Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Study Finds the Perfect Ratio of Attractiveness

samzenpus posted more than 3 years ago | from the hey-there-big-arms dept.

Idle 176

Gksksla writes "Scientists in Australia and Hong Kong have conducted a comprehensive study to discover how different body measurements correspond with ratings of female attractiveness. The study, published in the Journal of Evolutionary Biology, found that across cultural divides young, tall and long armed women were considered the most attractive."

cancel ×

176 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

yummy... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33737698)

mmm... arms...

Golden Ratio (5, Interesting)

C_Kode (102755) | more than 3 years ago | (#33737808)

Wasn't this already figured out by Ancient Greek mathematicians? :)

Re:Golden Ratio (1)

carrier lost (222597) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738314)

Wasn't this already figured out by Ancient Greek mathematicians?

Are you referring to that old "Angle of the dangle, mass of the meat something, something" calculation?

Re:Golden Ratio (2, Informative)

VolciMaster (821873) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738636)

Wasn't this already figured out by Ancient Greek mathematicians?

Are you referring to that old "Angle of the dangle, mass of the meat something, something" calculation?

I always thought it was "heat of the meat"...

Re:Golden Ratio (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738656)

Wasn't this already figured out by Ancient Greek mathematicians? :)

Sorry to suck the fun out of the comment, but... no.

The ratio of straight lines rarely has much to do with the female form.

Forgot one (4, Funny)

RealErmine (621439) | more than 3 years ago | (#33737816)

Young, tall, long armed and with huge... tracts of land.

Re:Forgot one (1)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738060)

>>>with huge... tracts of land.

Believe it or not, some of us prefer small... um, tracts of land. We'd actually prefer small natural... tracts of land, rather than silicone enhanced... uh, tracts of land. If you catch my meaning.
.

>>>young, tall and long armed

i.e. Thin.

There's a tendency in this society (well US society anyway) to hate-on people with vicious comments like "too thin" or "skeletal" or "see-through" when in reality they have a perfectly healthy BMI index. (Between 18.5 and 23)

Re:Forgot one (1)

toastar (573882) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738078)

>>>with huge... tracts of land.

Believe it or not, some of us prefer small... um, tracts of land. We'd actually prefer small natural... tracts of land, rather than silicone enhanced... uh, tracts of land. If you catch my meaning. .

>>>young, tall and long armed

i.e. Thin.

There's a tendency in this society (well US society anyway) to hate-on people with vicious comments like "too thin" or "skeletal" or "see-through" when in reality they have a perfectly healthy BMI index. (Between 18.5 and 23)

Funny It used to be wide hipped lady's that used to consider attractive, Due to how many kids they could pop out.

Re:Forgot one (1)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738154)

>>>It used to be wide hipped lady's that used to consider attractive

That's still true. You've never seen a wide-hipped thin lady? They do exist.

Re:Forgot one (2, Informative)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738194)

P.S. Here's a whole bunch of those THIN but still wide-hipped ladies:

Warning: Naked europeans. Not recommended for prudes: http://www.domai.com/news/index.html [domai.com]

Re:Forgot one (1)

IdolizingStewie (878683) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738456)

The article mentions hip-to-waist ratio as a strong indicator of attractiveness, so I'd say you're exactly right. And I speak as a wide-hipped thin lady (although missing the component up top to be a true hourglass figure, I've still never had any complaints.)

Re:Forgot one (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33738492)

Pics or it didn't happen.

Re:Forgot one (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33739388)

She made me promise that I wouldn't post the pics online... otherwise I would.

Re:Forgot one (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33738686)

BMI index

Body Mass Index Index? What's that?

Re:Forgot one (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33739218)

when in reality they have a perfectly healthy BMI index.

Except that a "perfectly healthy BMI" for the vast majority of people isn't "perfectly healthy". Did you happen to miss that episode of Bullshit? Or did cognitive dissonance* kick in because that episode didn't fit with your preconceived notions?

*Note to others, it may sound like flamebait, but Troll64 has themself been throwing around the cognitive dissonance card at people lately.

