And yet there are heterosexual women who remain heterosexual despite not finding traditional masculine traits attractive. They are attracted to men, but are not turned on by big muscles and aggression and alpha male posturing or what have you. And likewise with heterosexual men. That sexual orientation is genetically determined does not presuppose sexual attraction is restricted to a masculine and feminine binary.

> They are attracted to men, but are not turned on by big muscles and aggression and alpha male posturing or what have you.

Not finding desirable the traits that you think are masculine traits does not mean that they do not find masculine traits desirable. It just means that what you think is the masculine traits, is wrong.

So your argument is that masculine traits are defined as any traits a heterosexual woman finds attractive in a man, therefore heterosexual women are universally attracted to masculine traits.

I guess I can't argue with that.

> So your argument is that masculine traits are defined as any traits a heterosexual woman finds attractive in a man, therefore heterosexual women are universally attracted to masculine traits.

No, my response was to the original poster of this thread who implied that if we prescribe a new norm for what "masculine" traits are, then women would stop finding the old masculine traits attractive.

If it were possible to change what people find sexually attractive all the efforts to "cure" gay people would have worked.

My argument is that just because someone has prescribed what masculinity is, doesn't mean that women are going to stop finding the old definition of masculinity more attractive.

Sexual attractiveness just doesn't work like that; you can tell people (and even get them to agree) what a man or a women should be, but that doesn't mean that they are going to find examples of that definition attractive.

Two things can be true. It can both be true that your sexual desire has an inherit, non-mutable component, while ALSO being partly shaped by your experiences. Just because a homosexual person can't be conditioned to be attracted to the opposite sex does not mean their life experiences can't have some impact on the kind of person they are attracted to.

I'd also say that

> If it were possible to change what people find sexually attractive all the efforts to "cure" gay people would have worked.

is a pretty flawed assumption.

Even if we assume sexual attraction is purely based on experience/environment that does not imply that the techniques attempted by the various gay conversion "therapies" would be successful in changing it.

> No, my response was to the original poster of this thread who implied that if we prescribe a new norm for what "masculine" traits are, then women would stop finding the old masculine traits attractive.

I believe I'm the poster in question and I didn't mean to imply that. What I did mean to imply is that masculine traits that elicit desire are viewed through a cultural lens.

If "reliable" or "competent" or "virile" are attractive to women, the ways of signaling that can change over time.