Sexual Selection based on body type

Aaron Edwards
Joanne Lee
Melanie Youssef
Robert Ramirez

Introduction
Imagine being able to design your own body. How would you develop your ideal
features, and what standards would you use to determine your attractiveness? For many years,
scientists have studied the ideal elements of body attractiveness. What determines how males
select their female partners and vice versa? We can use sexual selection to explain why each
gender choses certain characteristics in the other to determine if they will have sexual relations.
Attraction to the female body has arguably evolved over time, and the relationship between
physical attractions to mate selection has been a significant identifier in analyzing trends for
partner selection. A study was conducted with 40 young male and female heterosexual Caucasian
men and women, with an average age of just over 19. British researchers asked them to design
ideal bodies- one for themselves and one for a hypothetical mate (TodayStyle). They were
presented with 3-D computer representations of bodies, where each participant could then adjust
the images in many different ways until they arrived at the ideal body for their gender, and the
ideal body of the opposite gender. Results were predictable- as men and women barely had
different opinions of what an ideal body should look like, both for their gender as well as the
opposite. Essentially, the male ideal is a pyramid shape with broad shoulders and a small waist
while the female ideal is an hourglass shape with a small waist to hip ratio. Another interesting
finding was how all the participants preferred slimmer female bodies than the real female
participants possessed. As health trends, such as wearing corsets to shape thin waists, obtaining
thigh gaps, etc. have become prevalent on social media sites, the concept of body image has now
become more standardized than ever. The standardization of the female body image leads us to
question if mate selection based on tested physical attributes, such as the hip-to-waist ratio or
WHR, have changed from previous years, and which evolutionary factors drive this change.

Another study was conducted where men were asked to view pictures of women while
their eyes were tracked, and assign attractiveness. From their study, they have concluded that the
most attractive WHR is 0.7. Men were asked to look at an image of a woman for 5 seconds.
From a back pose, initial visual fixation was on the midriff of the woman. The first fixation
occurred within 200 milliseconds of showing the image. For the rest of the 5 seconds the greatest
viewpoints were on the midriff and buttocks. When shown an image from a frontal view for five
seconds, the attention was mainly on the breasts, with attention shifting more to the midriff of
women with a higher WHR. From these results, they concluded the importance of the female
midriff and the WHR upon men's attraction level, with a priority to the back posed image
(Dixson et al. 2010). This leads us to our first hypothesis: If a woman falls into the ideal WHR,
males will be more likely to select them as attractive mates. This then led us to also question if
women had the same interests as men.
If womens physical attributes drive male mate selection, then what drives female mate
selection? As we examined the study of womens preference of body hair on men in class, we
argued that the preference of attraction could be easily based on the physical size of the male
participants, in addition to the amount of body hair they had. The waist-chest ratio or WCR,
which measures the proportion of the chest to the waist, is an indicator of male strength in
relation to size. The theory of evolution showed that historically, females chose their mates based
off of their partners ability to hunt and protect. A wide-chested man meant increased strength
and protection for the female. Today, we attempt to see if women continue to prefer men with
wider chests on account of security and strength. In a study titled Characteristics of Male
Attractiveness conducted by Maisey et al. in 2010, 214 men were measured for their waist-chest
ratio, waist-hip ratio, and BMIs. 50 men who fell into the average of the 214 men's

measurements (+ a standard deviation of 1.7 on either side of the mean) were chosen as the
sample. 30 female undergraduates (average age 20.6) were shown color pictures of the front
views of the 50 men, but the pictures did not include the men's faces. The female participants
were shown the full range of 50 men before proceeding with their ratings of their attractiveness.
The data showed that while all three factors (waist-chest ratio, waist-hip ratio, and BMIs) were
significant to the attractiveness rating, the waist-chest ratio accounted for 56% of the variance
when identifying the significant contributor to attractiveness when age was controlled. BMI
measurements only counted for 12.7% of the variance, while hip-waist ratio was not a significant
factor to the ratings of attractiveness. Slight changes of the waist-chest ratio played a role in the
attractiveness of the male. The results showed that shape, rather than size, played a huge role in
determining attractiveness (Maisey). We conducted our own study with our hypothesis in mind:
If a man falls into the ideal waist-to-chest ratio (WCR), females will be more likely to select
them as attractive mates.
We expect our findings to fall into the patterns of previously established studies, with the
majority of men picking their ideal woman as the one who has a WHR close to 0.7. Our
expectations for women include the majority of the women choosing men who have a higher
waist-chest ratio, or men who have an upside-down triangular shaped torso vs. a straight shaped
torso. This is very similar to past studies that have been done on this hypothesis, but ours is done
at Pasadena City College using a smaller number of people. It is also going to add more present
day data. Natural Fitness is defined in our book as the contribution an individual makes to the
gene pool of the next generation in comparison to the contributions from other individuals
(Simon 2015). Our hypothesis fits into the fitness benefits because we are showing why falling
into the ideal range will increase contribution to the next generation. Women prefer men with

