Dr. Kate’s Guide to Beauty and Fashion
It is rare that a girl gets a moment of insight into the true male psyche. I had one such moment a few years ago as I sat in a lecture hall waiting for an undergraduate biology class to start. Looking over my guy friend’s shoulder, I watched him choose his ideal female figure from a series of sketches on a survey form. He and the other male students in the room were taking part in a study run by a Psychology Professor at our university.
The survey was very simple. From what I remember, there were cartoon drawings of about eight women, all similar looking apart from their varied body proportions. The woman’s figure he chose was not surprising: large bust, tiny waist, and round hips. And after the completed surveys had been collected the Professor explained that the purpose of this exercise was to test the male preference for a small waist-to-hip ratio. That is, a small waist relative to large hips. Again, not surprising. It is well established that a waist-to-hip ratio of 0.7 represents the average male’s preference. In pop culture Jessica Alba’s figure is often used as an example of this magic number, and many rappers extol it in their lyrical descriptions of women who fit the “36-25-36” mold. But the Professor’s study was different to any ever done before in that the waist-to-hip ratios depicted in the sketched women extended way below what commonly occurs naturally in the female form – as far as a crushing 0.4. For a woman of standard height and weight this would represent either a waist so small that ribs or muscular tissue must be missing, or hips so wide that walking would be difficult due to the sharp angle at which the femur would meet the hip socket.
The surprising part: some men, given the option, select the 0.4 figure.
So what does this mean? Is this just a passing fad as men move their attention from the Jessica Albas of the world to the more curvaceous Christina Hendricks? Or in the age of plastic surgery and online avatars is this a trend towards the bionic proportions of Heidi Montag? If men could favor such an unnatural composition of the female form then is natural beauty a thing of the past?
Fortunately the answer is: probably not. It seems that men will just go for the most feminine option available to them. What is attractive is simply what is furthest from the square to upside-down-triangle shape of the male form. And women are equally as guilty of this need for extreme sexual dimorphism. That’s why the tallest men at a bar or club will attract the attention of even the shortest women.
But the female form has changed over the last century so that women these days are unlikely to possess the classic 1950s hourglass figure. This became painfully obvious to me when I recently got my hands on some vintage sewing patterns which were a gift from my Mom’s neighbor. I looked over the packets and tried to determine which were in my size. I’ve always found my measurements to be decidedly average – a far-from-perfect 35-28-36. But any of these patterns which were the correct size for my bust and hips were cut to a waist measurement of 25 inches or smaller. Still hopeful, I went ahead and sewed a couple of these patterns – a top and skirt – and then had to take the waists out several inches to get them to fit.
This experience left me wondering why the body shapes of modern women are so different from those of our 1950’s counterparts. At first I even wondered if it could be that the corset had survived into the later decades of the 20th century. But Mom’s neighbor had the true answer. “Women are much more muscular these days” she said. It seems our vigorous sporting activities as children and teenagers, combined with ambitious work-out schedules throughout adulthood, have left our waists filled in with muscle.
Even so, an hourglass figure - a score of 0.7 or better - is the option of every woman; and it doesn’t require diet, exercise (or lack of) or even surgery. Simply wearing clothes that are tucked at the waist is good enough to create the illusion of a perfect 0.7. I recommend: peasant and baby-doll dresses with empire waistlines
wrap dresses which tie at the waist
low-rise lighter-colored jeans to accentuate the hips (pair with a dark top to make your waist look smaller)
and belts worn over long tops to cinch the waist
My one rule, whether I’m buying clothes or sewing them myself, is that they must have a defined waist. So long as the waist is defined the hour glass effect falls into place near enough.
The moral of this story is that we can’t all be shaped like Joan from Mad Men, and it may not even be healthy for us to be that way, but we can at least fake it. Oh yes, as the great American adage goes: Fake it until you…. ummm….. get too old to care.
With a title like “Dr. Kate’s guide to beauty and fashion” I feel the need to first assure you of my credentials. I am indeed a scientist. I am also a girl; 28 years old to date. I work as a Postdoctoral Researcher at Stanford University, California, and while I might spend a lot of time in lab wearing the stereotypical white coat, jeans and flats; I also do all the usual girly things like shopping, styling my hair, putting on makeup, waxing, getting my eyelashes dyed (a must for someone so blonde), exfoliating, tanning (well, attempting to), dieting, and I’ve been known to get on my sewing machine and sew the occasional dress or two.
