligence or kindness — only attractiveness," adds the Beeb.

But what about the fact that red is associated with the devil? And that blue is the traditional color of the Virgin Mary? Is there a virgin-whore complex at work here? And how powerful is this unconscious attraction? Can it blind a man to a woman's flaws? Would he choose a red-clad date who was abusive to a waiter over a nice lady in turquoise? And what if red's not your color (and it's trying, ironically, for many blonds.) Would he pick you in red even if it washed you out more than the blue top? What if the red top was, like, a Christmas sweater with a big snowman on it, and the blue top was really cute? These are the follow-up studies I want to see.

The basic point of all these studies, at the end of the day, is that people are attracted at some level to those who seem like fit mates — no news there. Yes, men are attracted to ovulation, we're drawn to height. We're animals. We reproduce. We know this. And yes, we like science that has something to do with poppy human interest. But do people listen to these studies — change their behavior or grooming based on these biological findings to increase their attraction? Seriously, I want to know. To the extent any body language study or even the most elementary makeup or clothing tutorial is founded on basic principles of "maximizing best points" I guess we are all on some level at the mercy of this kind of thinking. I wear blush like the next pale person — which I guess on some level is intended to mimic good reproductive health and (in the case of NARS) orgasm. Even in a non-romantic context, we're certainly encouraged to manipulate perceptions all the time — in a job interview, for instance — so I guess manipulating nature wouldn't be that much of a stretch.

So, no judgments: can we get an informal poll on whether any of us have consciously used these studies that fill our inboxes on a slow news day, to alter our behavior? I'll admit, that pheromones thing made me feel a little better about being too cheap to get regular bikini waxes. After all, in a world in which we seem at the mercy of all sorts of external forces (global economy, anyone?) I can certainly see the appeal of trying to take matters into one's own hands so to speak. Are we glad or not to be essentially creatures of biology? To embrace or overcome? Gives 'back to nature' a whole new meaning.

Men prefer women in red [Telegraph]
Wearing red 'boosts attraction'

Earlier: Fake Scientist Finds Real Humor In Crappy Cosmo Content

I'm not even talking about the first fifteen years of my life, my legitimately blonde phase, also characterized by tininess, enormous flannel dresses and extreme self-righteousness. Rather, I'm referring to a particularly low moment a few years ago in which I agreed to go blonde for a feature in an alleged women's magazine I'd never heard of. Being unemployed at the time, it was no problem for me — along with a blonde and a redhead, neither of whom seemed especially jazzed — to show up at a salon somewhere in Manhattan for our gratis metamorphoses.

The first doubts began to intrude when we learned that the makeover was a promotion for an at-home haircolor line that shall remain anonymous. Basically, someone would be dyeing our hair, but using the same stuff you buy at the grocery store. The smelly, stinging ordeal commenced. I was excited to see myself transformed into a glamorous sex kitten — it was one of those deals where seeing ourselves would be a big surprise at the end - but my fears mounted as colorist after colorist walked over to my chair, went into hurried consultation with the stylist, and gave me a wan smile that I didn't find reassuring. An assistant styled my hair in silence, refusing to meet my eyes.

They assembled us for the reveal before a bank of mirrors. One by one they turned us towards our reflections. Everyone enthused over the former blonde's maghgany mane and the redhead's ebony crop. When they reached me there was an awkward silence. They turned me to face the mirror. There, atop my head, was a pile of Velveeta-hued straw. I burst into tears. Chaos ensued. The beauty editor screamed that she couldn't run a picture of the atrocity; someone else demanded they repair the damage. The "repair" meant an additional three bleachings which left the Velveeta marginally paler and my hair utterly destroyed. A makeup artist gamely blotted at my tears with a powder puff; the hairdresser sprayed me with some silicon-based product to create an illusion of glowing good health. The khaki pants they made me wear were several sizes too big and needed to be cinched in the back with a diaper pin. I heard the words "Photoshop" and "color correction."