torsos shaped like an upside down triangle (broad shoulders, narrow waist), which represent
physical strength and masculinity. Men have always been the more dominant and stronger
gender, and a long time ago women needed them in order to survive (for food, shelter, etc.),
which is why those traits still stand out to women today. Men prefer women with bigger hips
because it shows childbearing abilities. In return for protection, women offered them sex, love,
and raising children. This is important because it shows how key it is to reproduce and pass traits
on to future generations. We are attracted to the same traits that we were hundreds of years agobecause of sexual reproduction.
Method
We generated images based on specific waist, hip, and chest measurements at a website
called www.bodyvisualizer.com. This nifty tool provides computer-generated images of both
male and female bodies based on exact measurements. For female images, we referenced
Marilyn Monroe, a famous Hollywood actress and public figure who is renowned for her
physical attractiveness. Our research showed that she had an approximate 0.7 WHR, and
corresponding measurements of 35 bust, 23 waist, and 35 hips. We included images of female
bodies that had a smaller hip to waist ratio (more difference) and a larger hip to waist ratio (less
difference). The static measurements we used for our female images were 57 tall, a 36 bust,
and 36 hips, with the waist measurement ranging from 20 (0.55) to 36 (1:1) in 4 increments,
making a total of 5 pictures. The static measurements used for male images were 510 tall, 36
hips, and 32 waist, with a chest measurement ranging from 32 (1:1) to 48 (0.66) in 4
increments, also making a total of 5 pictures. Important to note is that the weight of the male and
female images we generated was automatically adjusted by the www.bodyvisualizer.com image
generation software.

Figure at right shows a sample

image presented to participants

We then actively surveyed participants using www.surveymonkey.com. We generated a

survey using the images we had generated, and added the following questions: gender, age range
in years (17 and under, 18-20, 21-29, 30-39, 40-49, 50-59, and 60+), sexual preference, height,
weight, race, and location of birth. We then presented the survey to 30 male participants to
evaluate female attractiveness, and 29 female participants to evaluate male attractiveness. The
images were randomly arranged in the survey, and the participants were unaware that we were

testing their preference of WHR and WCR, to avoid bias. Each question was chosen based on its
applicability to the study at hand. We included questions regarding the test subjects own height
and weight to see if there was a correlation between their own body shape and the body shape
they chose as the most attractive. The survey we used gives accurate results of the participants
preference. It also gave us extensive information about the participant so that we could identify
patterns.
Our team then reviewed the data generated by the survey, and obvious patterns regarding
participant information were selected for mention in our results. Primarily, the data allowed us to
find the average preferred WHR and WCR of all participants questioned. First adding the total of
all the WHR or WCR recorded, then dividing that number by the total number of participants for
that survey reveals the average WHR or WCR.
Results
Our study consisted of 29 females evaluating male attractiveness and 30 males evaluating
female attractiveness, all of which were asked the same questions about themselves. We were
able to find many patterns within the results, the first of which being the preferred WHR. The
results showed that these 30 males averaged 0.65 WHR in their preferences. We compared these
results to a variety of tests in the past, which showed an average preferred WHR of 0.7. The
second pattern we noticed was that the 29 females questioned preferred men with a WCR of
0.80. We also compared these results to various tests, which showed an average WCR preference
of .77. This indicates that the findings of our study were very similar with results found by
previous studies.
Figure 1(left) and figure 2(right) show the overall WCR/WHR ratios within the study.

