Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Gender role attitudes refer to attitudes toward the appropriate roles, rights, and responsibilities of men and women in society. Evidence indicates that individuals with traditional gender role attitudes tend to prefer mates with sex-typical opposite-sex characteristics in heterosexual men and women. This study examined whether gender role attitudes were associated with vocal masculinity preference in gay men in China. Five hundred and sixty-seven participants aged between 16 and 49 years completed the vocal masculinity preference (voice pitch and vocal tract length; VTLs) and gender role attitudes scale. The results indicated that gay men generally preferred masculine voices (lower voice pitch and longer VTLs) and gender role attitudes were positively correlated with preferences for masculine cues in the voices of men. While individuals indicating an affinity with traditional gender roles exhibited stronger preferences for feminine voices, which were inconsistent with the present hypotheses. The results help us understand the role of traditional gender beliefs in the mate preferences of gay men in China. Furthermore, based on the results, understanding one's gender-role attitudes can help cultivate more diversified criteria for mate selection and facilitate gay men in better choosing suitable mates. Future longitudinal studies should examine the relationship between gender role attitudes and masculine preference changes over time. Whether this relationship differs in the different sexual roles of gay men should also be explored.

Keywords

gender role attitudes voices masculine mate preference gay men

Introduction

Sexual dimorphism refers to the differences between men and women after the development of secondary sexual characteristics in adolescence, that is, masculinity and femininity. According to the immunocompetence handicap theory, exaggerated secondary sexual cues are reliable indicators of good gene expression and health (Folstad & Karter, 1992). Facial and vocal characteristics are perceived as secondary sexual cues (Feinberg, 2008; Hodges-Simeon et al., 2015). Previous studies have indicated that masculine faces (e.g., pronounced brow and large jaw) and voices (e.g., lower-pitched voice and longer vocal tract length [VTL]) are both associated with high testosterone levels (Arnocky et al., 2018; Roney et al., 2006), which may result in long-term health benefits (e.g., good health and energetic condition; Hodges-Simeon et al., 2015).

Preferences for Masculinity Among Homosexual Men

Heterosexual women generally prefer masculine to feminine characteristics because men with masculine characteristics are judged as more attractive (Pisanski et al., 2012), dominant (Wolff & Puts, 2010), and healthier (Hodges-Simeon et al., 2015) than those with feminine characteristics. For example, women showed a stronger preference for masculine faces and voices in men (Feinberg et al., 2008); in terms of bodies—another secondary sexual cue—women preferred masculine bodies of men in the follicular phase of their cycle (Little et al., 2007). Little et al. (2011) demonstrated that women showed a stronger preference for masculine cues across faces, bodies, voices, and smells in the context of short-term relationships.

Most homosexual men showed stronger preference for partners who described themselves as more masculine (Bailey et al., 1997) and relative taller (Valentová et al., 2014). Further, Glassenberg et al. (2010) indicated that gay men perceive masculine faces as more attractive than feminine faces and Valentová et al. (2013) found that single gay men prefer masculine to feminine voices. In recent studies, gay men showed a stronger preference for masculine faces, bodies, voices, and personality traits than for feminine versions thereof (Zhang et al., 2018, 2019). However, some studies have found that gay men do not prefer masculine or feminine faces (Valentová et al., 2013; Welling et al., 2013).

Relationship Between Gender Role Attitudes and Mate Preference

Gender role attitudes refer to attitudes toward the appropriate roles, rights, and responsibilities of men and women in society (Davis & Greenstein, 2009). Traditional gender consciousness holds that men should be providers, while women should be more family oriented and prefer patriarchal systems within the family (grant more power and status to the men providers; Glick & Fiske, 2001). Historically, in most societies, traditional gender role attitudes regarded women as a vulnerable group that needed protection. They were expected to bear children or sacrifice personal interests for the family unit, depending on men for protection (Deutsch, 2006). Men, in the meantime, were regarded as the movers and shakers who were expected to provide for the family, make decisions, and provide protection (Cao, 2008; Zheng et al., 2011). From the evolutionary perspective, the parental investment theory of Trivers (1972) indicated that there are two predictions, first, the gender that invests more in offspring is more selective in choosing a mate, because it is more conducive to their own reproductive success. Second, those who invest less in their offspring compete more fiercely for mates to attract more selective members of the opposite sex. In most species, including humans, females invest more in their offspring than males do, then the differences (e.g., in physiology, psychology, and attitudes) between different genders predicted by parental investment theory will be presented. Therefore, men competed internally for social status and resources to attract women, women invest more in their families and offspring; when choosing a mate, women were more selective for men's ambition, hard work, and ability to earn money.