Re:Forgot one (1)

floodo1 (246910) | more than 3 years ago | (#33739332)

did you catch the episode of Bullshit where they said that all bottled water is just tap water? Where they completely ignored the fact that while the water does indeed come from "the tap" (typically the county water supply where the bottling plant is located), but it's not put straight into bottles as received. For example Pepsi treats their water with lime, then runs it through reverse osmosis before bottling it.

Point is that Bullshit isn't exactly a good source of information.

Re:Forgot one (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33739184)

The sample base was pathetically small, I doubt ANY of the Chinese women had breasts bigger than a C cup, etc.etc.

All bullshit as usual.

We KNOW what is attractive - the most attractive women are seen in popular pornography (notice I said POPULAR, not 'pornography'). Milena Velba, for example, is quite short, but I'll bet that 90% of men would choose her as a highly attractive woman.

Why aren't there loads of big breasted women in Hollywood and the controlled media's programmes? Because if there were, big breasted women wouldn't have to resort to pornography in order to make money/become famous...

Ugly people are mutants. The more mutated from normality - i.e. beauty, the more ugly they are. (Note that 'normality' does NOT mean 'most common' or 'most prevalent', it means most natural.)

Pssshhh... (3, Funny)

mister_playboy (1474163) | more than 3 years ago | (#33737834)

Long arms? Give me a hourglass shaped babe with plenty of T&A, thanks. :)

Re:Pssshhh... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33737924)

Any gal you marry will end up with plenty of A, no matter how much she starts with.

Re:Pssshhh... (1)

fyngyrz (762201) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738460)

Any gal you marry will end up with plenty of A, no matter how much she starts with.

Yeah, but after the first year or so, she isn't going to share it with you anyway, so what difference does it make?

Re:Pssshhh... (1)

Jake Griffin (1153451) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738732)

WHOOOOOSH!

I think the GP was calling the GGP an A...

Re:Pssshhh... (1)

rthille (8526) | more than 3 years ago | (#33739194)

Slashdot needs a 'sad but true' moderation.

Re:Pssshhh... (1)

Surt (22457) | more than 3 years ago | (#33737960)

The point of the study seems to be that that's what you say, but not what you actually pick.

Re:Pssshhh... (1)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738024)

I'm willing to say I'm an exception to the results, as I KNOW I prefer my women with some curves as opposed to skinny ones. Not really big girls, but I prefer the girls more in the 125-140 lbs range rather than the 100-115 lbs range.

Re:Pssshhh... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33738102)

you mean tall and long armed weighting in at 125-140?

So? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33738590)

Long arms? Give me a hourglass shaped babe with plenty of T&A, thanks. :)

Hourglass+T+A does not preclude long arms.

36-24-36 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33737868)

'nuff said.

In the words of Sir Mix-a-Lot (1)

somaTh (1154199) | more than 3 years ago | (#33737910)

Only if she's 5'3". Baby got back.

The perfect study (2, Funny)

Big Smirk (692056) | more than 3 years ago | (#33737880)

Nice job.

Next up, a study on perfect female breast size.

"No ma'am, I'm not oogling you, I'm conducting a study"

Re:The perfect study (1)

fyngyrz (762201) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738484)

"Yes, I know beauty is only skin-deep; did you think I was admiring your lungs?"

bad survey. (2, Informative)

JWSmythe (446288) | more than 3 years ago | (#33737882)

God, yet another insignificant study without enough information.

    96 models, and a sample set of 94 (plus some number in the Hong Kong group).

    At least it leads to their site, which appears that it may do a better job at getting a good sample group.

    It, of course, can't take into account moods, personal history, etc. Like, the most beautiful woman in the survey could look just like my exgirlfriend/exwife. It's very likely I'd immediately score her lower.

   

Re:bad survey. (1)

blai (1380673) | more than 3 years ago | (#33737976)

I am from Hong Kong, you insensitive clod!

Re:bad survey. (1)

JWSmythe (446288) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738528)

    Send us your young tall thin large breasted women!

Re:bad survey. (3, Funny)

insertwackynamehere (891357) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738854)

What the statue of liberty should have said

Re:bad survey. (1)

Surt (22457) | more than 3 years ago | (#33737986)

It takes into account personal history via sample size.

