None of 160 female student volunteers significantly preferred weaker men when rating attractiveness (Sell et al. 2017)

I've posted this study before here: https://www.reddit.com/r/BlackPillScience/comments/b9hat3/cues_of_upper_body_strength_account_for_70_of_the/

But I missed this extremely crucial insight which completely refutes the feminist claim that a sizable fraction of women would be into weak men. Based on this calculator, 0/160 means that less than 2.3% of women prefer a weaker male with 97.5% confidence.

By the way, good papers are also being collected here: https://incels.wiki/w/Scientific_Blackpill

Further evidence of the "bodyguard hypothesis" you think? BTW I'm the one who did that edit on the wiki, I'd be interested if you could link any good studies on the possible connection between male voice depth and mating success?

Yeah bodyguard hypothesis, or from a more blackpilled view it's another manifestation of the overall parasitic dependence of human females, which, as matriarchal mammals demonstrate, is not strictly necessary. Giving birth is not that costly. Human females seem choosier than necessary. It is a local minimum that sexual species are generally attracted to a.k.a. Bateman's principle and probably frequently involves tricking males into providing for them e.g. by making females neotenous and manipulative/agreeable and males horny.

It seems any kind of dimorphism gets reinforced by sexual selection (sensory bias), including voice pitch and physical dominance ornaments, so it's likely not only about bodyguarding. Below are some studies that link voice pitch and reproductive success:

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/David_Puts/publication/228782698_Mating_context_and_menstrual_phase_affect_women's_preferences_for_male_voice_pitch/links/5b2135c7458515270fc6bb29/Mating-context-and-menstrual-phase-affect-womens-preferences-for-male-voice-pitch.pdf

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2391230/

https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Dominance-and-the-evolution-of-sexual-dimorphism-in-Puts-Gaulin/a5c4f38697fe281db64d8a862c6e98ee25e53477

This bodyguard hypothesis is interesting, I wonder what the evolutionary purpose for this preference within females is?

Women are a lot weaker (around 40% less muscle mass), so they need protection. They are weaker because of higher parental investment or a parasitic adaptation (I think both with the former initiating the latter).

Lmao, not that costly ? Wtf are you on ?

I think not costly enough to justify a sex difference to the extent it exists. Matriarchal mammals prove that females can be physically dominating despite higher parental investment. Consider how strongly body mass varies between humans; that variation is larger than the amount of additional organic matter that grows & needs to be maintained during pregnancy.