The positions of men and women in different roles highlight gender differences in long-term partner preferences; roles, in turn, influence behavior through various developmental and socialization processes as well as psychological and biological processes involved in social interaction and self-regulation (Eagly et al., 2004). Therefore, in traditional female homemaker households, women are more likely to maximize their roles by seeking partners who can earn money and have access to resources. Men are more likely to look for a partner who can take good care of their home and children, so that they can devote more time and energy to careers outside the home (Zheng et al., 2011). Further, sexual orientation does not entirely change the preference in some sexually differentiated aspect of sexuality, for example, in Bailey et al. (1994) study, homosexual and heterosexual men did not differ in their interest in uncommitted sex and visual sexual stimuli, as well as partner's status and physical attractiveness.

Rules concerning these roles have important implications for one's choice of partners. In countries with a more extreme traditional division of labor, men tend to prefer younger women with good family potential. In contrast, women tend to prefer older men with good provider potential (Eagly & Wood, 1999). Furthermore, Eastwick et al. (2006) confirmed that women with traditional gender role attitudes tended to prefer older men and attached greater value to characteristics related to financial aspects. Men with traditional gender role attitudes tended to prefer women who were younger and valued characteristics concerning meal preparation and housekeeping. Recent studies have found that heterosexual individuals with traditional gender roles tend to prefer potential partners with sex-typical characteristics (Eastwick et al., 2006; Tao, 2020). For example, women with traditional gender role attitudes or higher benevolent sexism (BS: conforming to traditional gender roles) scores show a stronger preference for potential partners with attractive appearances and the ability to provide resources, whereas men with traditional gender role attitudes or higher BS scores show stronger preferences for potential partners with the characteristics of beauty, thinness, larger breasts, and overall attractiveness (Chen, 2016; Eastwick et al., 2006; Forbes et al., 2007; Lee et al., 2010; Swami & Tove, 2013 ; Travaglia et al., 2009; Wang, 2011). Studies with Chinese participants mainly focused on college students (ages ranging from 18 to 25 years), while participants from other countries (such as America, England, and Italy) included college students or older adults. These findings suggest that gender role attitudes guide partner selection by fostering partner preferences for different gender types.

The Present Study

Chinese culture advocates “collectivism” and “relationship,” while most Western countries are characterized by “individualism.” A previous study found that Ukrainians with a mainstream collectivist culture had more traditional attitudes toward gender roles than Americans in individualistic cultures (Shafiro et al., 2003). Thus, Chinese people may be more conservative regarding gender roles than their Western counterparts. Gender role attitudes, as a product of culture, strongly influence individuals’ attitudes, emotions, and personalities, and in intimate relationships among gay men of China, the research indicated that traditional gender role attitudes were significantly associated with gay men's sexual self-labels and gender role preference of potential partners (Zheng & Fu, 2021).

Traditional gender role attitudes in men are associated with more rigid expectations of characteristics concerning meal preparation and housekeeping by their female partners (Eastwick et al., 2006), which means that gender role attitudes are related to preferences for a partner's masculinity/femininity. Research on gender role attitudes and partner preferences has indicated that heterosexuals with traditional gender attitudes tend to choose partners with gender-typical characteristics of their preferred gender (i.e., women with more feminine characteristics and men with more masculine characteristics). This study explored whether gay men with traditional gender role attitudes prefer partners with more masculine voices. There are two sexually dimorphic vocal characteristics: voice pitch and formant frequency (resonant frequency of air in the vocal tract; VTLs). Past research on voices in gay men has mainly focused on identifying sexual orientation and impressions (Fasoli & Msass, 2020; Fasoli, Berghella et al., 2022; Fasoli, Hegarty et al., 2021; Fasoli, Paladino et al., 2017) and has rarely examined voice preference.

Therefore, the current study aims to examine the relationship between gender role attitudes and vocal masculinity preferences among gay men in China. We hypothesized that gay men would prefer men with masculine voices (lower voice pitch or longer VTLs), and that gay men who hold more traditional gender role attitudes would prefer more masculine voices.

Methods

Participants and Procedure

The initial sample consisted of 567 Chinese cisgender men self-identified as gay, aged between 16 and 49 (M_age = 21.1 years, SD = 5.42 years). We recruited participants from Forums, Post Bar, and QQ groups. Informed consent was obtained from all participants, and this research was approved by the Ethics Committee of the related institution. All participants were informed that their participation was completely voluntary and that they may withdraw from the study at any time. Nevertheless, their personal privacy would be protected and their data would be used for psychological research only. Demographic data are shown in Table 1.

Table 1.

Demographic Variables of Participants.

