Shoulder to Waist Ratio

Share your experiences with the opposite sex. Suggest ways to improve your success. Analyze the behavior of females in real life and online. Rant and rave about females. Show the importance of looks pertaining to attracting females and other social situations. Discuss aesthetics and the science of attractiveness. Exchange health, nutrition and looksmaxing tips.

I've read this forum a bit, there is some interesting stuff on here, and some total nonsense. But I haven't seen the most important arbiters of female attraction being discussed.

Emphatically shoulder-to-waist ratio is the biggest indicator of female sexual attraction. Naturally you want broad shoulders and a slim waist. If you have these characteristics, you honestly don't need to be facially attractive (although obviously it doesn't do any harm). Forget about height. Forget about having hair or otherwise. You don't even need to be muscular. It's the main characteristic that will determine your sexual attractiveness.

There are literally hundreds of links supporting this on the 'net, but here are five for starters:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/artic ... p-man.html

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/cu ... attractive

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3510069/

http://www.stuffmomnevertoldyou.com/blo ... male-body/

http://www.businessinsider.com/what-mak ... 013-2?IR=T

I just want to point out a few key aspects from these articles. Firstly...

Scientific research, though, has discovered that men overestimate the degree of muscularity that women find attractive, assuming they need to pump iron and sport a honed six-pack to be attractive.

Images of muscle-bound men have almost certainly fostered men's misperception of what women find most sexually attractive - just as photo spreads of impossibly thin models have led women to overestimate the degree of thinness that men find most attractive.

One study compared the muscularity of men's bodies in Cosmopolitan magazine (whose readership is 89 per cent women) with Men's Health (whose readership is 85 per cent men).

The level of muscularity in Cosmopolitan was nearly identical to that which women rate as ideal in a sexual partner. Men, in contrast, mistakenly believe women desire a more muscular sex partner, which corresponds more closely with the muscularity of men in Men's Health.
That shouldn't need any comment, but guys who are in the gym every moment God sends pumping iron are wasting their time. You just need to be reasonably lean. You don't even really need to be muscular.

For men, according to evolutionary theory, the android body shape with greater musculature on the upper body and a narrow pelvis with little waist is associated with higher testosterone and good health. This is the classic “V-shaped” body, and men with this type are seen as more dominant.
In other words, there are deep-rooted genetic reasons why women are attracted to this body type. Today, there is no objective reason for it, but it's part of our collective DNA now. As confirmed here:

It has been suggested that this v-shaped torso represents a muscular, strong body type that would be an advantage in our ancestral environment and therefore be sexually selected...
This is particularly enlightening:

Back broadness, or just how wide that V-back sprawls, accounts for over 79 percent of the variability in women’s attractiveness rating. Penis length and height, meanwhile, were responsible for 6 percent and 5 percent, respectively.
Note that this desirable v-shape is 13 times more attractive than a big dick, and 14 times more attractive than height according to this survey.

So it's interesting to note that two of the most prominently promoted aspects of male appearance that women are supposed to go for actually count for very little. Muscularity is pretty meaningless, and actually mainly a male obsession. And height is only of marginal importance. This makes sense if you think about it. The average female is about 5'3 - 5'4, so virtually every man is taller than her anyway.

The five main arbiters of male sexual attractiveness are as follows:

(i) V-shaped torso;
(ii) Social status;
(iii) Wealth;
(iv) If you get to be 'famous' then that will increase your sexual attractiveness ten-fold, but this is really related to social status;
(v) I suppose when you're younger if you seem like a cool, fun, popular person it might count for something, but only stupid, young, impressionable women really care about this. If you want to spend all your time with the intellectual pondlife of our society, good luck to you, but anyone with an adequate number of brain cells will see through this easily, and most women grow out of this rapidly.

You can probably improve your chances fractionally by being particularly charming and / or funny, but this will ultimately have minimal impact.

Anyone you can name that either makes women swoon in large numbers, or goes through sexual partners like sex is going out of fashion, or both, will have two or more of the top four characteristics. If you have none of them, attracting the opposite sex will be a constant struggle whatever you do.

