"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.
Side note:
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
No comments:
Post a Comment