Measures		Measures
Age (in years) M (SD)	21.1(5.42)	More than 10,000	41(7.2)
Education level N (%)		Occupation N (%)
Junior high school or less	37(6.5)	Students	411(72.5)
Senior high school	165(29.1)	Employed	127(22.4)
College	302(53.3)	Job-seeking	13(2.3)
Postgraduate or higher	63(11.1)	Other	16(2.8)
Monthly income N (%)		Relationship N (%) (multiple choices)
No	321(56.6)	Single	434(76.5)
Less than 2000	60(10.6)	Married	7(1.2)
2000–4000	57(10.1)	Have same-sex partner	138(24.3)
4000–6000	44(7.8)	Have opposite-sex partner	4(0.7)
6000–10,000	44(7.8)	Divorced	4(0.7)

We conducted this survey in China using an online survey platform (www.sojump.com). There were four sections of the questionnaire: sociodemographic characteristics (age, sex, sexual orientation, education level, professional condition, relationship status, and monthly income), voice pitch preference, traditional gender role attitude scale, and VTLs preference. We adopted a forced-choice paradigm to present voices, and all participants evaluated the male stimuli. For the general preference for masculine voices, we rated the stimuli using attractiveness ratings, which have been widely used in previous studies (Fraccaro et al., 2010; Little et al., 2011). First, participants’ sociodemographic characteristics were recorded. Second, for voice pitch preference, participants were sequentially presented with six pairs of voices manipulated by voice pitch (each pair comprised masculinized and feminized versions of the same individual). They were then asked to select one voice from each pair of voices according to the question, “Which voice is more attractive?” Third, for VTLs preference, six pairs of voices manipulated by VTLs were presented sequentially; participants had to select one voice from each pair of voices according to the question, “Which voice is more attractive?” For all voices, the orders of stimuli presentation and the side where the stimuli were presented were fully randomized. Finally, participants completed the Attitudes Toward Sex-Roles Scale.

Voice Stimuli

Six Chinese male undergraduates were recruited to say Chinese words: nan bei (“north and south”), zuo you (“right and left”), ming ci (“noun”), li kai (“get away”), and guan bi (“turn off”; Zhang et al., 2018). Masculinized and feminized versions of voice pitch were manufactured by raising and lowering the pitch by 0.5 equivalent rectangular bandwidths from the original voice using Praat software (Boersma & Weenink, 2013). We manipulated masculinized and feminized VTLs by raising or lowering the whole spectrum by 10%, making the formant position of the manipulated voice approximately 90% or 110% of the original formant position (Pisanski et al., 2014). Finally, we obtained 24 new voices: six voices of men with higher-pitched, six voices of men with lower-pitched, six voices of men with longer VTLs, and six voices of men with shorter VTLs. Previous studies have indicated that the number of voices used in our study were enough to generate the preference for masculinized and feminized voices (Feinberg et al., 2008; Jones et al., 2010; Zhang & Tao, 2022).

Attitudes Toward Sex-Roles

The Attitudes Toward Sex-Roles Scale (Larsen & Long, 1988) was used to assess the gender role attitudes of gay men as ranging between “traditional” and “egalitarian.” The Attitudes Toward Sex-Roles Scale views gender role perceptions as a continuous variable from traditional to equal gender roles. The original scale contains 20 items, of which 12 reflect the traditional concept of gender roles and 8 reflect the concept of equal gender roles. Due to cultural differences, in traditional Chinese weddings, there are no wedding vows, then one item, “obedience should be removed from wedding vows,” was deleted from the scale. The scale with the deletion of this item has been successfully used in Zheng and Fu's (2021) study. Participants rated items using a 5-point scale (1 = “extremely disagree” to 5 = “extremely agree”). The responses were averaged, with higher scores indicating that attitudes toward sex roles were more egalitarian, while lower scores indicated more traditional attitudes. The internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's alpha) for this scale was 0.85.

Data Analysis

First, the data are encoded. For voice pitch, selected the higher was coded 0, selected the lower was coded 1. For VTLs, selected the shorter was coded 0, selected the longer was coded 1. Then, we used one-sample t-tests to calculate the proportion of trials in which participants selected the lowered or raised pitch and lengthened or shortened VTL. We calculated the proportion of participants who showed a preference for masculinity by comparing with 0.5 (absolute range 0–1, compared with 0.5, which represents preferred masculinized profiles above chance: 50% probability); higher scores represented a preference for more masculine voices, and lower scores indicated a preference for more feminine voices. Subsequently, we performed a correlation test and hierarchical multiple regression analysis to explore the relationship between vocal masculine preference and gender role attitudes.

Results

We used one-sample t-tests to explore gay men's general preferences of voices. The results indicated that gay men selected lower pitched voices (i.e., 0.5, M = 0.68, SD = 0.29) and longer VTLs (M = 0.72, SD = 0.32) significantly more often than chance. The one-sample t-test indicated that lower voice pitch (t[566] = 14.44, p < .001, d = 0.62) and longer VTLs voices (t[566] = 16.43, p < .001, d = 0.69)were selected as more attractive than the corresponding higher voice pitch and shorter VTLs voices.

