6,480
edits
Body attractiveness: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
no edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
Though BMI and WHR are linearly correlated with each other (that is, there is a trade-off where an increased WHR is associated with higher levels of body fat in women, and thus a higher BMI, which is generally not seen as ideal in a female partner among men) attractiveness of a woman's body is more determined by a lower BMI than WHR (thinness),<ref>https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/abs/10.1098/rspb.2002.2133</ref> and most of the contribution of WHR towards evaluations of female bodily attractiveness is explicable by a smooth distribution of body fat in a gynoid shape on the female body (fat being concentrated around the hips and thighs) being associated with higher attractiveness ratings of female bodies by men, strongly implying that both the distribution and amount of this fat (particularly subcutaneous fat, which is generally thicker in women than men), in so far as this fat contributes to an overall smooth and curvaceous appearance in the woman, is more critical in determining female bodily attractiveness than simple ratios like the WHR.<ref>https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022519308005031</ref> | Though BMI and WHR are linearly correlated with each other (that is, there is a trade-off where an increased WHR is associated with higher levels of body fat in women, and thus a higher BMI, which is generally not seen as ideal in a female partner among men) attractiveness of a woman's body is more determined by a lower BMI than WHR (thinness),<ref>https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/abs/10.1098/rspb.2002.2133</ref> and most of the contribution of WHR towards evaluations of female bodily attractiveness is explicable by a smooth distribution of body fat in a gynoid shape on the female body (fat being concentrated around the hips and thighs) being associated with higher attractiveness ratings of female bodies by men, strongly implying that both the distribution and amount of this fat (particularly subcutaneous fat, which is generally thicker in women than men), in so far as this fat contributes to an overall smooth and curvaceous appearance in the woman, is more critical in determining female bodily attractiveness than simple ratios like the WHR.<ref>https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022519308005031</ref> | ||
According to two studies examining women's preferences regarding male body types published by the Royal Society in 2017, it appears that perceived strength is the strongest single indicator of male bodily attractiveness. This single trait has a very high positive correlation (r = 0.8) with women's attractiveness ratings of said male bodies. | |||
According to two studies examining women's preferences | |||
The conductors of these studies also found evidence that there exists a linear association between perceived strength (as judged by women) in male bodies and higher ratings of men's bodily attractive attractiveness, with no women in the sample demonstrating a statistically significant preference for weaker men, in contradiction to previous research that maintained this association was curvilinear (that is, women find men with a 'sweet spot' level of formidability to be the most attractive and dislike both very muscular and thin men).<ref>https://incels.wiki/w/Scientific_Blackpill#Rated_strength_is_the_main_predictor_of_men.27s_bodily_attractiveness._No_women_prefer_weak_men</ref> | The conductors of these studies also found evidence that there exists a linear association between perceived strength (as judged by women) in male bodies and higher ratings of men's bodily attractive attractiveness, with no women in the sample demonstrating a statistically significant preference for weaker men, in contradiction to previous research that maintained this association was curvilinear (that is, women find men with a 'sweet spot' level of formidability to be the most attractive and dislike both very muscular and thin men).<ref>https://incels.wiki/w/Scientific_Blackpill#Rated_strength_is_the_main_predictor_of_men.27s_bodily_attractiveness._No_women_prefer_weak_men</ref> | ||
In this study, the relationship between the women's ratings of attractiveness of the men and their actual measured strength was relatively weak, from r = 0.25-.038 depending on the angle of the photo used. | |||
This weak correlation suggests, firstly, that ratings of strength are not identical to ratings of attractiveness. Ratings of attractiveness likely capture facets that contribute to ratings of attractiveness but not strength, such as body fat percentage. Secondly, a portion of the perceptions of physical strength appears determined by factors that are only weakly related to actual strength. | |||
These features could include traits that contribute to the desired male 'v-taper' shape, such as narrow waists and wide clavicles, traits that are unrelated to actual strength or perhaps detrimental to it in some instances. | |||
Wide clavicles, in particular, represent one sexually dimorphic trait <ref>https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22138028/</ref> that could have conceivably been subject to [[Fisherian runaway|Fisherian sexual selection]] throughout humanities evolutionary past. While women generally find this trait attractive in a male partner (and wide clavicles contribute to the width of one's shoulders exclusive of soft tissue, which is associated with greater physical attractiveness)<ref>https://www.unm.edu/~abryan/articles/femalehipratio.pdf</ref> it seems there is no relationship between clavicle length (to the humerus) and throwing ability in men. This lack of a relationship indicates that this trait is primarily ornamental (not serving a direct adaptive function apart from increasing sexual attractiveness to the opposite sex).<ref>https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267812769_Clavicle_length_throwing_performance_and_the_reconstruction_of_the_Homo_erectus_shoulder</ref> | |||
==Relative contribution of face and body to attractiveness== | |||
In the [[incelosphere]] and elsewhere, there is an often furious debate that rages regarding how much bodily attractiveness contributes to overall physical attractiveness in men, especially compared to the contribution of facial attractiveness to holistic physical attractiveness ratings. | |||
Currie & Little (2009) tested this by presenting photos of the bodies and faces of various individuals to separate raters in randomized order and then together. The pictures were not rated not as a full-body image, so the experimenters could mask the faces to control for the potential confounding effects of hair, accessories, and so on regarding ratings of faces. <ref>https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1090513809000580</ref> | |||
The raters were instructed to evaluate the desirability of these images in the context of both long and short-term relationships. The whole body photos of the individuals were then presented to a distinct group of raters to determine if presenting the faces and bodies together in such an unnatural way reduced the validity of the ratings (it was later found it didn't to any significant degree). | |||
They found that, in men, facial attractiveness predicted more of the variance of the full-body photographs (β=.427) compared to body ratings (β=.349). However, the effect sizes were quite large (as measured by [https://www.statisticshowto.com/eta-squared/ partial eta squared] statistic). | |||
Conversely, body attractiveness mattered relatively more to men when evaluating women exclusively for short-term relationships. The mating context-related primes had less influence on women's evaluations of the relative importance of facial attractiveness, which was stable across both conditions. | |||
This finding suggests that bodily attractiveness matters quite a bit in determining gestalt physical attractiveness. However, there may be a 'minimal threshold' of facial attractiveness needed for bodily attractiveness to matter much. Interestingly enough, though, the researchers in this study found stronger evidence for an opposite effect, i.e., in some subjects, their gestalt attractiveness was dragged down in a dramatic way when their bodies were relatively unattractive compared to their faces. | |||
==Relation of stature to body attractiveness== | ==Relation of stature to body attractiveness== | ||