Re:bad survey. (2, Interesting)

JWSmythe (446288) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738458)

    It doesn't look like the same size provides an adequate room for edge cases to not skew the results.

    At one company, I did scored ratings. It seemed like a big complicated system, but it boiled down to be pretty simple. People were voting 1 to 5 on a set of pictures. There were thousands of sets handled by the system at any given point, and multiple millions of votes stored in our logs.

    In the first 10 results, we could have a tremendously skewed result. Say a 4.5
    In the first 100 results, we'd see them drift. maybe now 2.5
    In the first 10,000 results, it would be closer to a consistent number. 4.2, for the sake of this example.

    To encourage voting, and reduce complaints of "where's my score", we didn't publish any scores until there were at least 50 results. It made for the occasional complaint of "why did my score change so much", which we could address by providing their logs (timestamps and votes).

    So, 100 guys in Australia, and an unknown sample group in Hong Kong? Nope, not good enough, especially where they're trying to say it covers 50% of the world population.

Long arms? Uh, no (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33737928)

Slender-ish arms are attractive and tend to look longer (although they are normally not actually longer).

Arm shape is one thing I look at to determine how healthy a woman is. Chubby arms on a thin woman indicate a potential fat woman in disguise. Too thin of arms indicate a potential eating disorder, drug problem, or who knows (ie. mental issues if true).

I don't go by these alone but they do shape my initial impression.

Re:Long arms? Uh, no (2, Insightful)

bluefoxlucid (723572) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738010)

I usually fuck her if she's cute, friendly, comfortable, and willing. Failing the willing part, we get flirty; failing the comfortable part, things get weird and we dismiss the idea. Failing the comfortable/willing parts both, we usually just wind up being friends. If she turns out to be a bitch, I just ignore her because no amount of unbelievable hotness is going to cover up a giant cunt. Sure I'm not into chubby chicks; but there's plenty of skinny, curvy, short, and somewhat long girls out there that catch my eye. There's no real pattern: I like her or I don't, and if she's got a smoking body but her aura says "LOL I AM ENTITLED TO EVERYTHING SO FUCK YOU ALL KNEEL BEFORE ME" I'm not going to notice her.

Re:Long arms? Uh, no (1)

BlackSnake112 (912158) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738406)

You can read aura! Dam you!

Re:Long arms? Uh, no (1)

JamesTRexx (675890) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738512)

How true. For me it's the eyes that tell wether she's a nice girl or a bitch, and I'm not interested in living with a constant headache.

Re:Long arms? Uh, no (1)

bluefoxlucid (723572) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738740)

I'm not interested in cuddling with a witch from hell, much less sticking it in her. Much less marrying her lol wtf?

Re:Long arms? Uh, no (1)

sumdumass (711423) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738996)

I would agree until I found out they wear colored contact lenses and use makeup to manipulate the parts surrounding the eyes and they can find a lot of the bitch within.

Now I just pretend I'm a family man looking at a sports car. I will test drive them, if they are too slow, I take it back to the lot, if they are too fast, the same. If they need their valves adjusted every 10 miles, well, you get the hint. I'm just glad that Google Voice allows me to block numbers altogether.

Long arms? (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33737942)

How long have these arms to be?
Long enough to hand me a beer over from the fridge?

one of these days (1)

roman_mir (125474) | more than 3 years ago | (#33737968)

one of these days they will stop trying to figure out what makes some women more attractive than others and will finally start figuring out how to get everyone one or two of those.

Re:one of these days (2, Informative)

rubycodez (864176) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738224)

no problem, travel to some place money is scarce. bring some money. you will be found attractive and have women.

Re:one of these days (1)

fyngyrz (762201) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738520)

+1 spot fucking on

Re:one of these days (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33738862)

you forgot one thing: make it known that you have money.

Really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33738052)

Awesome. A useless study that tells us what men already knew (and women). Can I get a Weekend Update Really?! segment for this?

Did They Account for Individual Taste? (2, Interesting)

BJ_Covert_Action (1499847) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738128)

Personally, I like short girls for some reason. I don't know why, but I've always had a thing for girls that are 5'4 or below. I think it's because the short ones are usually zesty packets of spunk and attitude. Nothing like short-woman syndrome to make a girl the right balance of crazy and fierce.

