Talk:Physical attractiveness

Penis size

Don't women, on average, consider large penis size to be a turn on? Why isn't this included in second paragraph?

Western cultural tradition: women have long scalp hair

Currently, the hair section of the women's section talks about a preference for long hair on women without contextualizing it as a social construct of Western cultural tradition. There are a few isolated cultures across the world where the women customarily keep their scalp hair short that show that this preference is not something rooted in innate brain biology, but, instead, a socially-constructed gender signifier in Western culture that has to be learned through cultural transmission. I think that this section should have a neutral-point-of-view-disputed tag until the idea that long scalp hair makes women more attractive is contextualized as a social construct of Western cultural tradition by statements from additional reliable sources.--Ephert (talk) 00:00, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

You stated, "There are a few isolated cultures across the world where the women customarily keep their scalp hair short." That means that women having long hair is indeed not simply a western culture thing. In fact, looking at different cultures, it's easy to see how prevalent that the "boys/men have short hair and girls/women have long hair" factor is. And, yes, it's socially-constructed, like much of any human society. Flyer22 (talk) 00:05, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

Meskó, Paál & Gábor (2012) in The Face and Head Hair of Woman: Long Hairstyle as an Adaptive Means of Displaying Phenotipic Quality said on the upper-left of page 464 that they personally believe in the "good genes model" wherein long hair is an indicator of health, since only healthy women can grow healthy long hair. After acknowledging the variability of hairstyles around the world on the bottom-left of page 467 which would seem to contradict their personal belief in an explanation rooted in evolutionary psychology, Meskó, Paál & Gábor (2012) state on the bottom-left of page 467 that women may keep short hair in other cultures for reasons unrelated to physical attractiveness. The next sentence that follows this statement says that having short hair may keep parasites out of the hair. This hygienic explanation could mean that the existence of isolated, non-Western cultures where women customarily keep their hair short may not be caused by differing preferences in physical attractiveness, so a neutral-point-of-view-disputed tag may not be warranted.--Ephert (talk) 08:44, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Asian/Pacific Islander preferred body shape for women

Table 17. Cross-Tabulation Between Body Type and Race*

	White	Hispanic	Black	Asian/Pacific Islander	Other	Combined
Apple	1%	0%	5%	29%	0%	2%
Pear (Bottom heavy)	8%	13%	5%	0%	14%	8%
Hourglass	72%	63%	76%	29%	76%	70%
Top heavy, small bottom	3%	13%	0%	0%	0%	4%
Thin all over	17%	11%	15%	43%	10%	16%
Note: Figures are percentages. Percentages may not total to 100% due to rounding errors. *$\chi ^{2}$ = 49.807, p < n.s.
This data comes from: Sewell, R. (2013). What Is Appealing?: Sex and Racial Differences in Perceptions of the Physical Attractiveness of Women. In The University of Central Florida Undergraduate Research Journal. 6(2). Page 68.

Sewell (2013) in What Is Appealing?: Sex and Racial Differences in Perceptions of the Physical Attractiveness of Women on the bottom-left of page 60 said that blacks, whites, Hispanics and the group labeled "Other" most commonly selected the "hourglass" body shape as the most attractive shape for women, but Asian/Pacific Islanders most commonly selected the "thin-all-over" body shape as the most attractive shape for women. Sewell (2013) concludes on the bottom-left of page 61 that, "This study illustrates that answers to questions asking what is the most attractive when it comes to female physical appearance may vary between the sexes and among different racial groups, depending on the characteristic being discussed." This article is currently lacking any depictions of Mongoloid women aside from Jessica Alba who is only 13% indigenous American according to her DNA results on the Lopez Tonight show, and there are currently no women in this article with the "thin-all-over" body type that Asian/Pacific Islanders most commonly selected as most attractive, so I think that a depiction of a Mongoloid woman with the "thin-all-over" body type that Asian/Pacific Islanders most commonly selected as most attractive would make this article better represent the worldview of physical attractiveness.--Ephert (talk) 22:50, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Table 18. Cross-Tabulation Between Height and Race*

