Length of ring fingers & correlates with sexual attraction.

Various studies have shown that babies exposed to higher levels of testosterone when developing in the uterus have longer ring fingers as adults, and higher levels of oestrogen typically result in longer pointer fingers. However, testosterone & oestrogen levels also affect the rest of the body, including a person’s physical appearance. The ratio between the length of the index and ring fingers has been found to be a good indication for a variety of social and economic factors, thought to be directly or indirectly related to the effects of the prenatal testosterone. These photographs are part of a study on beauty and sexual attraction.

In 2010 a Meta-analysis studyby researchers from the University of Ontario, Penn State, and the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health found that the second to fourth finger length ratio (2D:4D) serves as an indicator of sexual orientation. The study included 1.618 heterosexual men, 1.693 heterosexual women, 1.503 gay men, and 1.014 lesbians.

In addition to identifying the normative heterosexual sex difference in 2D:4D for both hands, the researchers found that heterosexual women had higher (more feminine) left- and right-hand 2D:4D than did lesbians. However… the researchers found NO difference between heterosexual and gay men (though moderator analyses by the researchers suggested that ethnicity explained some between-studies variation in men).



Gay men and lesbians tend to have 'reversed' ratios.

Index fingers of most straight men are shorter than the ring fingers; most straight women have the same length or index longer. Gay men and lesbians tend to have reversed ratios.

We all know that the body length of males is usually longer than the body length of females. Scientists call this difference between the sexes: a ‘sexually dismorphic trait’.

 The picture below describes some details of this male-female dimorphic trait: about 75% of men are longer than about 75% of females.

About 75% of males are longer than 75% of females.
John Manning reported in his first book, titled: Digit Ratio that a likewise ‘sexually dimporphic trait’ is noticed in the hands. In the hands of men, the index finger tends to be shorter than the ring finger. And in the hands of women the index finger tends to be the same size (or slightly longer) than the ring finger.

The picture below describes some details of this ‘sexually dimorphic trait’ in the hand: in about 75% of men the ring finger is longer than the index finger; however in females the percentage is about 50%.

About 75% of males have a digit ratio lower than '1.00'; in females this percentage is about 50%.
Interestingly, John Manning also has pointed out that various studies have indicated that the relative lengths of our fingers offer a hint related to the sexual preference of a person!

For, as expected the index fingers of most straight men appear to be shorter than their ring fingers, while for most straight women the length of both fingers is closer to equal, or even reversed in ratio. But some researchers have noted that gay men are likely to have finger-length ratios more in line with those of straight women, and a study of self-described “butch” lesbians showed significantly masculinized ratios. An overview of these results is presented in the picture below:

Researchers have found a link between index and ring finger lengths and homosexuality.

An overview of the scientific sources which have found a link between finger length and sexual preference:

* Hand asymmetry in heterosexual and homosexual men and women: relationship to 2D:4D digit ratios and other sexually dimorphic anatomical traits. – 2008

* The effects of sex, ethnicity, and sexual orientation on self-measured digit ratio (2D:4D). – 2007

* Digit ratio (2D:4D) in homosexual and heterosexual men from Austria. – 2005

* 2nd to 4th digit ratio and a universal mean for prenatal testosterone in homosexual men. – 2003

* The ratio of 2nd to 4th digit length and male homosexuality. – 2000

* Finger length ratios and sexual orientation – 2000


Illustration from the last study (Williams, 2000):