The good news is that anyone reading this with relatively broad shoulders, no matter what physical shape they are in, has potential. I've been in good shape all my life, in fact I was actually a gifted athlete when I was younger, but I've always been a skinny runt, and this causes me massive problems. I have had to rely on wealth.

But if you're not a skinny runt like me then you can make yourself attractive to women. You don't need to be a bodybuilder, in fact that's a turn-off for many women. You just need to be in shape, and have a good ratio between shoulder and waist width. If you can achieve this, you are almost guaranteed to attract women.

If you're skinny like me, tough shit! Work on your career.

Sorry for the long post, but as I said here:

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1002839&start=0#p2022031

Modern society has destroyed our attention spans, that's why we're getting closer and closer to Idiocracy despite living in an incredible information age.



one of the biggest slayers i knew had a twink frame...

and ur basically saying u can cheat evolution by blasting your delts 3 times a week
Image

Ceran wrote:and ur basically saying u can cheat evolution by blasting your delts 3 times a week
If I had meant that I would have said it! I am capable of expressing myself, my friend!

I don't know anything about the gym, I don't have any interest in it. It's virtually pointless for me to workout as I'm too skinny to start off with, and to make any significant gains I'd have to engage in a load of obsessive nonsense, and I can't be bothered. I hate weight lifting anyway, I can't imagine anything more tedious.

I would suggest that shoulder-to-waist ratio is largely genetic. You can make your shoulders more prominent, but it's rather difficult to increase the ratio, except by losing weight if you're overweight.

I'm sure it's possible to cite a few example of men who were hugely successful with women and don't have the characteristics that I've listed, but they are the exceptions that prove the rule. Certainly if you're talking about any male sex symbols they will have that physical characteristic. You even get a few surprising ones like Patrick Stewart, I'm sure he brings other qualities to the table, but the main reason women are drawn to him is strong, broad shoulders and narrow waist. It's built into their DNA, they don't have any choice in the matter.
PostThis post by cats was deleted by puanewb on Thu Mar 10, 2016 11:26 am.
Reason: Requested via PM



cats wrote:Good shit, but it's nowhere near as important as face.

We've talked a lot about frame here and yeah it's important, but mostly genetic and set after puberty there's nothing you can do about it.
Don't agree at all, with respect.

I've seen guys who aren't even remotely facially attractive, but have big, naturally strong, broad physiques just picking up the hottest women like it's child's play.

If you're a 'pretty boy', I'm sure you will do okay, but particularly as women mature they want to feel that sense of protection. That's why they're attracted to broad shoulders, they believe subconsciously that this guy will protect them better, and ultimately their offspring.

And you only need to look at the scientific studies on the subject, it comes out as the number one indicator of sexual attractiveness time and time again.

If you're as handsome as George Clooney that ain't going to do you any harm! But if you consider men in the public eye who women go gooey over, at least 90% of them will have broad shoulders, slim waist.

cats wrote:Good shit, but it's nowhere near as important as face.

We've talked a lot about frame here and yeah it's important, but mostly genetic and set after puberty there's nothing you can do about it.


Legit, the reason these studies tend to overlook face is that it is much more complex than 'have wide shoulders and narrow waist' A good face is so hard to quantify, the person with a great jaw and high cheekbones will not automatically be better looking than someone without these features(imo at least) Facial harmony is hard to quantify.

offthewall wrote:Legit, the reason these studies tend to overlook face is that it is much more complex than 'have wide shoulders and narrow waist' A good face is so hard to quantify, the person with a great jaw and high cheekbones will not automatically be better looking than someone without these features(imo at least) Facial harmony is hard to quantify.
There are many studies on facial attractiveness. But the conclusion of this one is close to my opinion:

http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/ ... /1571/1638

Being more or less attractive has important social consequences and people do generally agree on who is and who is not attractive. Beauty is not just a simple social construct—attractiveness appears to be ingrained in our biology. While some aspects of face perception might be innate, other aspects are clearly influenced by experience; it seems unlikely that individuals are born with a representation of what a perfect partner looks like.
Note the important sentence; this is a lot more subjective than physical stature. Of course, if you are spectacularly handsome it will help you. But most men who are considered spectacularly handsome by women also have broad shoulders and are the stereotypical 'hunk'.