	White	Hispanic	Black	Asian/Pacific Islander	Other	Combined
5'—5'2"	13%	18%	12%	43%	10%	14%
5'3"—5'6"	56%	53%	44%	29%	57%	54%
5'7"—5'10"	27%	18%	29%	29%	24%	26%
5'11"+	4%	11%	15%	0%	10%	7%
Note: Figures are percentages. Percentages may not total to 100% due to rounding errors. *$\chi ^{2}$ = 15.395, p < n.s.
Note: Choosing a height range of under five feet tall was a possible choice in the questionnaire which was reprinted on page 63 of the study.
This data comes from: Sewell, R. (2013). What Is Appealing?: Sex and Racial Differences in Perceptions of the Physical Attractiveness of Women. In The University of Central Florida Undergraduate Research Journal. 6(2). Page 68.

I added this data table from page 68 of Sewell (2013) to display the percentages of Asian/Pacific Islanders who chose certain height ranges as being the most attractive height range for women. Asian/Pacific Islanders most commonly selected a height range of 5'0" to 5'2" tall as the most attractive height for women while the other groups questioned most commonly selected a height range of 5'3" to 5'6" tall as the most attractive height for women. Based on this data table, I think that finding an image of an Asian/Pacific Islander woman who is 5'0" to 5'2" tall should be a consideration when it comes to choosing an image of a Mongoloid woman who has a body that would most commonly be deemed most attractive by Asian/Pacific Islanders. As I said previously in the paragraph above, finding an image of a Mongoloid woman whose body type is "thin-all-over" should also be a consideration. Let's hope we can find an image of a Mongoloid woman with both of these qualities in Wiki Commons, so we can add an image of a Mongoloid woman studies indicate would have a body most commonly deemed most attractive by Asian/Pacific Islanders.--Ephert (talk) 06:23, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

The African-American and African perspectives on physical attractiveness

Rihanna has light brown skin.

There should be an image that depicts a representative African-American point of view on female beauty, and, if there is agreement between this view and the African-blacks-in-Africa point of view, it would be an even stronger reason to have such a representative image. Sewell (2013) in What Is Appealing?: Sex and Racial Differences in Perceptions of the Physical Attractiveness of Women on the bottom-right of page 61 found that their African-American male participants most commonly selected "light brown/caramel" skin as the most attractive skin color for women, and African-American female participants most commonly selected either "light brown/caramel" or "medium-brown" skin as the most attractive skin color for women. Similarly, Coetzee et al. (2014) in Cross-Cultural Agreement in Facial Attractiveness Preferences: The Role of Ethnicity and Gender said in the fourth paragraph of "General Discussion" that African blacks from South Africa preferred "a significantly lighter, yellower and redder complexion" for African black men and women than Scottish whites preferred for African blacks. Figure 1 in the "Methods" section of Coetzee et al. (2014) is a gallery of the African black faces used in the study. The lightest-skinned African black woman in that gallery appears to have medium-brown skin that is a bit darker than Rihanna's skin color, so Rihanna's skin color would probably be highly appraised by both African-Americans and African blacks from South Africa, doubling her representativeness, and increasing the reason an image of her should be included somewhere in the article. Like I previously said in the discussion about the questionable attractiveness of blue eyes, Rihanna's eye color is another reason to include her. She either has light brown or green eyes, and the Sewell (2013) study found African Americans most commonly selected light brown eyes as the most attractive eye color for women while green eyes were most commonly selected as the most attractive eye color for women by all participants overall in the "Combined" statistic.--Ephert (talk) 22:41, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

You should read and reread the Wikipedia policy on using secondary sources as you continue to edit this article and other articles on Wikipedia. This whole article ought to be sourced to an overall textbook or handbook on physical attractiveness--if there is such a thing--and not to a miscellaneous set of primary research papers. And the same applies for articles on other topics. When you and I edit, we should be looking for reliable sources, especially secondary sources, for topics like this and just about all topics. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (Watch my talk, How I edit) 00:04, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Racial bias in the waist-to-hip ratio image

This is the image currently used in the article, and I consider this image to be biased against women of Mongoloid race.--Ephert (talk) 06:48, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

File:Proyecto “Desierto florido de cuerpos pintados“ 2002.jpeg

This is the image that I propose should be used as a replacement for the currently-used image.--Ephert (talk) 06:48, 17 August 2015 (UTC).