To examine the relationship between gender role attitudes and masculinity preferences, we conducted a correlation test between the variables (Table 2). The results indicated that gender role attitudes were significantly and positively correlated with preference for masculine cues in voice pitch (r = 0.13, p = .002) and VTL (r = 0.17, p < .001) (see Figure 1).

Figure 1.

The correlation between gay men's gender role attitudes and vocal masculine preference (a) represents voice pitch preference, (b) represents VTLs preference.

Table 2.

Correlation Coefficients (r) Among Variables of Voice Preference and Gender Role Attitudes.

Measures	Mean	SD	1	2	3
1. Gender role attitude	4.18	0.54	—
2. Voice pitch preference	0.68	0.29	0.13*	—
3. Vocal tract length preference	0.72	0.32	0.17**	0.39**	—

Note: *p < .01, **p < .001.

To further explore this association, we conducted a hierarchical multiple regression analysis with demographic variables (age, education level, and monthly income) serving as independent variables in the first step, and the gender role attitudes in the second step; masculine voice pitch and VTLs preference were dependent variables. Age, education, and monthly income were entered as control variables given that they were related to parts of the independent and dependent variables. For example, age was negatively correlated with gender role attitudes (r = −0.18, p < .001) and positively correlated with longer VTLs preference (r = 0.09, p = .04); education level was positively correlated with longer VTLs preference (r = 0.20, p < .001); and monthly income was negatively correlated with gender role attitudes (r = −0.18, p < .001). The hierarchical multiple regression analysis indicated that, for voice pitch preferences, the general regression model was significant (F [4, 562] = 2.85, R² = 0.020, p = .023). Gender role attitudes had a significant effect on voice pitch masculine preferences (t = 2.94, p = .003); meanwhile, the demographic variables of age, education, and monthly income had no association with preference for masculine voice pitch. Concerning VTLs preference, the general regression model was significant (F [4, 562] = 9.97, R² = 0.066, p < .001). Gender role attitudes had a significant effect on masculine VTLs preference (t = 4.03, p < .001); education had a significant effect on masculine VTLs preference (t = 3.40, p < .001); the demographic variables of age and monthly income had no association with masculine VTL preference (Table 3).

Table 3.

Hierarchical Multiple Regression Analyses of Gender Role Attitudes for Vocal Masculinity Preference.

	B	SE	β	p	R²△
Voice pitch preference
Step 1					0.005
Age	−0.004	0.003	−0.070	.218
Income	0.003	0.010	0.015	.785
Degree	0.023	0.017	0.061	.185
Step 2					0.015
Age	−0.003	0.003	−0.051	.364
Income	0.006	0.010	0.032	.566
Degree	0.016	0.017	0.044	.343
Gender role attitude	0.068	0.023	0.126	.003
Vocal tract length preference
Step 1					0.039
Age	<0.001	0.003	0.008	.880
Income	0.001	0.010	0.004	.943
Degree	0.079	0.018	0.193	<.001
Step 2					0.027
Age	0.002	0.003	0.033	.551
Income	0.005	0.010	0.026	.628
Degree	0.069	0.018	0.170	<.001
Gender role attitude	0.099	0.025	0.169	<.001

Discussion

Our findings regarding masculinity preferences across voices were consistent with previous studies finding that gay men evaluated masculine voices as more attractive than feminine ones (Valentova et al., 2013; Zhang et al., 2018, 2019), as well as other studies in which men with masculine voices were judged as more attractive (Feinberg et al., 2005), more dominant, healthier, and more masculine than those with feminine voices (Collins, 2000; Feinberg, 2004; Feinberg et al., 2005; Puts, 2005). However, in two studies, the researchers found that homosexual men preferred for neither masculine nor feminine facial characteristics when evaluating both manipulated and nonmanipulated images, and this issue remains unresolved presently (Valentová et al., 2013; Welling et al., 2013). Future studies should continue to investigate gay men's vocal preference.

The results of the present study indicated that the gender role attitudes score is positively correlated with lower-pitched voices and longer VTLs preferences among gay men in China, that is, gay men with traditional gender role attitudes tend to prefer feminine voices. This result was inconsistent with previous studies showing that heterosexually identified people with traditional gender role attitudes tend to prefer sex-typical partners (Eastwick et al., 2006; Tao, 2020). For example, heterosexual men with traditional gender attitudes attach more importance to their partner's physical appearance and personality traits, whereas women attach more importance to their partners’ social resources, physical features, and interpersonal communication skills (Chen, 2016; Wang, 2011). In general, gender role attitudes are not only associated with partner trait preferences in heterosexual men and women but also with vocal preferences in gay men.

