Every time I open my phone, there seems to be another chart explaining how men and women supposedly choose a partner.

They all look like they’re trying to be scientific. Neat little graphs. Colour-coded priorities. Men, we’re told, place physical attractiveness at the top of the list. Women, meanwhile, are said to prize kindness, intelligence, loyalty and emotional stability. Appearance sits somewhere further down, almost as an afterthought. Possibly, not even on the list at all.

The message is subtle, but unmistakable: Men need to be attracted to their partners. Women merely need someone nice.

It is one more example of the internet’s favourite pastime: reducing human beings to simplistic categories and then presenting them as universal truths.

I don’t doubt that there is good psychological research showing differences in what men and women prioritise, on average. But somewhere between the academic paper and the social media infographic, nuance disappears.

What survives is a caricature.

According to this version of reality, men are visual creatures, and women are emotional ones.

But here’s the plot twist…women are visual too!

The difference isn’t that we don’t notice physical attraction. It’s that attraction rarely exists on its own.

A handsome man will catch our eye, but what happens thereafter depends on a few other factors:

Depending on what we seek, we may ask ourselves – does he seem kind? Does he make us laugh? Do our values align? Does he seem emotionally mature? Could I imagine building a life with him? Etc.

The internet often mistakes this second stage for the absence of the first.

It isn’t.

It’s simply that women tend to evaluate attraction through more than one lens at the same time.

Perhaps that’s why online dating can feel so revealing?

A striking profile picture may make you pause. But then you read the bio. Maybe he’s funny. Maybe he’s thoughtful. Maybe he wants the same future you do.

Or perhaps he seems arrogant, dismissive, incompatible or simply…a bit odd.

In an instant, the attraction fades.

Not because he stopped being handsome, but because attraction is rarely sustained by appearance alone.

The reverse is true as well.

Someone who is reasonably attractive can become incredibly attractive once you experience their humour, warmth, confidence or emotional intelligence.

Attraction isn’t fixed.

It evolves as our understanding of another person deepens.

Perhaps “Visual, Plus” is the simplest way I can describe how women evaluate attractiveness.

Yes, we notice beauty. Of course we do. We women appreciate a warm smile, expressive eyes, good style, confidence, the way someone carries themselves, the effort they put into their health and appearance.

We enjoy looking at beautiful people just as much as anyone else.

But appearance merely opens the door. It doesn’t decide whether someone gets invited inside.

Which makes another cultural contradiction all the more fascinating: Women are the largest audience for romance fiction.

We devour novels with unforgettable “book boyfriends.” We fall in love with characters who occupy our thoughts long after we’ve closed the final page. We watch period dramas like Bridgerton with enthusiasm. We replay scenes that make our hearts race.

If women truly didn’t care about attraction, none of this would exist.

Yet, the fantasy isn’t simply a handsome man.

If all these heroes did was stand around looking beautiful, the stories would be painfully dull.

The attraction lives in something much richer:

The lingering glances. The tension before the first touch. The confidence without arrogance. The tenderness behind strength. The intelligence. The humour. The competence. The emotional restraint. The feeling that this man sees one woman, and chooses her with intention.

Perhaps that’s what a “book boyfriend” really is.

Not just a gorgeous face. But a gorgeous man who makes a woman feel deeply desired whilst also remaining deeply admirable.

Because women don’t want to simply admire someone. We want to feel admired in return.

That distinction matters.

It also explains why I find another common narrative so frustrating.

If women are repeatedly painted as the gender that isn’t particularly swayed by appearance, some men may begin to believe that once they’re in a relationship, they no longer need to make an effort.

The assumption seems to be that women value personality, and therefore grooming, fitness, style and self-care become optional. As though loyalty replaces attraction.

It doesn’t.

Let’s be clear on one thing here – ageing is not the issue. Life’s inevitable changes are not the issue.

The issue is complacency.

There is a profound difference between growing older together v.s. quietly abandoning the effort that first drew two people towards one another.

Women notice.

We notice when someone continues to take pride in themselves. We notice when they flirt with us, pursue us, compliment us and make us feel wanted years into a relationship.

And yes, we notice when those things disappear.

That isn’t vanity. It’s humanity.

Perhaps the greatest flaw in these endless internet debates is that they ask the wrong question.

They ask whether men are visual and women are emotional. However, the reality is infinitely more interesting.

Most of us are drawn to whole people. To faces, certainly. But also to voices, laughter, character, confidence, movement, humour, competence, kindness, chemistry, shared values and the extraordinary feeling of being genuinely seen.

Attraction is never one-dimensional. And neither are we.

Maybe it’s time we stopped reducing men to biology and women to virtue. Human desire has always been more complex than a chart could ever capture.