Another pattern appeared when we looked at preferences based on the questioned mens
weight. When we disseminated the male participants information into weight categories, we
found that within our study participants who weighed less preferred women with a smaller WHR.
We split the weight into 3 categories from least to highest weight. The WHR preference escalated
along with the male participants weight from 0.55 to 0.6 to 0.8.
Figure below shows the WHR preference sorted by weight.

However, this was not the case with height. Again we split the males height into 3
categories only this time the WHR went from .65, .5.5, to .7.
Figure below shows the male WHR preference sorted by height.

The
female
participants showed a more consistent pattern in WCR preference. When we split the WCR
results into 3 categories of weight from lowest to highest, the WCR preference went from 0.9 to
0.8 to 0.7.
Figure below shows the WCR preference sorted by weight of participant.

When
the

female

results

were

split

once

more into 3 categories of height in escalating order, a similar pattern appeared, from 0.85 to 0.75
to 0.7.
Figure below shows the female WCR preference sorted by height.

Discussion
Our original hypothesis was constructed behind the idea that if a woman falls into the
ideal waist-to-hip ratio (WHR), men would be more likely to select them as an attractive mate.
Not surprisingly, our data supported this notion. Our data showed that out of the 30 men
surveyed, the majority of them selected women with a waist-to-hip ratio that fell within 0.550.77. 26.67% of the men surveyed chose the woman with a 20 inch waist and 36 inch hip,
23.33% of the men surveyed chose the image of the woman with a 28 inch waist, and 33% of the
men chose the woman with a 24 inch waist, yielding a total average of a 0.65 preferred waist-tohip ratio across all men surveyed. The optimal waist-to-hip ratio, as previously established by
other studies as 0.7, identifies a woman with an hourglass or pear figure. A woman who has a

larger waist-to-hip ratio bears more fat on her stomach, having more of an apple shaped body
figure. The place where fat is deposited on the body is determined by sex hormones, and the
waist-to-hip ratio is a great measurement for locating fat distribution. Thus, the ratio is an
indicator for potential health risks such as diabetes or stroke. The desire for a woman with a
lower waist-to-hip ratio may be a biological urge for a mate that has better health.
Mate selection based on the male participants height and weight revealed quite
interesting results. Lighter males who weighed from 120-160lbs preferred females with lower
waist-to-hip ratios, while males who weighed from 201-240 lbs. preferred women with higher
waist-to-hip ratios. This shows that another factor in deciding potential mate partners may
actually be based on the males own individual size, with thinner men preferring thinner women
and thicker men preferring thicker women. According to gene researchers, people choose
potential mating partners who have genetic similarities to their own because they want to
preserve their genes and pass it onto future generations (Dye 2005). This innate biological urge
to pass on genetic similarities to future generations may be the cause that men tend to choose
mates based on their own individual size. Males who are genetically thin may not want to
compromise their gene pool with genetically curvier women, and men who are genetically larger
may not feel comfortable with women are genetically petite or significantly thinner than
themselves. When looking at different body shapes of women based on their waist-to-hip ratios,
the male participants appear to take into account their own body shape and choose their preferred
mating partner accordingly.
Although the weight of the male participants affected how they chose their female mating
partners, height however, did not. The height of the individual male participant did not show any
trends as to how they chose the female images, attesting to the fact that the survey conducted was

based primarily on the body size and curviness of the females, while the height remained
constant. Since all images of the female body types shown were of the same height, it is unlikely
that the height of the male participants was a factor in their choices for female body types.
To a point, the lower the waist to hip ratio, the more attractive the males found the
females to appear. These results coincide with a previous study done by Dixson et al. in 2010.
According to their study, they asked the men to look at pictures of a nude womans front view
and back view for 5 seconds. The participants eyes were tracked, and where the participants
stared at the longest was logged. The most stared at areas ended up being the breast, hips, and
butt, and perhaps more significantly, the waist-to-hip ratio. The study revealed that the waist-tohip ratio men most preferred were 0.7. Women, who carried more fat distribution in their hips
and breasts, rather than in their stomachs, had lower waist-to-hip ratios, and thus had higher
levels of estrogen and progesterone (Jasienska, 2004). The increased rates of hormones meant a
greater chance of conceiving, along with increased fertility rates. The notion of increased fertility
and health may be the reason men innately prefer women with lower waist-to-hip ratios,
providing a scientifically valid reason as to why men like women with thinner waists and big
hips.
For our second hypothesis, we deduced that if a man falls into the ideal waist-to-chest
ratio (WCR), then females will be more likely to select them as attractive mates. Our findings
were quite interesting: the majority of the female participants deviated from the two extreme
types of male body shapes, with only a mere 3.45% choosing the male with a 32 inch waist and a
32 inch chest (straight pencil shape), and another 3.45% choosing the male with a 32 inch waist
and a 48 inch chest (upside down triangular shape). The other 93% of female participants chose