Gay men with traditional gender role attitudes tended to prefer potential partners with feminine voices but not masculine ones, the reasons may be as follows. Traditional gender consciousness holds that men should be providers, whereas women should be more family oriented and prefer patriarchal systems within the family (Glick & Fiske, 2001). This is especially influential in traditional Chinese culture; despite the rapid development of modernization, patriarchy still exists, influenced by the feudal society in ancient China (Chen, 2010; Zheng et al., 2011). Men are considered superior to women; men are seen as strong, women as weak, whereby women are positioned as good wives and mothers. In addition, Bailey et al. (1994) indicated that gay and heterosexual men did not differ in the status and physical attractiveness of their partner. As such, both gay and heterosexual men with traditional gender role attitudes may expect their partners to be submissive and to take care of the family. Furthermore, feminine voices in men were perceived as being more submissive when compared with masculine versions thereof (Borkowska & Pawlowski, 2011; Wolff & Puts, 2010); evidence indicates that, in romantic relationships, feminine versions of men's voices were perceived as being more likely to result in an investment of time and effort, in addition to being financially generous with romantic partners when compared to partners with masculine voices (O'Connor et al., 2012). Both gay and heterosexual men with traditional notions of gender roles may value more of these messages conveyed by feminine voices than signaling conveyed by masculine voices, such as attractiveness (Zhang et al., 2018), dominance (Borkowska & Pawlowski, 2011; Wolff & Puts, 2010), and stronger leadership skills (Tigue et al., 2012).

Other information perceived by feminine voices may also explain the association between gender role attitudes and voice preferences among gay men. For example, men with masculine voices were perceived as less trustworthy in romantic relationships than those with feminine voices (O'Connor et al., 2011). In China, men with traditional gender role attitudes value personality traits related to family more when selecting a partner (Wang, 2011), while gay men are similar to heterosexual men in the association between gender role attitudes and mate preferences. Therefore, gay men with traditional gender role attitudes prefer potential partners with feminine voice characteristics. In addition, gay men with higher internalized homophobia tend to have traditional gender role attitudes (Zheng & Fu, 2021). Previous studies have indicated that gay men with higher levels of internalized homophobia are less willing to come out of the closet and, therefore, are less likely to be perceived as gay men and may not be willing to show a preference for same-sex partners (Jost et al., 2004; Tskhay & Rule, 2013). This may have influenced the results.

Limitations and Conclusion

This study has some limitations. First, participants recruited mainly from the Internet were likely to be more educated and wealthier than typical Chinese gay men, indicating a possible lack of representativeness. Second, we only assessed vocal preferences; future researchers should consider facial, personality, and smell preferences. Third, we only explored the association between gender role attitudes and vocal masculine preferences among gay men; future studies must explore this association among lesbians. By doing so, we can obtain a more comprehensive understanding of the potential partner preferences of sexual minorities in the context of Chinese culture. Fourth, with the development and progress of society, gender equality is increasingly advocated, and the overall trend of people's gender role attitudes is constantly moving toward notions of equal gender role concepts, which may lead to less discrimination of scale; this should be taken into account in future studies. Fifth, the regression model indicates that the contribution rate of independent variables is low. Factors such as relationship conditions, different age groups, and sexual roles may influence the results, and future studies should consider these factors and replicate this study in other countries.

Despite these limitations, this study adds new insights into the literature on the relationship between gender role attitudes and masculine vocal preferences among gay men in China. Gay men have long suffered stigma and discrimination (Mi et al., 2022; Salvati et al., 2021), and those who do not conform to traditional gender roles are more likely to suffer discrimination and prejudice than those who do (Hunt et al., 2016; Salvati et al., 2018 ). This study helps us understand the state of traditional gender role attitudes and the role of traditional gender beliefs in the mate preferences of gay men, thus increasing their acceptance in China. Furthermore, understanding gay men's gender role attitudes can help cultivate more diversified criteria for mate selection and facilitate individuals to better choose suitable mates. We hope this special issue will contribute to the existing literature and inspire more work on mate preferences among sexual minorities.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research,authorship,and/or publication of this article.

Funding

This research is supported by Sichuan Applied Psychology Research Center Fund (CSXL22218),by Sichuan Network Culture Research Center Fund (WLWH2220).

ORCID iD

Jing Zhang

Data Availability

There is not a data set associated with the paper.