The current image for the waist-to-hip ratio section shows a Caucasoid woman who has an hourglass shape due to a fat distribution that deposits fat in her breasts, in her butt region, in her extremities and around her hips, giving her a low waist-to-hip ratio. The current image also shows an obese Caucasoid man with a high waist-to-hip ratio due to his obesity. This image is racially biased against women of Mongoloid race, because it implies that high waist-to-hip ratios are unfeminine, caused by obesity and unattractive. At similar levels of adiposity to the Caucasoid woman in the current image, a typical Mongoloid woman would have a higher waist-to-hip ratio due to accumulating a greater percentage of fat evenly distributed around her trunk and less around her hips, in her breasts, in her butt region, around her hips and in her extremities (legs and arms). The image to the right of an indigenous American and European woman in a friendly embrace clearly shows this racial difference in fat distribution between two healthy women of reproductive age and similar body fat percentages, and, to counter the racial bias in the currently-used image, this new image should be used as a replacement. Note that the reason these racial differences exist is not important to this argument; it is only important to see that these racial differences do exist from the image at the right to understand the racial bias in the image currently used in the article, but I will explain the reason these differences exist, so people will understand that the striking differences seen in the image to the right are not anomalous. Indigenous Americans derive from Northern Asia and they still bear many of the physical adaptations that were adaptive for the extreme cold of Northern Asia even after being removed from this region for thousands of years. Among these adaptations for an extremely cold climate was a change in body fat distribution, so that fat was more centered around the trunk and away from the breasts, butt, hips and extremities to reduce surface area, maximizing heat retention in accordance with Allen's rule. Prior to this change in body fat distribution in Northern Asia that was adaptive to the region's extreme cold, it would be reasonable to assume that the pre-Mongoloid ancestors of Mongoloids before settling in Northern Asia had body fat distributions that were more tropically-adapted and more similar to other races. We can currently see the other extreme in the tropically-adapted steatopygiac women of the Andaman Islands and the tropically-adapted steatopygiac women of certain black African groups. Since Caucasoids evolved in a climate in-between these two temperature extremes, Caucasoid women have body shapes that are intermediate between these two extremes. That was a long explanation, so let me reiterate the change to the article that I am suggesting. The image of the indigenous American and European woman in a friendly embrace should replace the current image, because it counters the racial bias in the current image by showing that different waist-to-hip ratios naturally exist on healthy adult females of reproductive age and similar body fat percentages, and that these differences are not related to obesity, being less of a woman and/or being less attractive.--Ephert (talk) 22:12, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Do you have a reliable, secondary source for any of these assertions, particularly that any of this relates to the article topic here, which is Physical attractiveness? -- WeijiBaikeBianji (Watch my talk, How I edit) 22:44, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

@WeijiBaikeBianji: I have a reliable secondary source that supports the existence of racial differences in fat distribution. In Handbook of Pediatric Obesity: Etiology, Pathophysiology, and Prevention, Goran & Sothern (2006), the editors of the book, state in the middle of page 43 that Malina et al. found propotionately more subcutaneous adipose tissue on the trunks of Asian adolescent girls when compared to white adolescent girls, and Malina et al. found proportionately more subcutaneous adipose tissue on the trunks of white adolescent girls when compared to black adolescent girls. Goran and Sothern display a bar graph copied with permission from He et al. (2002) on the top of page 42 which shows that African American girls have more gynoid fat than Caucasian girls and that Caucasian girls have more gynoid fat than Asian girls. Goran and Sothern state in the middle of page 42 that He et al. (2002) found that Caucasian boys have more total limb fat than Asian boys and that Caucasian girls have more total limb fat than Asian girls. In the middle of page 43, Goran & Sothern state that Goran et al. found that Mohawk children had more centrally located fat than Caucasian children and that Mohawk children had significantly higher waist-to-hip ratios when compared to Caucasian children. In the middle of page 42, Goran and Sothern comment on the reality of racial differences in fat distribution with the statement, "Race differences in fat distribution are clearly evident in adults but are less well characterized in prepubertal children."--Ephert (talk) 09:52, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

