What body type do you men prefer?

Of course there are other things that come into play - personality, confidence, style, etc.

But, if we are simply looking at BODY TYPE and NOTHING ELSE.
There has been studies that have taken this on.
Look up Martin Tovee from Newcastle University.

He has studied female attractiveness and compared many elements that could determine a female's body attractiveness.
It turns out that BMI is the highest predictor of female attractiveness (more than waist-to-hip ratio).
Now, unfortunately, what may upset you, is the actual BMI range that is considered attractive to men.
It has been shown that the most attractive women tend to be between a BMI of 16-20, peaking at around 18-19. Which means women are "borderline underweight" to be considered peaking their physical attractiveness. Sad isn't it? No wonder we're all messed up in the head. What is considered attractive isn't what is healthy.

Now, the ratings of attractiveness are still good between a BMI of 20-24 but drops down significantly afterwards.
Other studies have also shown this. Most PlayBoy bunny centerfolds have a BMI of under 19, if I remember correctly, it was something like 18.8 or so.

Look it up - Martin Tovee, he has done all sorts of studies on female attractiveness.
Martin Tovee's study on optimal attractiveness

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140673605792576

BMI is such a bad way to measure body composition. It doesnt take into account how much muscle a person has or how lean they are. Peoples figures, frames and bone structure vary so much that this measurement can essentially remain static when comparing two people that look completely different. A better way to measure composition is bodyfat percentage. That being said, I'm happy with anywhere in the green on this scale.



Now this is actual body fat percentage. The one on the left would probably come in low on the BMI scale, suggesting she is underweight. But clearly she is in great shape. She's not skin and bones, nice rounded hips and tummy, and nice muscle tone. Not that the others aren't attractive, just trying to show how two measurements differ.



Now if you ask most men which they like best? Most would probably like the one on the left. The point: the higher the ratio of muscle to fat on your frame, the more useless the BMI measurement is. Yet another reason women should be hitting the weights.

If you were to look at further studies on BMI, you would know that the body fat/muscle ratio can only significant differ in HIGHER BMI values. This means that for low BMI (under 19), muscle and body fat percentage doesn't vary by much.

So, this being said, you can't say... well, I'm underweight, its because I don't have any muscle, but otherwise, I'm still healthy.
It only works the other way around, when overweight according to the BMI chart, it could be because you have lots of muscle as opposed to fat. So, when at a low BMI, most of your weight comes from structure (bone) and what is left, muscle and fat, doesn't make a big enough difference.

That being said, it still means that a low BMI would rule over body fat percentage as a predictor of attractiveness, especially in Martin Tovee's study.

Of course there are other things that come into play - personality, confidence, style, etc.

But, if we are simply looking at BODY TYPE and NOTHING ELSE.
There has been studies that have taken this on.
Look up Martin Tovee from Newcastle University.

He has studied female attractiveness and compared many elements that could determine a female's body attractiveness.
It turns out that BMI is the highest predictor of female attractiveness (more than waist-to-hip ratio).
Now, unfortunately, what may upset you, is the actual BMI range that is considered attractive to men.
It has been shown that the most attractive women tend to be between a BMI of 16-20, peaking at around 18-19. Which means women are "borderline underweight" to be considered peaking their physical attractiveness. Sad isn't it? No wonder we're all messed up in the head. What is considered attractive isn't what is healthy.

Now, the ratings of attractiveness are still good between a BMI of 20-24 but drops down significantly afterwards.
Other studies have also shown this. Most PlayBoy bunny centerfolds have a BMI of under 19, if I remember correctly, it was something like 18.8 or so.

Look it up - Martin Tovee, he has done all sorts of studies on female attractiveness.
Martin Tovee's study on optimal attractiveness

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140673605792576

BMI is such a bad way to measure body composition. It doesnt take into account how much muscle a person has or how lean they are. Peoples figures, frames and bone structure vary so much that this measurement can essentially remain static when comparing two people that look completely different. A better way to measure composition is bodyfat percentage. That being said, I'm happy with anywhere in the green on this scale.



Now this is actual body fat percentage. The one on the left would probably come in low on the BMI scale, suggesting she is underweight. But clearly she is in great shape. She's not skin and bones, nice rounded hips and tummy, and nice muscle tone. Not that the others aren't attractive, just trying to show how two measurements differ.



Now if you ask most men which they like best? Most would probably like the one on the left. The point: the higher the ratio of muscle to fat on your frame, the more useless the BMI measurement is. Yet another reason women should be hitting the weights.

If you were to look at further studies on BMI, you would know that the body fat/muscle ratio can only significant differ in HIGHER BMI values. This means that for low BMI (under 19), muscle and body fat percentage doesn't vary by much.