Re:Did They Account for Individual Taste? (2, Informative)

rubycodez (864176) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738274)

short? the average height of women in the USA is 5'4".

Re:Did They Account for Individual Taste? (1)

ihatejobs (1765190) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738368)

That happens to a lot of people. They think that their choice in partner is completely unique and it turns out that they just like the average.

Re:Did They Account for Individual Taste? (1)

BJ_Covert_Action (1499847) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738386)

Fine then, change my criteria to at least 6 inches shorter than myself. I don't really care about the USA average height, I just like women that are short compared to myself.

Re:Did They Account for Individual Taste? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33738626)

I just like women that are short compared to myself.

So do nearly all men.

Re:Did They Account for Individual Taste? (2, Interesting)

IndustrialComplex (975015) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738446)

short? the average height of women in the USA is 5'4".

You will have people talking about 'short' guys who are average or above average height. As a result, if you fall near average, you have to state your height as exaggerated in order to avoid being labeled 'short'.

I think there is also a disconnect in referring to height in a numeric manner. It's interesting when you look at it from a statistical standpoint, I've seen people refer to guys who were 5'9" and 5'10" as short.

You will hear people refer to women below 5'6" as being short, which doesn't make sense when looking at the statistical data.

Re:Did They Account for Individual Taste? (2, Interesting)

CAIMLAS (41445) | more than 3 years ago | (#33739068)

I think there is also a disconnect in referring to height in a numeric manner. It's interesting when you look at it from a statistical standpoint, I've seen people refer to guys who were 5'9" and 5'10" as short.

In some parts of the country, that is short.

I'm 6'2" - just barely. My brother is 6'3", maybe a little more. My boss is 6'2" and thick (280lb or so). My best friend is 6'5". My dad is 6'1" (or was before he started getting old). Other friends and acquaintances are anywhere from 5'11 up through 6'6" and various builds (most around the 6'1" height).

My FIL is one of the "shorter" men I know - at 5'10".

No, it doesn't have much to do with the group I hang with: out here, people really are taller and bigger than the average (don't ask why, I don't know). This is particularly true in many small towns (visit one, and I feel short. Oi!) in the area where people spent their days working with their hands.

5'6" is short, as it's uncommon for women to be over 5'10" (the height for 'professional' modeling, I hear). Sure, that's a 4" window, but most seem to be near the lower end. There also seem to be more "tall" than "under 5'4", so someone at 5'4" is an exception. (My wife is 5'6" and is considered "short", being several inches shorter than most of her peers).

When I go to (say) the coasts of the US (NE corridor or California) I'd find myself having a good head's view over the crowds - I am 'quite tall' there, whereas here, I'm relatively normal. (Hell, due to a slight build, I'd even be considered small.) I'm not "the tall guy", I'm "the skinny guy".

Re:Did They Account for Individual Taste? (2, Interesting)

Spectre (1685) | more than 3 years ago | (#33739344)

In some parts of the country, that is short.

No, it doesn't have much to do with the group I hang with: out here, people really are taller and bigger than the average (don't ask why, I don't know).

When I go to (say) the coasts of the US (NE corridor or California) I'd find myself having a good head's view over the crowds - I am 'quite tall' there, whereas here, I'm relatively normal. (Hell, due to a slight build, I'd even be considered small.) I'm not "the tall guy", I'm "the skinny guy".

I'll second all of the above. The country was settled by people of different ethnicities area by area. California and New England are shorter than the people in the midwest.

I don't know if this is because of the backgrounds of the people settling in different regions of the USA or if it is because in the midwest we grew up on hormone-laced beef, but it is a phenomenon that is at least correct from a biased viewpoint (mine).

Re:Did They Account for Individual Taste? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33738434)

Yeah, yeah, we all know it's because they make you're dick look bigger.

Re:Did They Account for Individual Taste? (1)

couchslug (175151) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738534)

"I think it's because the short ones are usually zesty packets of spunk"

Don't use that complement in the UK.

Re:Did They Account for Individual Taste? (1)

llamapater (1542875) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738988)

that one's not even good in the US maybe he means it just as it sounds?

Re:Did They Account for Individual Taste? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33738770)

...are usually zesty packets of spunk...