References

Arnocky

Hodges-Simeon

Ouellette

Albert

(2018). Do men with more masculine voices have better immunocompetence? Evolution and Human Behavior, 39(6), 602–610. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2018.06.003

Bailey

J. M.

Gaulin

Agyei

Gladue

B. A.

(1994). Effects of gender and sexual orientation on evolutionarily relevant aspects of human mating psychology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66(6), 1081–1093. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.66.6.1081

Bailey

J. M.

Kim

P. Y.

Hills

Linsenmeier

J. A.

(1997). Butch, femme, or straight acting? Partner preferences of gay men and lesbians. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73(5), 960–973. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.73.5.960

Boersma

Weenink

(2013). Praat: Doing phonetics by computer (Version 5.3.51) [Computer program]. Last viewed on, 12. http://www.praat.org/retrieved

Borkowska

Pawlowski

(2011). Female voice frequency in the context of dominance and attractiveness perception. Animal Behaviour, 82(1), 55–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2011.03.024

Cao

(2008). Research on gender role types and gender role attitudes [Unpublished master dissertation]. Nanjing Normal University.

Chen

(2010). A brief analysis of the negative influence of male chauvinism culture on modern marriage and family in China. Knowledge Economy, 20(41), 54–55. https://doi.org/CNKI:SUN:ZZJJ.0.2010-20-041

Chen

(2016). Research on adult attachment, gender role attitudes, mate selection criteria and their relationships among college students [Unpublished master dissertation]. Sichuan Normal University.

Collins

S. A.

(2000). Men’s voices and women’s choices. Animal Behaviour, 60(6), 773–780. https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.2000.1523

10.

Davis

S. N.

Greenstein

T. N.

(2009). Gender ideology: Components, predictors, and consequences. Annual Review of Sociology, 35(1), 87–105. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-070308-115920

11.

Deutsch

F. M.

(2006). Filial piety, patrilineality, and China's one-child policy. Journal of Family Issues, 27(3), 366–389. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X05283097

12.

Eagly

A. H.

Wood

(1999). The origins of sex differences in human behavior: Evolved dispositions versus social roles. American Psychologist, 54(6), 408–423. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.54.6.408

13.

Eagly

A. H.

Wood

Johannesen-Schmidt

M. C.

(2004). Social role theory of sex differences and similarities: Implications for the partner preferences of women and men. In Eagly

A. H.

Beall

A. E.

Sternberg

R. J.

(Eds.), The psychology of gender (2nd ed., pp. 269–295). Guilford.

14.

Eastwick

P. W.

Eagly

A. H.

Glick

Johannesen-Schmidt

M. C.

Fiske

S. T.

Blum

A. M.

Eckes

Freiburger

Huang

L.-L.

Fernández

M. L.

Manganelli

A. M.

Pek

J. C. X.

Castro

Y. R.

Sakalli-Ugurlu

Six-Materna

Volpato

(2006). Is traditional gender ideology associated with sex-typed mate preferences? A test in nine nations. Sex Roles, 54(9-10), 603–614. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-006-9027-x

15.

Fasoli

Hegarty

Frost

D. M.

(2021). Stigmatization of ‘gay-sounding’ voices: The role of heterosexual, lesbian, and gay individuals’ essentialist beliefs. British Journal of Social Psychology, 60(3), 826–850. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12442

16.

Fasoli

Maass

(2020). The social costs of sounding gay: Voice-based impressions of adoption applicants. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 39(1), 112–131. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X19883907

17.

Fasoli

Maass

Berghella

(2023). Who has a better auditory gaydar? Sexual orientation categorization by heterosexual and lesbian, gay and bisexual people. Journal of Homosexuality, 70(5), 876–899. https://doi.org/10.1080/00918369.2021.2004796

18.

Fasoli

Maass

Paladino

M. P.

Sulpizio

(2017). Gay-and lesbian-sounding auditory cues elicit stereotyping and discrimination. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 46(5), 1261–1277. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-017-0962-0

19.

Feinberg

D. R.

(2004). Fundamental frequency perturbation indicates perceived health and age in male and female speakers. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 115(5), 2609–2609. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.4784735

20.

Feinberg

D. R.

(2008). Are human faces and voices ornaments signaling common underlying cues to mate value? Evolutionary Anthropology: Issues, News, and Reviews, 17(2), 112–118. https://doi.org/10.1002/evan.20166

21.

Feinberg

D. R.

DeBruine

L. M.

Jones

B. C.

Little

A. C.

(2008). Correlated preferences for men’s facial and vocal masculinity. Evolution and Human Behavior, 29(4), 233–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2007.12.008

22.

Feinberg

D. R.

Jones

B. C.

Little

A. C.

Burt

D. M.

Perrett

D. I.

(2005). Manipulations of fundamental and formant frequencies influence the attractiveness of human male voices. Animal Behaviour, 69(3), 561–568. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2004.06.012

23.

Folstad

Karter

A. J.

(1992). Parasites, bright males, and the immunocompetence handicap. The American Naturalist, 139(3), 603–622. https://doi.org/10.1086/285346

24.