The African savanna hypothesis predicts that men of all races should universally find women with body shapes that signified health and fertility in the African savanna to be the most sexually attractive body shapes.--Ephert (talk) 18:22, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

@WeijiBaikeBianji: I have a reliable secondary source that makes a statement proposing a universal male preference for women with low waist-to-hip ratios, but I consider this to be a controversial statement, because the statement implies that Mongoloid men find the relatively low gynoid fat, relatively high trunk fat and relatively high waist-to-hip ratios of typical Mongoloid women to be of low sexual attractiveness. In The Evolution of Human Sociality: A Darwinian Conflict Perspective, Sanderson (2001) cites seven studies on page 180 which were done by Devendra Singh and his colleagues. On page 180, Sanderson states that Singh found that the preference for a low waist-to-hip ratio was "invariant across different racial and ethnic groups", and, on the bottom of page 180, Sanderson said that a portion of the male participants came from Hong Kong in at least one of Singh's studies. Sanderson states on page 180 that Singh hypothesizes that a preference for women with high gynoid fat and a low waist-to-hip ratio is a universal male preference due to all humans descending from "ancestral males" who maximized their "inclusive fitness" by preferring women with low waist-to-hip ratios. This reference to "ancestral males" appears to invoke the African savanna environment of evolutionary adaptation of evolutionary psychology which may posit that all humans share certain psychological traits which would have been adaptive to their hunter-gatherer ancestors on the African savanna. Sanderson concludes on the bottom of page 180 that more research is needed to see if a preference for women with a low waist-to-hip ratio is truly a universal male preference. I consider Singh's hypothesis to be controversial, because it would imply that ever since the extreme cold-climate body features of Mongoloids evolved which gave rise to the relatively high waist-to-hip ratios found in healthy adult Mongoloid females, Mongoloid men have found the body shape of women of their own race to be low in sexual attractiveness for tens of thousands of years yet still have reproduced with them in large numbers despite a supposed low sexual attraction to their bodies.--Ephert (talk) 09:52, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

A healthy indigenous Amazon woman of reproductive age poses with her young kids while exhibiting a high WHR. She is living proof that a low WHR is not necessary for a woman to be able to become pregnant.--Ephert (talk) 17:22, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

@WeijiBaikeBianji: I have a reliable secondary source that is critical of the racial bias which favors white women in WHR research. In Complexities: Beyond Nature and Nurture, Susan McKinnon & Sydel Silverman (2005) state in the first sentence of the fourth paragraph on page 146 that "The claim for the universality of the low WHR has received the most sustained criticism within the evolutionary science literature." On the bottom of page 146, they cite a counter example to the universality of male preference for a low WHR when they mention the Yu & Shepard (1998) study which found a preference for a high (0.9) WHR for women among the isolated Amerindian Matsigenka people of southeastern Peru (the exact (0.9) WHR number comes from a different source: Sorokowski, P. et al. (2014)). They state in the beginning of page 143 that WHR research "assumes a white woman as the norm". On the second paragraph of page 152, they further note the racial bias in WHR research when they conclude with rhetorical questions asking how the vaunted "hourglass shape" promoted by WHR research reflects "racialized hierarchies" with the "idealized white curvaceous woman" at the top and they ask how is a low WHR "both natural and universal". In the first sentence of the last paragraph of page 27, they state that ancestral humans were not situated in a single environment of evolutionary adaptation which is posited by the African savanna hypothesis. Therefore, in their hypothetical framework, I would assume that Mongoloid men would be sexually attracted to the naturally high WHRs of women of their own race in spite of expectations to the contrary supported by much of the WHR research and the African savanna hypothesis, since Mongoloid men would not have inherited the preference for a very low (0.7) WHR from their ancestors on the African savanna. Based on this book, I think that the section about the supposed universality of a preference for a low WHR and its supposed health benefits is given undue weight in the article, so this section should either be removed from the article or counterbalanced with criticism from this book. I think that the former option is more appropriate, because this is not the article about WHR. A more in-depth discussion about the controversial subject of WHR research and its accompanying criticism should go in the main article about WHR.--Ephert (talk) 18:51, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