After you're done with them, sure...

Distrubing (3, Funny)

TiggertheMad (556308) | more than 3 years ago | (#33739014)

I've always had a thing for girls that are 5'4 or below. I think it's because the short ones are usually zesty packets of spunk

if...
girls that are 5'4 or below == short ones
and
short ones == zesty packets of spunk
That would mean that you just said:

I've always had a thing for zesty packets of spunk.

on Slashdot. /shudder

Re:Did They Account for Individual Taste? (1)

GodfatherofSoul (174979) | more than 3 years ago | (#33739274)

They seem to have better proportions IMO. Taller, fit women seem to get that "lanky" look.

Re:Did They Account for Individual Taste? (1)

psithurism (1642461) | more than 3 years ago | (#33739282)

I like short girls for some reason.

And other scientists would say this is normal! Short girls are faster and more likely to get married and have children (see wikipedia:hight_descrimination), assumed by some scientists (but mainly based on my personal observations) because men tend to choose shorter women as mates, regardless of what they say is attractive.

SCIENCE! (3, Insightful)

Triv (181010) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738132)

Why do I get the feeling this study was conceived purely as a way to get a bunch of nerds into a room with some hot chicks and to cover their leering as "scientific curiosity."

wtf? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33738142)

Pics or it isn't true!

Long arms eh? (1)

Joffy (905928) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738152)

That sucks for Hayden Panettiere!

Re:Long arms eh? (1)

phly1x (1286846) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738486)

she's good from afar, but far from good. besides: not tall. not thin/skinny. not long arms.

Armed? (1)

oldmac31310 (1845668) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738156)

No thanks. I prefer if women are not all tooled up and ready to go on a killing spree.

Seriously though, tall does not appeal to me (nor just very short) but in this 'study' it would appear that 'tall' is relative. The bit about long arms is a mystery to me. Long as in orang utan or long as in not short and stubby? Or something in between. We need pictures!

I believe it was the esteemed... (1)

Itesh (1901146) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738166)

Sir Mix-A-Lot who said, "My anaconda don't want none unless you got buns hun!" and 36-24-36 only if she's 5' 3"

Nulliparous (1)

JackSpratts (660957) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738176)

is what the boys want, and what those pipestem arms and little waist whisper.

Na'vi? (1)

zero_out (1705074) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738192)

Was this survey performed outside a movie theatre after a showing of Avatar by any chance?

HEY! (4, Funny)

Shikaku (1129753) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738226)

Listen!

Re:HEY! (1)

silverglade00 (1751552) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738480)

Listen!

You smell something?

Re:HEY! (1)

Abstrackt (609015) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738640)

Argh, that was low. Couldn't you have posted a goatse link instead?

That makes sense... (4, Insightful)

XxtraLarGe (551297) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738230)

I think tall, short-armed women or short, long-armed women would look kind of odd.

Re:That makes sense... (1)

hawkfish (8978) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738880)

I think tall, short-armed women or short, long-armed women would look kind of odd.

Exactly - the second group would have a similar ratio to chimpanzees. Not sure what the first group would look like but probably any quadruped.

Study: Women that look like models are attractive (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33738238)

How much money did they spend to discover that people find women that resemble models to be attractive????

Sounds like good news for female boxers? (1)

BerntB (584621) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738264)

Sounds like good news for female boxers?

Shocking (2, Funny)

carrier lost (222597) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738266)

"...found that across cultural divides young, tall and long armed women were considered the most attractive."

Get out! Men don't like old, short, stubby-armed women?

Sacre-bleu!

Dave.cpp (4, Funny)

CODiNE (27417) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738286)

Actually Dave [thedailywtf.com] has already figured out the optimal formula for calculating and ranking a woman's beauty.

I appreciate large derrieres... (4, Funny)

Drakkenmensch (1255800) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738322)

...and it is impossible to be untruthful.

Re:I appreciate large derrieres... (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33738424)

None of us can refute that

Re:I appreciate large derrieres... (3, Funny)

Abstrackt (609015) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738680)

When a young woman enters with a small waist and supple buttocks

Re:I appreciate large derrieres... (3, Funny)

RightSaidFred99 (874576) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738838)

And proceeds to expose her hip and buttocks region in close proximity to your face, One's penis might become turgid, lending a certain urge to extract it.