men within the median range of our measurements, ranging from a waist-to-chest ratio of 0.70.9.
Our second hypothesis was supported because our results yielded an average preferred
waist-to-chest ratio of 0.8, coming very close to the previously established 0.77 ideals. The
majority of the women (59%) chose men who had a waist-to-chest ratio of 0.8-0.88, supporting
our hypothesis of the preferred male body type. However, the results presented a number of
anomalies from previously established studies on womens preference in male body shape. We
expected that the majority of women would choose men who had an upside-down triangular
shaped torso, as confirmed in multiple studies. However, the majority of the women we surveyed
preferred men with straighter torsos; the majority of the women chose men who had 36 and 40
chest sizes and 32 waists, a milder upside-down triangular shape.
Although our hypothesis was supported, our results were quite surprising. This deviates
from the notion of mate selection based on protection that we had mentioned earlier in our
introduction. If women have historically chosen men with larger chests for strength and
protection, it seems that the preference for those features may be subsiding in present day culture
in the Pasadena area. According to a study done in 2007, 854 participants were shown images of
men who had exaggerated masculine features and they were considered more likely to cheat,
fight, and contribute less in parental duties (Kruger 2007). Masculine features, such as a
muscular body, may once have been associated with strength, but are now less appealing factors
in choosing potential mating partners. We can take an educated guess and deduce that women are
deviating from past evolutionary qualities and adapting new preferences in male body selection.
Coinciding with these findings, female participants who were both shorter and lighter
preferred men with higher waist-to-chest ratios, or men who have more of a straight pencil frame

rather than an upside-down triangular frame. Smaller women may prefer men who are not as
bulky because they are more comfortable with men similar to their size, seeking to preserve their
genetic qualities as we mentioned earlier. Similar patterns of genetic preservation appear as with
the male participants, but female participants show more cohesive and apparent results of this
genetic preservation. Taller women who weighed more preferred males with larger chests,
showing parallels in mate selection based on the individual participants body shape and size.
Several problems we encountered in our study were gathering a collective representative
sample and finding images of real life women. Our survey included both students of PCC and
friends of students, making our results more diverse than a specified pool of candidates.
Although the randomization of our data helped ensure a wide variety of participants, our data
may have yielded more statistics if we concentrated on a specific pool of participants such as
only students from PCC, only participants residing in the city of Pasadena, etc. Also, using
images of real life women with identical or similar body shapes may have affected the
participants decision making. If we used images of real women rather than digitally produced
images, participants may have felt differently about the various body types and our results may
have been different. Our interpretations are thus limited in analysis and scope. In future studies,
it would be ideal to take an image of a female model and a male model respectively, and digitally
alter proportions based on ratios. Using a real life model would eliminate any guesswork of the
validity of body shapes.
Our experiment has shown that our results are very similar to the results from previous
studies. There are mild differences in the chosen WHR and WCR of our survey participants.
The change in preferred WCR from the previously established 0.77 to 0.80 indicates that
perhaps the newer generation of females prefers men with a milder triangular shape. Adversely,