So, this being said, you can't say... well, I'm underweight, its because I don't have any muscle, but otherwise, I'm still healthy.
It only works the other way around, when overweight according to the BMI chart, it could be because you have lots of muscle as opposed to fat. So, when at a low BMI, most of your weight comes from structure (bone) and what is left, muscle and fat, doesn't make a big enough difference.

That being said, it still means that a low BMI would rule over body fat percentage as a predictor of attractiveness, especially in Martin Tovee's study.

I was only demonstrating how the measurements differ and why it seems that men prefer an unusually low BMI when judged on image alone. Not whether one is superior to the other in a particular study.

Why is it that anytime someone posts "hey guys <insert question here>", the first (or nearly the first) answer is always another lady....and of those....why is that 90% of those say "well....not a guy....but.....<insert lame comment here>"....ever notice that guys don't do that? sure, we will eventually jump in at some point.......but is it just in your nature to have to make a guy question about YOU anyways? \m/

Because the rest of us women find these questions demeaning.

And men don't have periods or give birth, so they can't comment on what that actually feels like, whereas women do have experience regarding what and how many men are attracted to them at various stages of life, size, etc.

I certainly wouldn't comment on a thread asking about how to handle getting an erection every time you see a picture of Tina Turner or whatever.

Breathing...

Still warm...

curvy

curvy

What kinda curvy?

Of course there are other things that come into play - personality, confidence, style, etc.

But, if we are simply looking at BODY TYPE and NOTHING ELSE.
There has been studies that have taken this on.
Look up Martin Tovee from Newcastle University.

He has studied female attractiveness and compared many elements that could determine a female's body attractiveness.
It turns out that BMI is the highest predictor of female attractiveness (more than waist-to-hip ratio).
Now, unfortunately, what may upset you, is the actual BMI range that is considered attractive to men.
It has been shown that the most attractive women tend to be between a BMI of 16-20, peaking at around 18-19. Which means women are "borderline underweight" to be considered peaking their physical attractiveness. Sad isn't it? No wonder we're all messed up in the head. What is considered attractive isn't what is healthy.

Now, the ratings of attractiveness are still good between a BMI of 20-24 but drops down significantly afterwards.
Other studies have also shown this. Most PlayBoy bunny centerfolds have a BMI of under 19, if I remember correctly, it was something like 18.8 or so.

Look it up - Martin Tovee, he has done all sorts of studies on female attractiveness.
Martin Tovee's study on optimal attractiveness

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140673605792576

BMI is such a bad way to measure body composition. It doesnt take into account how much muscle a person has or how lean they are. Peoples figures, frames and bone structure vary so much that this measurement can essentially remain static when comparing two people that look completely different. A better way to measure composition is bodyfat percentage. That being said, I'm happy with anywhere in the green on this scale.



Now this is actual body fat percentage. The one on the left would probably come in low on the BMI scale, suggesting she is underweight. But clearly she is in great shape. She's not skin and bones, nice rounded hips and tummy, and nice muscle tone. Not that the others aren't attractive, just trying to show how two measurements differ.



Now if you ask most men which they like best? Most would probably like the one on the left. The point: the higher the ratio of muscle to fat on your frame, the more useless the BMI measurement is. Yet another reason women should be hitting the weights.

If you were to look at further studies on BMI, you would know that the body fat/muscle ratio can only significant differ in HIGHER BMI values. This means that for low BMI (under 19), muscle and body fat percentage doesn't vary by much.

So, this being said, you can't say... well, I'm underweight, its because I don't have any muscle, but otherwise, I'm still healthy.
It only works the other way around, when overweight according to the BMI chart, it could be because you have lots of muscle as opposed to fat. So, when at a low BMI, most of your weight comes from structure (bone) and what is left, muscle and fat, doesn't make a big enough difference.

That being said, it still means that a low BMI would rule over body fat percentage as a predictor of attractiveness, especially in Martin Tovee's study.

Muscled and lean.

I guess it depends on when you ask them.

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/news/165625926.html#!page=1&pageSize=10&sort=newestfirst

Stressed men prefer heavier women, study finds
By Amanda Alvarez of the Journal Sentinel
Aug. 10, 2012 1:40 p.m.



Men who are stressed out prefer heavier women, a new study has revealed.

Judgments of human attractiveness seem to change depending on environmental conditions that require different adaptive strategies, according to the report published in the journal PLoS ONE.

British researchers showed stressed and non-stressed men pictures of female bodies, and found that the stressed group gave higher ratings to women who were normal weight or overweight. The range of women who were rated attractive was also broader for the stressed group.

These results agree with previous studies showing that stress causes people to prefer “mature” physical characteristics that are correlated with ability to handle environmental stress.

While the effect in this study was small compared with the differences seen in body size preference across cultures, the authors emphasize that judgment of physical attractiveness and body size preference are flexible and can change based on environment, lifestyle and resource availability.