@WeijiBaikeBianji: I have a reliable primary source that hypothesizes that the trunk-centralized fat distribution of Mongolian women is an adaptation to a cold climate. In the journal article High Prevalence of Excess Fat and Central Fat Patterning Among Mongolian Pastoral Nomads in the American Journal of Human Biology, Cynthia M. Beall and Melvyn C. Goldstein (1992) in the right column of page 750 state that the average waist-to-hip ratio of Mongolian women is more than two standard deviations above the average waist-to-hip ratio for American women, and in the same paragraph they further note that Mongolian women have a fat distribution that deposits relatively more fat around their abdomens. In the upper-left of page 755, they hypothesize that the trunk-centralized fat distribution of Mongolian women could be an adaptation to conserve heat which would be adaptive in the cold climate where the Mongolian women live. In the same paragraph, they claim that "selection" favored this adaptation, and when they use the word "selection" in this instance they appear to mean natural selection. In the same paragraph they claim that the more spherical shape of Mongolian women is consistent with the predictions of Bergmann's rule. I think that they should have said that the shape is consistent with the predictions of Allen's rule which deals with body shape rather than Bergmann's rule which deals with body size, but I can see how the more trunk-centralized fat distribution of Mongolian women, giving them a larger trunk and a larger trunk size, would also be consistent with Bergmann's rule.--Ephert (talk) 05:22, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

@WeijiBaikeBianji: The reliable secondary source that criticizes the racial bias in WHR research also spells out the valuative implications of the assertion of the universality of a male preference for a low WHR. In Complexities: Beyond Nature and Nurture on the bottom of page 151, Susan McKinnon & Sydel Silverman (2005) critically state such an assertion leads to a certain valuative framework wherein conformity to that preference would be considered a legitimate sexual attraction and non-conformity to that preference would be considered "pathological". The authors use the term "pathological" which means that attraction to women with a high WHR is essentially seen as a mental illness in the hypothetical framework of the African savanna hypothesis which is a hypothesis that the authors do not support as implied by their claim in the last paragraph of page 27 that humans did not evolve in a single environment of evolutionary adaptation. This valuative framework pathologizes sexual attraction to women with a high WHR, among whom, of course, would be healthy Mongoloid women of reproductive age, although Mongoloid women are never specifically mentioned, making this idea potentially offensive to conscientious people of all backgrounds. The potentially offensive implication that men are mentally ill by virtue of their sexual attraction to the naturally high WHR of healthy Mongoloid women of reproductive age only adds another reason that the section about the preference for women with a low WHR being something innate, biological and universal is given undue weight in this article.--Ephert (talk) 08:36, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

