Women prefer bellies over 6-packs

imho it's only a small part of it. the perception of personality based on a physical aspect that the person has chosen to enhance, IS indeed indicative of at least one personality trait. Narcissism. being in shape or being fit or caring about yourself is entirely different than the hours at the gym needed to achieve the kind of cut we're talking about.. but beyond that.. at a more basic level.. it isn't a good look. it's not attractive. even if we are just talking eye candy.. I don't think super cut men are generally all that. never did. Some muscle is great but not muscle man ripped type muscles. it's just not attractive.

Men who have 6 packs do not exclusively fallen within the ambit of "bodybuilders" and even if they do you cannot simply assume they are narcissists simply because of that pursuit without knowing the individual. That sounds more like prejudice based on incomplete information and assumptions.

In addition, say you have a fatter gentleman who is training for a marathon or any endurance event. The amount of time he spends training may dwarf that of a bodybuilder and his diet may be even more restrictive yet somehow these negative associations do not apply. Is that fair, right or rational ?

@hat. but seriously. I don't know about big belly or not for the general preference but I would believe a bit of softness is preferable to a guy who is completely ripped. I was going off the daily mail uk article not the fox article comparing mr darcy to bond.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2742294/Mr-Darcy-beats-Bond-battle-bodies-British-women-date-man-love-handles-six-pack.html

and that is true. (Although I think the tall dark and handsome thing is winning out over the short and ripped and kind of ugly thing)

but still, colin firth is exactly the kind of body type I'm thinking when I say it's preferable to ripped and definitely not in the path for health problems

and let's go a step further and address the possibility of cheating or insecurity. EVERYONE loves colin firth. if we were talking no name guys, not superstars, and you just had a guy who was a dead ringer for daniel craig and one who was a dead ringer for colin firth I think a lot more temptation would be in the path of the firth look alike than the craig lookalike.

no

I can't say I am surprised by these results, but was this a scientific study or a survey? Does anyone have a link to the actual study?

EL OH EL
I'm pretty sure i read it's Fox..... So i hope your expectations are very very very very very low.

Which is fine.

However the survey isn't really about personality over looks.

It is about the perception of men's personalities based on nothing but looks. Which is pretty sucky.

This study shows that while men can agree on one type of attractiveness, women cannot.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/06/090626153511.htm

ETA: yes it is sucky when people are judged by their looks alone.

The study you linked says that women prefer thin, muscular men

Which is fine.

However the survey isn't really about personality over looks.

It is about the perception of men's personalities based on nothing but looks. Which is pretty sucky.

This study shows that while men can agree on one type of attractiveness, women cannot.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/06/090626153511.htm

ETA: yes it is sucky when people are judged by their looks alone.

The study you linked says that women prefer thin, muscular men

"As a group, the women rating men showed some preference for thin, muscular subjects, but disagreed on how attractive many men in the study were. Some women gave high attractiveness ratings to the men other women said were not attractive at all."

Yes, they showed a preference but within that they still couldn't decide if they thought those men were attractive or not. Whereas the men's responses were more in line with each other.

ETA: bolded more words because science.

I can't say I am surprised by these results, but was this a scientific study or a survey? Does anyone have a link to the actual study?

EL OH EL
I'm pretty sure i read it's Fox..... So i hope your expectations are very very very very very low.

Fox news doesn't typically (ever?) do studies. They do however often poorly report the results. Just because it's on Fox News does not mean a study is flawed.

Which is fine.

However the survey isn't really about personality over looks.

It is about the perception of men's personalities based on nothing but looks. Which is pretty sucky.

This study shows that while men can agree on one type of attractiveness, women cannot.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/06/090626153511.htm

ETA: yes it is sucky when people are judged by their looks alone.

The study you linked says that women prefer thin, muscular men

"As a group, the women rating men showed some preference for thin, muscular subjects, but disagreed on how attractive many men in the study were. Some women gave high attractiveness ratings to the men other women said were not attractive at all."

Yes, they showed a preference but within that they still couldn't decide if they thought those men were attractive or not. Whereas the men's responses were more in line with each other.

ETA: bolded more words because science.

If you actually look at the study, the source is exactly - word for word - the same as the article quoted. The study also doesn't seem to be replicated, nor does it mention having much validity, and it doesn't seem to be specific about the results of the characteristics they measured (for example: they didn't give us the high numerical values that the 'thin' and 'confidence' characteristics yielded within the study) with makes me skeptical. It may just be the studies i'm used to, but it isn't providing me with the pieces of information i'm used to seeing in psychological studies i'm used to seeing, so i don't trust it.

I don't know how reliable sciencedaily is as i don't frequent it personally, but i don't trust the study as far as i can throw it.

I can't say I am surprised by these results, but was this a scientific study or a survey? Does anyone have a link to the actual study?

EL OH EL
I'm pretty sure i read it's Fox..... So i hope your expectations are very very very very very low.

Fox news doesn't typically (ever?) do studies. They do however often poorly report the results. Just because it's on Fox News does not mean a study is flawed.

I never said they did a study - hence why i said 'i read it was Fox' as i remember somebody referencing the article as one from Fox News above. I was merely trying to help when i first scrolled through (obviously before i decided to answer and such), that's all.

I also never said that something being reported on Fox meant it was automatically flawed. I merely said to have low expectations because - like you say yourself - they are not the best at reporting accurately.

If you actually look at the study, the source is exactly - word for word - the same as the article quoted. The study also doesn't seem to be replicated, nor does it mention having much validity, and it doesn't seem to be specific about the results of the characteristics they measured (for example: they didn't give us the high numerical values that the 'thin' and 'confidence' characteristics yielded within the study) with makes me skeptical. It may just be the studies i'm used to, but it isn't providing me with the pieces of information i'm used to seeing in psychological studies i'm used to seeing, so i don't trust it.

I don't know how reliable sciencedaily is as i don't frequent it personally, but i don't trust the study as far as i can throw it.

Agreed. It's clearly junk.