Forbes

G. B.

Collinsworth

L. L.

Jobe

R. L.

Braun

K. D.

Wise

L. M.

(2007). Sexism, hostility toward women, and endorsement of beauty ideals and practices: Are beauty ideals associated with oppressive beliefs? Sex Roles, 56(5-6), 265–273. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-006-9161-5

25.

Fraccaro

P. J.

Feinberg

D. R.

Debruine

L. M.

Little

A. C.

Watkins

C. D.

Jones

B. C.

(2010). Correlated male preferences for femininity in female faces and voices. Evolutionary Psychology, 8(3), 447. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474704910008003

26.

Glassenberg

A. N.

Feinberg

D. R.

Jones

B. C.

Little

A. C.

DeBruine

L. M.

(2010). Sex-dimorphic face shape preference in heterosexual and homosexual men and women. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 39(6), 1289–1296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-009-9559-6

27.

Glick

Fiske

S. T.

(2001). An ambivalent alliance: Hostile and benevolent sexism as complementary justifications for gender inequality. American Psychologist, 56(2), 109–118. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.56.2.109

28.

Hodges-Simeon

C. R.

Gruven

Gaulin

S. J. C.

(2015). The low male voice is a costly signal of phenotypic quality among Bolivian adolescents. Evolution and Human Behavior, 36(4), 294–302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2015.01.002

29.

Hunt

C. J.

Fasoli

Carnaghi

Cadinu

(2016). Masculine self-presentation and distancing from femininity in gay men: An experimental examination of the role of masculinity threat. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 17(1), 108–112. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039545

30.

Jones

B. C.

Boothroyd

Feinberg

D. R.

DeBruine

L. M.

(2010). Age at menarche predicts individual differences in women’s preferences for masculinized male voices in adulthood. Personality and Individual Differences, 48(7), 860–863. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2010.02.007

31.

Jost

J. T.

Banaji

M. R.

Nosek

B. A.

(2004). A decade of system justification theory: Accumulated evidence of conscious and unconscious bolstering of the status quo. Political Psychology, 25(6), 881–919. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2004.00402.x

32.

Larsen

K. S.

Long

(1988). Attitudes toward sex-roles - traditional or egalitarian. Sex Roles, 19(1-2), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00292459

33.

Lee

T. L.

Fiske

S. T.

Glick

Chen

(2010). Ambivalent sexism in close relationship: (Hostile) power and (benevolent) romance shape relationship ideals. Sex Roles, 62(7-8), 583–601. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-010-9770-x

34.

Little

A. C.

Connely

Feinberg

D. R.

Jones

B. C.

Roberts

S. C.

(2011). Human preference for masculinity differs according to context in faces, bodies, voices, and smell. Behavioral Ecology, 22(4), 862–868. https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/arr061

35.

Little

A. C.

Jones

B. C.

Burriss

R. P.

(2007). Preferences for masculinity in male bodies change across the menstrual cycle. Hormones and Behavior, 51(5), 633–639. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yhbeh.2007.03.006

36.

Lan

Yang

Qiao

Shen

Zhou

(2022). HIV-related stigma, sexual identity, and depressive symptoms among MSM living with HIV in China: A moderated mediation modeling analysis. American Journal of Men's Health, 16(2), 15579883221087531. https://doi.org/10.1177/15579883221087531

37.

O'Connor

J. J.

D. E.

Feinberg

D. R.

(2011). Voice pitch influences perceptions of sexual infidelity. Evolutionary Psychology, 9(1), 64–78. https://doi.org/10.1177/147470491100900109

38.

O'Connor

J. J. M.

Fraccaro

P. J.

Feinberg

D. R.

(2012). The influence of male voice pitch on women's perceptions of relationship investment. Journal of Evolutionary Psychology, 10(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1556/JEP.10.2012.1.1

39.

Pisanski

Fraccaro

P. J.

Tigue

C. C.

Oconnor

J. J.

Roder

Andrews

P. W.

Fink

DeBruine

L. M.

Jones

B. C.

Feinberg

D. R.

(2014). Vocal indicators of body size in men and women: A meta-analysis. Animal Behaviour, 95, 89–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2014.06.011

40.

Pisanski

Mishra

Rendall

(2012). The evolved psychology of voice: Evaluating interrelationships in listeners’ assessments of the size, masculinity, and attractiveness of unseen speakers. Evolution and Human Behavior, 33(5), 509–519. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2012.01.004

41.

Puts

D. A.

(2005). Mating context and menstrual phase affect women’s preferences for male voice pitch. Evolution and Human Behavior, 26(5), 388–397. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2005.03.001

42.