@WeijiBaikeBianji: I have a reliable primary source that found that white women have a lower average WHR than black women, I have a reliable primary source that found that "Europoid" (white) women have a lower average WHR than Chinese women and I have a reliable primary source that found that Nigerian (black) women have a high average WHR of 0.870, so the idea that all men should prefer a low WHR seems to be an idea which was devised to glorify the physiques of white women rather than being derived from observations of the physiques of average African women under the assumptions of the African savanna hypothesis. In Racial Differences in Bone Density between Young Adult Black and White Subjects Persist after Adjustment for Anthropometric, Lifestyle, and Biochemical Differences, in Table 3, Ettinger et al. (1996) said that black women were measured to have an average WHR of 0.75 while white women were measured to have a lower average WHR of 0.72. In Body mass index, waist circumference, waist-hip ratio, and glucose intolerance in Chinese and Europid adults in Newcastle, UK, in Table 3 on page 164, Unwin et al. (1997) said that the average WHR of Chinese women with normal glucose tolerance was measured to be 0.840 while the average WHR of "Europoid" women with normal glucose tolerance was measured to be 0.774. In Relationship of Waist-Hip Ratio and Body Mass Index to Blood Pressure of Individuals in Ibadan North Local Government, on page 9 in Table 1, Sanya et al. (2009) found that Nigerian (black) women whose average age was 28.41 years old had a high average WHR of 0.870. I thought that researchers developed the idea for a universal preference for a low WHR from observations of the average physiques of African women under the assumptions of the African savanna hypothesis, but it now appears to be a Eurocentric beauty ideal which was devised to glorify the physiques of white women and, consequently, disparage of the physiques of non-European women. In light of these numbers that show that a low WHR seems to be primarily a European genetic trait due to the peculiar fat distribution pattern of white women, I can now better understand the truth of the statements of Susan McKinnon & Sydel Silverman (2005) in Complexities: Beyond Nature and Nurture on the second paragraph of page 152 about the vaunted "hourglass shape" promoted by WHR research being reflective "racialized hierarchies" with the "idealized white curvaceous woman" at the top.--Ephert (talk) 02:14, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

@WeijiBaikeBianji: In a review article which is a reliable secondary source, Devendra Singh said that populations where the women have higher WHRs like the Inuit may find women with higher WHRs to be attractive. In Female Mate Value at a Glance: Relationship of Waist-to-Hip Ratio to Health, Fecundity and Attractiveness, in the second paragraph of the right column of page 89, Devendra Singh (2002) said that "Population-specific" differences in the distribution of WHR may affect the WHR which is considered to be "maximally attractive". Singh futher said that in populations where the women have higher WHRs, of whom he mentioned the "Eskimos of Alaska", men may find women with higher WHRs to be "quite attractive". Singh qualified this statement by saying in the same paragraph that men in "a population" should still find WHRs lower than their WHRs to be "maximally attractive". This hypothetical framework seems to allow for multiple ideal WHRs for women rather than the single, Eurocentric 0.7 ideal which is currently being touted in this article as being the normative ideal. In The Health of Native Americans: Toward a Biocultural Epidemiology, on page 143 at bottom of the second paragraph, T. Kue Young (1994) said that non-diabetic Navajo men have an average WHR of 0.96, and non-diabetic Navajo women have an average WHR of 0.89. If we take Singh's idea of WHR ideals that are specific to populations and apply that idea to the Navajo, that idea may mean that Navajo men may find the 0.89 WHR of average Navajo women to be ideal. One of the major problems with the current version of this article is that it gives undue weight to the Eurocentric WHR ideal of 0.7 which probably is reflective of the average preferences of white men and not other groups of people like the Inuit, the Navajo or other Mongoloid peoples where the women normally have relatively high WHRs. The relevant section of this article should be structured so it just talks about multiple WHR ideals without putting white men's ideal WHR of 0.7 as normative in relation to other people's ideals, because the current version of this article reads like it is implying that the hourglass body shape of the average white woman is the normative sexually attractive body shape, and the thin-all-over body shape of the average Mongoloid woman is not the normative sexually attractive body shape when that sentiment is probably not shared with the majority of men of Mongoloid race if we apply what appears to be Singh's hypothetical framework that allows for multiple WHR ideals which are specific to individual populations.--Ephert (talk) 08:21, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

Study in Psychology Today (using our image of Jessica Alba, btw)

Source here.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 14:46, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Thornhill and Gangestad 1995 debunked

I am positive that I've read a pretty damning criticism of this study. The main criticism was that, as mentioned in the wiki, the researchers asked both the partners and the women themselves about orgasm frequency, and then turned these responses into a single number per couple. However, when the male partners' responses were removed, and only the womens' presumably more accurate responses were counted, the effect was not statistically significant. I'd be happy to find this article sometime if no one here can find it quickly.--71.59.153.25 (talk) 11:32, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

