Controversial Research Suggests "The Perfect Female Figure" Might Not Be Boiled Down to a Simple Waist-To-Hip Ratio

NY Post - Mathematicians have discovered that there is no exact formula for the “perfect” female body. 

A study recently published in Scientific Reports challenges long-standing assumptions about the most attractive female body shape — and it may not be about the waist-to-hip ratio (WHR).  

Researchers at the University of Konstanz in Germany claim to have discovered that a pronounced “S” shape from the chest down to their thighs — like Marilyn Monroe or Kim Kardashian — “is a better predictor of a woman’s body attractiveness” than a specific ratio.

As we were all well aware up until this important study, the attractiveness of a female figure could be boiled down to a broad's waist-to-hip ratio (or WHR). The ideal WHR being 0.7 (i.e. the waist is 30% smaller than the hips). For example, according to my own personal research, Victoria's Secret model Alessandra Ambrosio's body is a prime example of this perfect ratio. 

Matteo Prandoni. Shutterstock Images.

Other examples include Kate Moss, Jessica Alba, and Marilyn Monroe

Ron Galella. Getty Images.

Earl Theisen Collection. Getty Images.

This has been commonly accepted as fact since the Renaissance era. Going back even further, notable smokeshow amputee Venus de Milo has been boasting a 0.76 WHR since before the birth of our lord & savior Jesus Christ. 

Bettmann. Getty Images.

But recently, Professor Emeritus, Dr. Ronald Hübner of Universität Konstanz and his team of German mathematicians asked themselves, "Could it be possible that the ideal female figure… the figure that makes people the very most horny… does not boil down to a decimal we settled on at a time when the greatest members of society were still taking shits in holes. Is it possible that there is more than goes into physical beauty than WHR?"

So Hübner and his team got to work. In order to determine what figure people find most attractive, the team cooked up some line drawings of torsos of different sizes.

To test this theory, Professor Ronald Hübner and his team conducted an experiment using simple line drawings of female torsos. The drawings were manipulated so that the WHR and the degree of curviness were aligned.  

The participants, a group of 80 men and women, were asked to rate the attractiveness of each drawing on a scale of one to 100.

As expected, the drawings with a 0.7 WHR were rated as the most attractive. A drawing with a 0.7 WHR received an average attractiveness score of 74, while a drawing of the same body weight but with a more straight-line figure (a 1:1 ratio) received a score of just 54.

That confirmed earlier research linking WHR with attractiveness for slimmer body types — although a body in the median weight category was preferred to those that appeared to be over- or underweight.

In a second experiment, the researchers changed the conditions to isolate the effect of curviness. 

In this case, the WHR and curviness were no longer perfectly aligned. Some drawings were designed with exaggerated curviness, as seen in corset-tightened women with extreme curves and others were nearly straight. 

A group of 98 people were then asked to rate the newly drawn images. 

The 0.7 WHR remained the most attractive for slimmer bodies — but for larger body types, curviness emerged as the dominant factor in perceived attractiveness rather than an exact proportion. 

In fact, when the largest body with a 0.7 WHR was shown, it received the lowest rating, a mere 17 out of 100. The most attractive bodies were those with the greatest curviness, regardless of measurements.

In conclusion, the University of Konstanz researchers propose a shift in our understanding of female beauty. 

While the waist-to-hip ratio has long been a key determinant of attractiveness, the new research suggests that determining beauty is more elusive than previously thought.

Thanks to Dr. Hübner…

…who was probably one day enjoying Kim Kardashian's voluptuous figure and thought to himself, "Wait a minute… this woman's WHR is barely over 0.6… why do I find myself locked in a campus stall masturbating to her Skims ad while so many of my own students are perfect 0.7's with non-private Instagrams?"

Thanks to him and his hotness scientists, we now know that the ideal female figure has more to do with "general curviness" than a simple waist-to-hip ratio.

We now have real world evidence which tells us, "Yes, WHR still matters, but maybe possibly there's a little more to it than that. Maybe the waist-to-hip ratio of a 10/10 Victoria's Secret model doesn't compare apples-to-apples to the waist-and-hip ratio of a woman with a more Lizzo-esque figure."

In all seriousness though… if the German economy comes crashing down someday, and his Universität is forced into layoffs. Dr. Hübner's gotta be one of the first to go right? I bet he's paid damn good money to conduct this type of absolutely worthless, tell-us-nothing we didn't already know based on common sense research. Imagine him sitting down with the dean, or the Führer of Universität Konstanz, and having to explain what he's done for the school lately. 

"Well me and my team spent last semester drawing hips and asses and came to the conclusion that beauty can be subjective"

I have to think Konstanz would be able to survive without that type of groundbreaking research. But until then Dr. Hübner, while they're still paying you do conduct your horny ass studies, you might as well stay at it.  That's why you go to school until you're 30 right? So one day you'll get a job at a University and they'll pay you to teach other students until they're 30. The education machine will churn on. Maybe once every few years or so your research will be so fucking stupid that the NY Post, and in turn Barstool Sports will write about it. And that'll be all the validation you need feel like you made a difference in the world. 

Keep up the weird work, doctor.