Roney

J. R.

Hanson

K. N.

Durante

K. M.

Maestripieri

(2006). Reading men’s faces: Women’s mate attractiveness judgments track men’s testosterone and interest in infants. Proceedings Royal Society of London B, 273(1598), 2169–2175. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2006.3569

43.

Salvati

Pellegrini

Giacomantonio

De Cristofaro

(2021). Embrace the leadership challenge: The role of gay men’s internalized sexual stigma on the evaluation of others’ leadership and one’s own. British Journal of Social Psychology, 60(2), 700–719. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12424

44.

Salvati

Pistella

Baiocco

(2018). Gender roles and internalized sexual stigma in gay and lesbian persons: A quadratic relation. International Journal of Sexual Health, 30(1), 42–48. Advance Online Publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/19317611.2017.1404542

45.

Shafiro

M. V.

Himelein

M. J.

Best

D. L.

(2003). Ukrainian and US American females: Differences in individualism/collectivism and gender attitudes. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 34(3), 297–303. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022103034003004

46.

Swami

Tove

M. J.

(2013). Men’s oppressive beliefs predict their breast size preferences in women. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 42(7), 1199–1207. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-013-0081-5

47.

Tao

H. L.

(2020). Gender-role ideology and height preference in mate selection. Economics and Human Biology, 39, 100927. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ehb.2020.100927

48.

Tigue

C. C.

Borak

D. J.

O'Connor

J. J.

Schandl

Feinberg

D. R.

(2012). Voice pitch influences voting behavior. Evolution and Human Behavior, 33(3), 210–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2011.09.004

49.

Travaglia

L. K.

Overall

N. C.

Sibley

C. G.

(2009). Benevolent and hostile sexism and preferences for romantic partners. Personality and Individual Differences, 47(6), 599–604. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2009.05.015

50.

Trivers

(1972). Parental investment and sexual selection. In Campbell

B. G.

(Ed.), Aldine de Gruyter (Vol. Sexual Selection and the Descent of Man, 1871–1971, pp. 136–179). Aldine, Chicago.

51.

Tskhay

K. O.

Rule

N. O.

(2013). Accurate identification of a preference for insertive versus receptive intercourse from static facial cues of gay men. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 42, 1217–1222. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-013-0092-2

52.

Valentová

Roberts

S. C.

Havlíček

(2013). Preferences for facial and vocal masculinity in homosexual men: The role of relationship status, sexual restrictiveness, and self-perceived masculinity. Perception, 42(2), 187–197. https://doi.org/10.1068/p6909

53.

Valentová

J. V.

Stulp

Třebický

Havlíček

(2014). Preferred and actual relative height among homosexual male partners vary with preferred dominance and sex role. PLoS One, 9(1), e86534. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0086534

54.

Wang

(2011). The relationship between gender role attitudes and mate selection criteria of college students [Unpublished master dissertation]. Lanzhou University.

55.

Welling

L. L. M.

Singh

Puts

D. A.

Jones

B. C.

Burriss

R. P.

(2013). Self- reported sexual desire in homosexual men and women predicts preferences for sexually dimorphic facial cues. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 42(5), 785–791. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-012-0059-8

56.

Wolff

S. E.

Puts

D. A.

(2010). Vocal masculinity is a robust dominance signal in men. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 64(10), 1673–1683. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-010-0981-5

57.

Zhang

Tao

(2022). Vocal characteristics influence women's perceptions of infidelity and relationship investment in China. Evolutionary Psychology, 20(3), 14747049221108883. https://doi.org/10.1177/14747049221108883

58.

Zhang

Zheng

(2018). Consistency in preferences for masculinity in faces, bodies, voices, and personality characteristics among homosexual men in China. Personality and Individual Differences, 134, 137–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2018.06.009

59.

Zhang

Zheng

(2019). Self-rated attractiveness and sociosexual behavior predict gay men's preferences for masculine cues in male voices in China. Evolutionary Psychology, 17(2), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474704919847430

60.

Zheng

(2021). Gender beliefs and internalized homophobia shape sexual self-labeling and partner choice in gay and bisexual men in China. Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681994.2021.1957091

61.

Zheng

Zhou

Liu

Hesketh

(2011). Detraditionalisation and attitudes to sex outside marriage in China. Culture, Health & Sexuality, 13(5), 497–511. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691058.2011.563866

Gender Role Attitudes Influence Vocal Masculine Preferences Among Gay Men in China

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

Preferences for Masculinity Among Homosexual Men

Relationship Between Gender Role Attitudes and Mate Preference

The Present Study

Methods

Participants and Procedure

Voice Stimuli

Attitudes Toward Sex-Roles

Data Analysis

Results

Discussion

Limitations and Conclusion

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

Funding

ORCID iD

Data Availability

References