You mean this study? The finding that Women with partners possessing low fluctuating asymmetry and their partners reported significantly more copulatory female orgasms that were reported by women with partners possessing high fluctuating asymmetry and their partners, even with many potential confounding variables controlled -- in other words, the finding that women with better-looking male partners (ie men w/symmetrical faces) are more likely to orgasm -- well this seems to be a reasonable conclusion. The study size (86) is a bit small, and it is not clear how well the researchers controlled the other variables. What sources say that this study was 'debunked'?--Tomwsulcer (talk) 12:41, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Late 19th century black Africans' perception of their own attractiveness

Here is an account from the late nineteenth century of uncontacted black Africans' perception of their own physical attractiveness relative to white people's physical attractiveness. In The Works of Charles Darwin, Volume 22 which written in 1989, on the bottom of page 605, Charles Darwin appears to talk about the experiences of William Winwood Reade from Reade's account in the African Sketch Book which was written in 1873. Darwin reported that Reade told of his impressions of black Africans from the interior of Africa who had "never associated with Europeans". Reade was reported to have said that these black Africans did not consider very flat African noses to be attractive. Also, Reade was reported to have said that these black Africans like the long hair of white people and also the thick beard of white men, but Reade was reported to have said that these black Africans did not like white people's skin color, their blue eyes, their long noses and their thin lips. Unfortunately, this account of black Africans' beliefs of physical attractiveness is framed in a negative rather than a positive way. That is to say, it is not framed as black Africans finding their own skin color, their own eye color, their own nose length and their own lip thickness as being attractive physical traits. Instead, it is framed as black Africans finding the contrasting features of white people to be unattractive. I was wondering whether or not it would be considered a faithful representation of this source to reframe its statements in a positive way. My proposition would be to cite this source for the idea that black Africans in the interior of Africa from the late nineteenth century who had "never associated with Europeans" found their own skin color, their own eye color, their own nose length and their own lip thickness to be attractive physical traits. What do other people think of using this source in this way?--Ephert (talk) 01:51, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Male/Female Lip Size

According to studies that measure the lips physically, men have larger lips. Women have overall smaller faces however and narrower lips. For whatever reason I've often seen it mentioned that women have larger lips though. I think it's partially due to a desire to legitimize changes in beauty standards, seeing as full lips are particularly trendy. Should I link some studies here that show the measured differences? Sleepyed (talk) 19:37, 25 October 2015 (UTC)sleepyed

Jesus is sexy

Jesus in media and artistic images is very masculine young man with slim body, facial hair and other manly features. Also in crucifixion he wearing nothing but a loincloth and exposing his toned and sun-kissed body. The body of Jesus has been the subject of many paintings over the centuries, and showing his masculinity and his slimness --Fastez (talk) 07:53, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

Fastez, as you know, I reverted you here and Isambard Kingdom reverted you here. I reverted because Jesus is not so commonly cited as physically attractive or sexy...that he needs to be placed as a lead image. Your addition was also unsourced; this is a case where citing a figure as physically attractive should have WP:Reliable sources for inclusion. There is also WP:Offensive material to take into consideration when it comes to displaying religious images in this way. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 19:37, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

Correct. There was a good deal of discussion in early Christianity as to whether Jesus was attractive or very ordinary looking, a matter never really settled. See Depiction of Jesus. Johnbod (talk) 19:46, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

Male Beauty

This article has tons of photos of females, but none of males. Shouldn't this imbalance be corrected? --Roland 03:10, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

User:Roland, good point about the current state of the article. It used to feature Adonis as part of the lead image, but that was recently removed by an IP. The IP removed two other images as well, including this male image. I responded with this edit.

On a side note: You need to fix your signature. It should have a link to your user page/talk page so that editors can click on it and learn more about you. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 21:19, 31 January 2016 (UTC)