And this is a biologically determined preference that barely fluctuates from one woman to the next. It's almost taken as a given that women prefer tall men, yet one survey has shown that the ideal shoulder-to-waist ratio is 14 times more important! This is a preference for virtually all women, you will hardly find a single woman on the planet who will prefer skinny or fat guys to one with the idealised physique. Whereas facial attractiveness is far, far more subjective.



hmm interesting topic. you found some links that i had not seen before. will view the rest later...
mrz wrote:Those who argue against me are invariably religiously delusional with propaganda, or otherwise they are simply sociopaths, those are the only two possible reasons that anyone would argue against me.

Having a strong core, traps, delts, and glutes can increase the ratio, for sure. I never measured my width, but I think it is not that hard to add 3-4 inches of width to the shoulders. the traps push the deltoids out, and the deltoids can stick out pretty far.

Lots of women say they are not interested in muscular men. At one point one girl told me she wanted me to stay skinny. Then I went to the gym and did compound exercises. 3 months later I fucked her, and she obviously liked the difference and told me as such.

Try powerlifting. It can gradually pack on dense muscle. It will cause your muscles to be tenser at rest, which is the same thing as muscle "tone". And most women are so clueless about body composition they might not even perceive you to be getting "bigger". They'll just think you look sharper, broader, leaner, and more powerful. Meanwhile, you will actually be gaining mass.

What women don't like is the typical unbalanced gym rat routine, skinny legs, guys gaining lots of fat in a short period of time, guys who train for pure mass instead of athleticism, etc. Saying that it doesn't help to build strength is just pure bullshit. It got me laid for years, and every girl preferred it over the skinnier me.

At my max, I could deadlift around 500 lbs and I was a lean 175 lbs at 5'10". That probably wasn't ideal for most women, but I think no one I encountered seemed to disliked my figure.

if you have a narrow waist then you most likely will have a good face due to low body fat %

unless you have a shitty facial features/ deformed face

There are a good few threads around where people lose weight and the before and after photos are amazing transformations

If you have very low bodyfat, but you're not even a bit jacked, then depending on your its structure your face might look like shit.

When you exercise, you're exercising your face according to the principle of irradiation. Your nervous system activates muscles everywhere in the body during compound movements. So if you have shitty facial structure like me, weight lifting can give you a better face.

Musculature does a couple of things important to optimize the shoulder to waist ratio. First off, more lean mass burns more calories making it easier to stay lean and therefore keep the waist narrow. Second of all, more muscles generally will expand the back and shoulder width by a few inches, and if simultaneously your waist shrinks, that can have a major impact. Third, more musculature allows you to be lean at higher body weights, and that seems to be the best way to avoid that gaunt/concentration camp look while still being lean.

But I agree there's a point of diminishing returns IN MOST CASES. One huge advantage the roiders and other huge muscle freaks have is that there is a very small percentage of women who are definitely way into that, and since men with that build are rare, you probably don't have to have much else going for you to be able to score with them. You're hurting yourself with many more women, but to the ones that it helps with, it really helps with.

MushroomCloud wrote:When you exercise, you're exercising your face according to the principle of irradiation. Your nervous system activates muscles everywhere in the body during compound movements. So if you have shitty facial structure like me, weight lifting can give you a better face.

ahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaa
hhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaah
ahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahaha
hahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaa
hhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahah
ahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahah
ahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahaha
haaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahah
haaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahaha
hahahahhaaahhaahaha
hahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahaha
hahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahah
ahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahah
haaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhaahahahahahahahhaaahhav

Topic Tags

Return to Shitty Advice

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 93 guests