"All that is valuable in human society depends upon the opportunity for development accorded the individual.” (Albert Einstein)
Although this study (see link at bottom) was undertaken 2 years ago, I don’t think I’m going out on a limb by stating nothing outlandish has changed over this period of time. With this consideration, and in respect to the millions of gym-goers out there, this perennial subject is definitely worth exploring further.
In a way, I could be digging a rod for my own back here. As you will see from the results, the male “lean and mean” look is seen upon as most favourable in female eyes. I’ll leave the rest of the results for your bedtime reading. But as my own body definition and build is nearest to the profile that appeals to the majority of women, it may be just as well for me to leave well alone and revel in the glory. But as you will know by now, I’m far more interested in the truth than my ego. An ego will rarely get a person closer to success than the truth that exists in life.
More to the point though, in this case there likely is truth to the answers. But there is far more that lies beneath these answers in terms of the decisions women make for their male sexual mates. The first thing to state is the body type as shown preferential to the majority of women is a male body profile that only a minority of men possess. Naturally, many men who have this body would not choose to be with a large percentage of women for longer term relationships – because men who have this body will often (but not always) be facially good looking or above average looking men who hold desires to be with the top 10% visually pleasing women. But it goes further than the sheer numbers viewpoint, as the majority (80%+) of cute and hot women - who could lock down many men with the most pleasing bodies – are not seen with men in this compartment. General observation will back this up. Ultimately, could it possibly be the case that the male body women sexually desire the most is actually the male body that women desire the least for long term relationship material?
The study certainly isn’t absent of limitations and manipulation of the truth:
First, the process they should have taken was to show body pictures from regular guys off the street as opposed to celebrities. Women instinctively elevate their opinion of a man’s physical attractiveness if he is famous. This is even more applicable when he is less physically attractive than their relative self-grade, especially in facial terms. Justin Timberlake would be a good example. Whilst more than decent looking, he holds an attainable look to many cute women and all hot women who would feel comfortable being with him if he was simply a regular guy from their local town. They ultimately magnify the words to describe his physical attractiveness because of his status. With all this in mind, the truth may have been clouded a little in the answers of some.
Second, on the basis the vast majority were telling the truth, a high percentage of women will give responses that are instinctive to their immediate sexual predilections. However, men can be fooled by these curve balls, as the men who women stare at on the street or who they are most sexually aroused by are rarely the types of men they are seen shopping with on Saturday afternoons. The female justification to my claim will be that of: men who look good have the worst personalities and are boring to be with. To a point, they are right. However, I come from a different standpoint. That is, as women are (in general) low in confidence, low in trust, high in insecurity and high in egoism, they often select men who offer them more comfort in these metrics rather than one who optimizes them in a visceral sense. Even most women with higher confidence and lower ego needs will still date down due to their irritable feeling of men who captivate spectators.
Third, women can speak words about a man’s physical attractiveness that are reflective to their own beauty level. In other words, many lesser looking women will “downgrade” a man of significant greater aesthetic value in relative gender terms. Even a cute woman (say 7.5/10 physical rating) or a hot woman (say 8.5/10 physical rating) may not take kindly to seeing a picture of a male body that is more or equally impressive. Their egos may naturally force them to de-scale the true objective thoughts of him. Needless to say, many average and ugly women would be just as hostile in jealousy and undermining respects.
Fourth, and similar to the third point, comes in the form of previous rejection. This was picked up by a commenter, so I can’t take full credit for this despite singing from the same hymn sheet. Nearly all men will give true indications to a woman’s physical grade based on instincts, and it will be absent of past negative experiences. So if a man has sustained inundated rejections from tall hot blondes, he will still grade them in the objective manner. Women, due to their fragile prides, will more often do the opposite. If they have been inflicted by rejections or disinterest from certain looking (mainly good looking) men, their lips may force them to perhaps downgrade men of similar kind in the future. But if they have success stories from other (likely lesser looking) men, they will leverage one of parity in forthcoming moments.
However, where the study does take credit is that, in theory, it focuses on the male body and not the face. A man with an impressive body but average face will be cut far greater slack by women - in time constrained environments - than a handsome man with the equivalent tone and bulk. Why is this? Do I really need to explain? The study is also valid as so far it eliminates female identity. This would hopefully refrain from any agendas they placed in their votes.
So the study does give men a true idea to the male body women find most sexually arousing. Where men could come a cropper would be thinking this is the body women most desire for a longer term partner. I have my absolute doubts this is the case, in particular if he accompanies this impressive tone with an eye catching face. But one thing that has confirmed what I already knew is the fact the male “big is better beefcake” look is hardly ever what a woman craves for in today’s world. This may have been the case 15 to 20 years ago, but not now. So this brings a mild smirk to my face when I think back to all those hefty built guys who have come up to me in the past with advice to bulk up significantly. I was a step ahead of you, dude! As stated in the link, this heavy muscled look will appeal to a tiny minority of females, but if you observe the typical woman seen walking hand in hand with these men, would you really hold urges to be with her?
Yet again, this is all good news for lesser looking men who falsely believe a chiseled jaw-line and toned or buff body is the only way to score cute and hot women. The latter group of female society – as hot women are few and far between - may be more difficult if he cannot bring other desirables to the table in very large amounts, but simply being 10% to15% less pleasing to the eye (in relativity to the target woman) will be more than enough in many cases with lots of cute women.
Where do I stand on drawing conclusions to it all? I stick to the Vi Nay rule of splitting women into thirds:
- 1/3 of women will tell the truth.
- 1/3 of women will answer in immediate sexual liking language, only to later realize they perhaps do not possess the true inner confidence to be in a relationship with a physically stand out man.
- 1/3 of women will disguise their true feelings with words that vainly attempt to conceal their obvious weaknesses and insecurities.
As always, a man should watch what a woman does over listening to what she says.
As a guy who has history working in the model industry, I think I’m reasonably well placed to point this truth out. When you see men in catalogues, television commercials or on internet images, with defined washboard abdominal muscles that are hardly ever seen in your day to day life (including in the gym), bear in mind that professional lighting, expert camera shooting and associated oils somewhat exaggerate how you would see them if they stood 2 yards away from you in topless form. This isn’t to say they do not have good bodies, but they are just not as ripped as those photos would suggest. The best celebrity example would be Cristiano Ronaldo’s Emporio Armani underwear shots versus how you see him when he takes his shirt off after the match. Great body, don’t get me wrong, but you will see a pronounced difference in the abs definition.
This is why it makes me chuckle when some regular guys use these enhanced visions of themselves on their social network profile picture. If you then see them on the beach or on other online pictures, the body isn’t near to being as impressive. Strangely though, the “real” body will be more attainable in easing a woman’s delicate concerns against her own comparative body and overall physical attractiveness. Women, deny it as they may, are so intrinsically self-conscious about their own body that they can often be put off by a man with one that is too impressive in relativity to their own shape. As explained before, the leeway a man can get in this respect is when he is facially less admiring than his respective female partner. So here you have it: certain men going out of their way with extra expense to impress (I assume) women, yet they are, as a consequence, driving them away. Just a little something for men to think about, if they haven’t already…
Acknowledgements and further reading