Of course, further coloring was out of the question; I would have to live with what resembled a cheap doll wig. Which would have been fine, except that next day I got called in for a job interview. There was nothing for it; I would have to make the best of it. What I found galling — besides the way it looked, of course — was that I looked like a moron who a) had wanted to be incredibly blond and b) had totally fucked it up. There was no way this color was deliberate; too horrible to be deliberate, too conventional to be cool, it simply looked like the worst dye job in the history of the world, a canned corn-colored pile atop my small, sallow face. On the day of the interview, I screwed "hair" into a knot on my head and resolved to keep my beret on until the last possible moment. It is a testament to that boss's open-mindedness that she hired said hair to be her assistant. I suspect no one at that job was ever quite able to take me seriously, even when I was able to color it brown again. As to men "preferring" it, well, if you count jeering references to troll dolls or the hilarity of bums as signs of marked preference, then yes, I suppose they did.

Do Gentlemen Really Prefer Blondes? [Houston Chronicle]

Related: Want To Marry A Billionaire? Curl Up And Dye.
Do You Get Dumber Around Blondes?

Men with the gene, which, as the Washington Post notes, regulates the hormone vasopressin, are more likely to live with women without marrying them; if they are married, these men are more likely to fight with their spouses and consider divorce. Their female partners (the study only looked at heterosexual couples) also "reported lower levels of satisfaction, affection, cohesion and consensus in the relationship" than partners of men without the variant.

"No one is saying biology is destiny," says anthropologist Helen Fisher, who studies romantic love. She might marry a man with the "love-rat gene" — "but," she says, "I might not start a joint bank account with them for the first few years."

Kidding aside, this study looks at first glance like another great way to reduce human relationships to biological imperatives. As if comparisons between men and male animals weren't popular enough, the Post cites an earlier study in which the same gene variant was found in mountain voles, who are apparently more caddish than their prairie cousins. (Interestingly, Ayelet Waldman got the jump on this years ago, calling her faithful husband Michael Chabon a "prairie vole.")

People seem to find it comforting to believe that their behavior is predetermined. Fisher says a man with the variant "might be able to use the knowledge to ignore tugs of restlessness he might feel in his marriage: "You can say, 'Oh, it is just my DNA, and I am going to ignore it.'" Certainly better than the alternative — "oh, it is just my DNA, and I can't do anything about it" — but still kind of disturbing. The danger in putting too much stock in this kind of research is that we'll use it as yet another proxy for actual communication in relationships. In the last five years, the science sections of newspapers have started to read a little like Cosmo — they tell us how to learn all about our men without ever actually asking.

On the other hand, the study does counter a spate of recent books and articles that blame women for male inability to commit. In addition to Dante Moore, there's psychotherapist Gary Neuman, whose The Truth About Cheating: Why Men Stray and What You Can Do to Prevent It says "Men will eventually find their way into the arms of another if they are not getting enough sex at home." And of course there's Elroy Riggs at the Central Kentucky News-Journal, who blames divorce on modern women's unwillingness to whip up homemade biscuits.

If the love-rat gene makes people realize that infidelity is often more about the cheater than the cheat-ee, then more power to the Karolinska Institute. The most interesting research, however, has yet to be done. The Institute plans to study whether oxytocin, another hormone, affects women's ability to commit. This study might take some of the annoying stereotypical sting out of sex research. Thus far, much of it has been about why men "can't commit," with the assumption that women want them to. Corresponding research into women's predispositions might underscore the fact that we're not all sad little lady voles who sit around waiting for our man vole to come home. Nor are we slaves to biology. Some men and some women want to commit, and some don't, and our goal should be to avoid a mismatch of the two, not to pore over our genes for predictors of our happiness.

The love-rat gene: Why some men are born to cause trouble and strife
Study Links Gene Variant in Men to Marital Discord
Monogamy gene found in people
Author risks fury of millions of women with a claim that THEY are to blame when husbands stray