I had a look at a couple of studies to find out which body shapes men found more attractive. They seem to blow the 0.7 hip-to-waist ratio as the golden rule for the ideal female body shape out of the water.
They showed 40 male students colour photographs of 50 women, with their faces hidden, and asked them to rate how attractive they found them. Unfailingly, the men opted for women with a BMI of 18-21, regardless of shape. Health-wise this category is at the light end of normal weight. The most attractive BMI was found to be 20, which the men awarded five points on average. As soon as women’s weights dropped below 18 their attractiveness started to plunge rapidly.
At the other end of the scale there was a gentle decline, so that a woman rated as overweight still rated a four. The slow decline in attractiveness mirrored the slow decline in health and fertility that accompanies putting on weight. In all, women’s weight accounted for 75 per cent of men’s preferences whereas waist-to-hip ratio accounted for two per cent.
With further analysis, the researchers examined other body shape dimensions, including waist/bust ratio, bust/hip ratio and leg length/torso length ratio. None of these was found to contribute significantly to attractiveness ratings. Dr Tovee said: “There’s been a lot of work on waist-to-hip ratio but it has all been very bad. They could not distinguish between it and BMI.”
There has been a recent study into the changing shape of playboy centrefolds..
In the 1950s, the most attractive female body mass index was considered to be about 20, and the centrefolds reflected this. The optimum waist to hip ratio was believed to be slightly lower than 0.7.
But Voracek and Fisher found that over time, the bust and hip size of the models decreased, while waist size increased. Although weight remained fairly stable, height increased. “This means more recent models have a more skinny and tubular-shaped appearance,” Voracek says.
The typical body mass index of a Playboy centrefold from the late 1990s is 18 – lower than it was in the 1950s. The average waist to hip ratio of these later models is slightly above 0.7 – with an upwards trend.
It has to be said, that the first study still holds up the ideal BMI as 20, why it has changed to 18 in Playboy I’m not sure. A quick rifle through the top shelf in the news agents will show that the cheaper magazines prefer a curvier model. Possibly they are preferring a slightly ‘classier look’ for Playboy, with lower body fat, as higher BMI does have associations with lower social classes.
For the average woman (5′5”) this would make the ideal weight about 8st 10lbs for a BMI of 20, 7st 11lbs for a BMI of 18. So centrefold models are about 13lbs lighter than the standard ‘most attractive’ weight.
A BMI of 18 is considered to be slightly underweight (according to the BMI calculator), and right at the point were attractiveness rapidly drops off. I have to say, this is looking like a cultural trend not a biological one. Is the modern media really that fat-phobic?
The average man seem to rather less bothered by a few extra pounds than by being thin, as attractiveness slopes of slowly off with weight gain, but drops sharply with a BMI of under 18.
I’m guessing, for real life purposes, a BMI of 20 plus a hip to waist ratio of 0.7 would be most attractive.
As you can see, Marilyn Monroe was slightly better fed than these recent playboy centrefolds
7 responses so far ↓
Mathew Grlicz // September 17, 2008 at 2:59 am |
It is fascinating that women are so obsessed by this topic. Why? The answer is obvious. Women who are not attractive think they can change what men find attractive simply by criticizing men. Not going to happen. So far I have never heard of a single woman who was interested in changing how women view men! But that is also expected. Why don’t you find something useful to do with your time??? And no, your conclusions are not factual or reliable. I feel sorry that you can’t accept something that is. Instead you and many women spend your energy railing against something that will never change. Try spitting at the sun! That will have a larger effect!
mathilda37 // September 17, 2008 at 8:40 am |
Matthew…
Slightly missing the point that this is an anthropology blog, and this was solely about what men find attractive as part of human sexual behaviour. It was also one just one paragraph mentioned that what men actually found the most pleasing wasn’t was standardly what you see in ‘glamour photos’, which is hardly obsessive, in a pretty huge blog.
You need to get a life, find something useful to do with your time instead of making shirty comments about subjects you only seem to partially grasp the meaning of. The only thing that comment showed was a deeply misogynistic streak in your nature.
tzopilotl // May 23, 2009 at 11:36 pm |
…well, if i wanted somewhere to hang my wet trench coat, i’d pick the pneumatic blond in the
middle of those knock-out bookends, and
marilyn, who would ever want lipservice from
a body that is to pore over? is it because my
maternal grandmother won the 1oo yd dash as
a syracuse freshman way before jim brown
was a glimmer, or that when she caught my brother, kit, with a girly mag offered to pose in the buff for him so he would know what a real woman looked like instead of handfluff?
i suppose so, but what i really like about
a woman are her legs whether coming
towards me or walking away, any old way,
thisway and thasway, does her skirt ruck
up an inviting tuck, can she kiss and pout,
or does she have beaker lips like a dizzy
wild fowl stopping and starting with each
beat of my heart and sliding her extra lid
at me in what she thinks is gelid consumation?
tzopilotl // May 25, 2009 at 8:04 pm |
…i find criticism quite attractive in a woman
who spits back at male rot and rut. altho
the average male is like a spigot any female
can turn on just by ohhhing and ahhhing
at his hilariously spoiled ego, pretending
an interest in the broken catch-all attic
of his mind, his incredible poses as master
of his micro-universe, and of course his
feelings of gallimaufry when the horse’s
ass of chivalry points his way.
there is no reconciling a man who feels
he has not gotten what he deserves from
women, this usually goes along the lines
of servitude or worse, and he feels free
to bully them in absentia, which is also
his way of having sex with them,
but let’s leave irate onan and say that
women are savory, and it’s in
their flight as birds on the wing
they are a delight right enough
to banish any petulant skygod’s fury
and turn it to warm rain.
carlos lascoutx // May 31, 2009 at 6:26 pm |
…female, hmmm, f/p/b/v/ue(N)=big, ok,
she should be big, ah, fe/ue mal/tl=ma(i)tl=
hand(letra)=maitl(N)/aite(Jap)=wife, she should have big hands and warm feet/foot/
f/po(o)t/tli(letra)=potli(N)=compañera,
she should be the other foot as well.
figure, ah, f/piqu/gure(letra), ah, -gure=
g/col/re, hmm,, she shouldn’t be coleric,
but curly, not coiled, a collen/coloa(N),
and perhaps, colored, oh, ure/olé,
and piquant, and pixie, and piqui(N)=creative=picks/pi-qui/who,
not too picky, and, p/fi(n)g/qui(letra)=
fingers feinting and finiky. there she is:
my dame/dam/tame/tamati(N)/tamale,
and no piccame/piccatl(N)= p/bicce(OE)
need comply.tks
joswitch // June 8, 2009 at 10:04 pm |
Honestly – a sample size of only 40 males and all young students as well? That’s enough to render the first study you mention meaningless through far too small a sample size… try 100,000+ to get a halfway meaningful result, and that only within a given culture…
The second study – looking at playboy centrefolds??? Really? did they actually get funding for that? LOL! – that’s ONE publication, with – globally – an insignificant circulation which only really tells you one thing – the preferences of it’s editors!!
So both studies = garbage.
Yours
joswitch
male, 38 loves BBWs ( just for the record
)
tzopilotl // June 17, 2009 at 12:28 am |
…then again, the female figure lots of males
find attractive is the $ sign, but that makes
the men sweet potatoes/camotes(mex caló),
or padrotes/big daddys/pimperknuckles.