the male participants selected a more extreme WHR of 0.65 than the previously established 0.7.
Again important to note is that since our images were computer generated, this may have
affected the average WHR and WCR chosen, as opposed to real-life images.
The reasoning behind our conducted survey can be explained through a biological
perspective. As mentioned earlier, females historically preferred men with bigger chests because
they showed strength and protection. However, our findings show that this preference may be
evolving, and women may be beginning to prefer men with slightly more feminine features as
future long-term mates. The scientific reason as to why men prefer women with curvier body
types revolve around evolutionary psychology. Men prefer women with a larger waist-to-hip
ratio because bigger hips represent fertility and health, and women who are more fertile and
healthy are able to bear more children. This is important for a man because men want to
reproduce as much as possible, and a woman who is able to bear children is crucial to keeping
their genetic lines going.
Our findings matter because we have essentially tested which type of traits each gender is
attracted to. Many teenage girls are starving themselves because they believe that the skinny
model body is what men are attracted to, but our study suggests they are wrong. Numerous
studies have shown that men are attracted to the perfect waist-to-hip ratio, 0.7. Instead of
trying to lose weight, women should try and tone their body to fit that ideal ratio. Future research
can be done to determine if this is linked to cultural taste as well as biological factors. We opted
to keep our study isolated to gender, weight, and height, and did not factor in the racial data we
collected. Many countries have a very different standard to what an ideal body looks like. It
would be interesting to compare studies done by college students in another country to the results
obtained from our study. Another interesting approach would be to take data from first

generation Americans to see if being born and raised in America changes the way one looks at
their idea of the perfect body. Are mating choices universal? Interesting to see would be the
mating choices of men and women from other countries. Perhaps in less developed countries,
more masculine features such as a low WCR would be more important to a woman, and perhaps
in other places in the world a less profound WHR would be considered more desirable to men.
Maybe results will show that women all over the world will prefer men whose physical features
are similar to theirs for genetic preservation, and men all over the world will prefer women with
WHR of around 0.7 for childbearing abilities.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Alexander, Brian. "Ideal to Real: What the 'perfect' Body Really Looks like for Men and
Women." TODAY. N.p., 2 May 2014. Web. 01 Mar. 2015. <http://www.today.com/style/idealreal-what-perfect-body-really-looks-men-women-2D79582595>
Dixson, Barnaby J.Grimshaw, Gina M.Linklater, Wayne L.Dixson, Alan F. "Watching
The Hourglass." Human Nature 21.4 (2010): 355-370. Psychology and Behavioral Sciences
Collection. Web. 1 Mar. 2015.
<http://web.a.ebscohost.com.ezp.pasadena.edu/ehost/detail/detail?vid=3&sid=2a2feb4d-27a546cb-bead-

e1734f88c929%40sessionmgr4001&hid=4209&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d
%3d#db=pbh&AN=55530167>

Gesellschaft, Max P. Body Builder. Computer software. Www.bodyvisualizer.com. N.p.,

2011. Web. 21 Feb. 2015. <www.bodyvisualizer.com>.
Kruger, Daniel, Sarah Strout, Maryanne Fisher, Robin Edelstein, William Chopik, and
Carey Fitzgerald. "What That Cheating? Perceptions Vary by Sex, Attachment Anxiety, and
Behavior." Evolutionary Psychology11(1) (2013): n. pag. Evolutionary Psychology Journal.
Evolutionary Psychology, Nov. 2013. Web. http://www.epjournal.net/wpcontent/uploads/EP11159171.pdf
Dye, Lee. "Opposites Attract? Not According to Gene Researchers." ABC News. ABC
News Network, 10 Aug. 2005. Web. 27 Feb. 2015.
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/DyeHard/story?id=1023122&page=3
Maisey, D.S.Vale, E.L.E.Cornelissen, P.L.Tovee, M.J. "Characteristics Of Male
Attractiveness For Women." Lancet353.9163 (1999): 1500. Psychology and Behavioral Sciences
Collection. Web. 1 Mar. 2015.
<http://web.a.ebscohost.com.ezp.pasadena.edu/ehost/detail/detail?vid=5&sid=2a2feb4d-27a546cb-beade1734f88c929%40sessionmgr4001&hid=4209&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d
%3d#db=pbh&AN=1814218 >

Mueller, Jen, and Nicole Nichols. "Waist-to-Hip Ratio Estimates Health

Risk."SparkPeople. SparkPeople, Inc., n.d. Web. 27 Feb.
2015.http://www.sparkpeople.com/resource/fitness_articles.asp?id=776
Simon, Eric J. Biology: The Core. First ed. N.p.: Pearson Education, 2015. Print.
Vilvintage. "So What Size WAS Marilyn Monroe? Marilyns (& Other Movie Stars)
Measurements." Weheartvintage.co. We Heart Vintage, 14 Apr. 2013. Web. 21 Feb. 2015.
<http://weheartvintage.co/2013/04/04/so-what-size-was-marilyn-monroe-marilyns-other-moviestars-measurements/>