And furthermore... (1, Funny)

hyades1 (1149581) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738388)

"The study...found that across cultural divides young, tall and long armed women were considered the most attractive."

"Unt zee gymungous getitzenhooters alzo ve haf found to be zort uff nice.

Herr Professor Lance Wagstaffenstein, University of Norbnokkerschweet at Munchen

Worthless... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33738428)

This thread is worthless without pics!

Interesting Test Study... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33738462)

Subjects chosen from Chinese women, observed by Australian men and women...with a control group from Hong Kong...

AN Answer, not THE Answer (1)

DynaSoar (714234) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738490)

This is a very common topic in social psychology experiments. Many that are published fall prey to an error of calling the example selected most to be 'attractive'. It's more correct to say that the most common answer is the most common opinion of attractiveness. In the press to prove their point, they ignore the fact that a less common answer is also an opinion of attractiveness, just to fewer people. Just because more guys like the hard, bony ones with corners so sharp they bruise you and threaten to poke holes in the water bed doesn't mean some don't consider the softer, more squeezable ones to be attractive.

And while you're getting your 'fat chick' jokes ready to throw, keep in mind that the less likely a guy is to get a girl at all, the more likely he is to adopt an attractiveness standard in line with the majority (so he can lie as much as possible) but to an even greater degree (so he can better lies than the other guys do do). He might as well claim that's his preference since he's not likely to get any sort, and will take advantage of any chance to toss his artificial preference out for others to see, expecting them to take his preference as a history. Yes, there's an awful lot of this attractiveness research done, and only some of it tends to reach erroneous conclusions.
 

Knee sharpness? (1)

Stavr0 (35032) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738516)

Missing from the study is the impact of knee sharpness on perceived beauty standard.

didn't we already know this??? (1)

phly1x (1286846) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738620)

my wife is: able to stop traffic, blonde ,6' tall, 6'2" wingspan, 145lbs, elite athlete, a PE, LEED AP. you all can bow down before ME. i bow down before--in front of, facing--her.

And yet... (2, Insightful)

Starteck81 (917280) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738632)

And yet some people still find Snookie attractive. I know, it boggles my mind too.

FAIL (1)

ComputerGeek01 (1182793) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738698)

Not one mention of symetry or Vetruvian (spelling?) measurements was made in this article. The study was all Chinese women. The study group was all men from western cultures. I can't even believe this was published.

The morbidly obese'll scream with practised rage (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33738708)

We needed a study to find this out. Well, the people large enough to need their own post-codes will holler that unrealistic goals are being manufactured. /Don't eat crap. //See rule one.

Not surprising (4, Funny)

Translation Error (1176675) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738772)

After all, who's going to tell armed women that they're unattractive.

Corsets (1)

KDN (3283) | more than 3 years ago | (#33738784)

As someone who admires ladies in corsets, I've known about the waist to hip ratio for years :-) What is interesting is this may be inbred, because that ratio has been found to indicate the most fertile women.

Re:Corsets (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33738942)

Like your mom.

MORE PSEUDO-SCIENCE! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33738918)

"Our results showed consistent attractiveness ratings by men and women and by Hong Kong Chinese and Australian raters, suggesting considerable cross cultural consistency," concluded Brooks. "In part this may be due to shared media experiences.

Summary to the "study"
Make some silhouettes of a variety of Chinese and Australian women. Show them to some Chinese and Australian men and ask them to rate them. Conclude that the results are significant across all cultures and are genetically induced.

Who pays these fucking idiots?

Young!? (2, Insightful)

Strange Ranger (454494) | more than 3 years ago | (#33739284)

Shocking!! They had to do a study to find out men prefer young looking women?!?

There is a reason Steely Dan doesn't sing a song titled "Hey 39".

There are also plenty of good biological and evolutionary reasons for this.

Crappy article. No pictures. (1)

nickdwaters (1452675) | more than 3 years ago | (#33739372)

The statistics are averaged across cultures they sampled. It's about as meaningful as the tendency of storks to build their nests in chimneys.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>