Esthetics

Achim Schützwohl reported the results of a study that exposed men to line drawings of women, in pairs, with front-view waist-to-hip ratios of either 0.5, 0.7 or 0.9, varied by altering waist size.  Each pair of images was shown for a duration of 1.25 seconds, and the male participants were asked to judge the figures for attractiveness, fecundity, health and pregnancy status.  A shortcoming of the study was using the crude line drawings originally used by Devendra Singh, previously discussed in an entry addressing various confounds related to waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) and attractiveness in women.  Another shortcoming was not using more subtle variation of WHR.

In a new study where 3-D physiques of European women in color were rated for attractiveness by Europeans, the attractiveness ratings were related to percentage body fat, breast size relative to waist size, and skin tone, but not cardiovascular fitness, and male and female raters judged attractiveness similarly(1; pdf).

A number of women would be interested in what waist-hip proportions are “ideal” or the most attractive as far as heterosexual men are concerned.  The purpose of this entry is to show that it is meaningful to talk about an attractive range, albeit narrow, of waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) – as far as the preferences of most people [in Western societies] are concerned – rather than a strict value.  In some comparisons, a woman with a slightly thicker waist/higher WHR would be more appealing.  This entry should once again help make the case that beauty does not lie in some simple rules of thumb.

A study by Dixson et al.(1) reported that when shown line drawings of women from the back, varying in waist-to-hip ratios (WHRs) from 0.5 to 1.0, rural men in Bakossiland, Cameroon, most often preferred a WHR of 0.8.

A study by Dixson et al.(1) reported that when shown line drawings of women from the back, varying in waist-to-hip ratios (WHRs) from 0.5 to 1.0, Chinese men (college students) most often preferred a WHR of 0.6.

Some readers have left comments saying that beauty lies in the eye of the beholder.  Information addressing this issue has been scattered over multiple pages, but instead of linking to these pages everytime someone raises this issue, it is best to come up with a single page where a brief summary with links to the details is presented.  This entry will also be addressing some topics that have not been addressed previously.

An important issue regarding the standard of women participating in international beauty pageants is whether it is possible to compare the attractiveness of women from different geographic populations using objective criteria that are sufficiently exacting for the purposes of a high profile beauty pageant.

One possible explanation of the typical heavy masculinization seen among the female models in mainstream fashion magazines -- such as Elle -- is that these magazines do not cater to men.  The implication is that women -- at least the ones who patronize the magazines -- are apparently interested in masculinized models, and the publishers are simply using models with looks that appease magazine buyers and maximize sales.  Is this the case?

Some people would explain the extreme skinniness typically seen among high-fashion models in terms of a demand for skinniness on the part of the consumer [of fashion imagery/merchandize].  If this is true, then given that high-fashion models have the highest status among female models, it would appear that the aforementioned demand is especially great and characterizes a substantial proportion of the population, especially young women.  This issue needs to be formally addressed.

This entry addresses the aesthetics of the eyebrows in women; note the emphasis on a feminine appearance.  The ideal shape that the author talks about in the introduction is applicable to white women and oval faces.