The notion that men are
sexually excited by the visual and women by the verbal (or
emotional) is without question a broad and frequently inaccurate
generalization, but it is important to remember that many people are so strongly informed by their
culture and its
images that they behave according to such
stereotypes.
Males in America mature in a media environment saturated by schematics of female physical attractiveness; this is often why men find it so difficult to transcend the physical in dating considerations. Movies, television, and print media (as well as the Internet) provide a fairly clear set of attributes which we are to consider attractive in a woman; with some variation, the archetypal model woman is clearly defined, and most men (myself included, sadly) are barely able to overcome their culturally-derived aesthetic when selecting dating partners.
On the other hand, how does the media define the perfect man? Is it Sean Connery, George Clooney, Brad Pitt, James Gandolfini, Ed Norton, Eminem, Sisqo, John Cusak, Matt Damon, Arnold Schwarznegger, Tom Hanks, or even Jay-Z? In the media, it seems to matter little what a man looks like, it being more critical the strength of his personality, his ability to represent a demographic identity, or simply his relative success.
If even fifty-percent of Americans allow their culture to determine their sexual and romantic inclinations, and I imagine that many more do, then the images disseminated by the media do have a very real effect on the way each gender defines itself and what is attractive. Women are not biologically or intrinsically more likely to be attracted to the verbal, and men are not chemically predisposed to the visual; but in most Western nations, the history of narrative and visual culture supports the idea that we have been conditioned to adopt these roles (and as a male, I can’t complain).