Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
What women like in men...
-
09-04-2014 12:21pm#1Hi guys, stumbled on this:
Warning pics of scantily clad men http://www.therichest.com/rich-list/most-popular/the-10-male-features-women-like-best/10/
Upon suggestion from Pawwed Rig, I'll put the list in text for those too afraid of looking at half naked men in the office
10) Chest/Shoulders muscles;
9) Penis;
8) Neck;
7) Hair;
6) Height;
5) Long Legs;
4) Eyes;
3) Flat stomach;
2) Thinness;
1) Buttocks;
Not sure about the website, first time I heard of it, but thought it would make some interesting discussion - especially about places #1,#2 and #3, because:
- I have been saying since the dawn of time that women are much stricter than men about weight and tend to go for the super-skinny guys;
- A "10 female features men like" featuring the same in the top 3 would cause outcries of sexism, superficiality and accusation of causing eating disorders;
Curious to see what you think (ladies are more than welcome to chip in of course).5
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
I've seen similar, but I don't see it as unfortunate, it's just how it is from culture to culture.
Definitely, I was just trying to be polite to anyone who might be sensitive on the subject;I dunno. I can think of two guys I know who might find her face pretty, but would think her way too skinny for them. They would actively seek out fatter women and ignore thinner.
Certainly; I can think of a couple, maybe three people myself, and we're talking people from Italy. But that number is out of how many? There will be a variance in every place, I'd say.True dat
Lol, for the sake of objectivity, it has to be said it goes the other way around too: when a man says "woman with meat on her bones" usually he means athletic body types (e.g. Lindsay Vonn) or hourglass figures (as insignificant as she is, I can think of no other example than Kim Kardashian); Many women will think size 20Somewhat, but women can be sending out reproductive fitness signals at a heavier weight. A plump hourglass for example is likely more reproductively fit than a thin straight up and down shape. The hourglass hip waist ratio is universally seen as attractive, even taking weight out of the equation(down to the hormonal level too. That ratio is reflected in better profiles for reproduction). Many cultures have fattened women up before marriage. Women's body shape "ideal" is far more plastic in culture compared to mens. The classical ideal for men would find favour today, but the classical ideal for women would be considered hefty. Even within the space of a century we see this. A Miss World winner of the 1950's wouldn't even get selected for the regional heats today.
True, and the cultural variance is a big factor indeed, although mostly coming from social circumstances; the preference for heavier women in the past centuries was driven by the fact it meant they were healthy as in "they actually had food". As society progressed in certain areas and food availability was no problem anymore, the whole conundrum reversed.
As for the variation over the last century yes, if you watch a movie from the '50s the average shape of the actresses bodies is quite a bit different than today's; However it always goes unnoticed that male actors changed dramatically as well: Until the late '80s, most of them where what would today be called "skinnyfat": thin but with lack of any muscle tone.
The Stallone of "Rambo" that was a sensation at the time, would look just a bit more muscular than the average actor right now.
The waist-hip ratio research makes a great point, but wouldn't you say that specific one is actually down to hormones/genetics, more than weight? There are plenty of thin women with hourglass figures and plumper ones with heavy tops and men-like hips.My point was that men's physicality is only part of the equation and it generally plays a much lesser part than in women.
It has always been the case, however as we progress the feeling is that women are paying more and more attention to the "visual part" than they did hitherto. Branching off the previous paragraph, it's worth noting that there are buffed up actors starring in comedy movies now (with few notable exceptions). Nothing wrong with it, as long as the ladies admit they like their eye candy tooYou misunderstand me. I'm saying that the studious guy in school that doesn't get a look in from his female peers can "earn" extra attractiveness points in life. If he became a consultant doctor for example. He could cast his net wider compared to the popular jock type guy in school that never rises beyond a cubicle job. More women will "decide" the doctor is the better bet.
I would also argue that it's all up to the woman. Yes it's a sellers market, however men can vastly improve their chances in such a market. The more choice a man appears to have means the more choices he will have. It also depends on life stage. IE an established man in his 30's has far more options than the same man at 18, whereas the reverse trend tends to be more the case if you swap the genders.
Oh yes, in that case it is. But as we said, this is changing as well, although maybe not as quickly as one would imagine.Every romantic relationship is based on what the individuals gain from it. Only the fog of romance masks it. It's only because the more extreme the assets brought to the table the more obvious it makes it such as in your above example.
Absolutely!Sure, but whatever about personality, a woman in her 40's that looks as good as a woman in her 20's, would as a general rule have looked better in her own 20's. If we're talking about starting a family her 25 year old self is way ahead. Plus contrary to the old sop of "well we all age so beauty is fleeting", good looking women(and men) in their 40's were nearly always outliers in the beauty dept when young. Precious few ugly ducklings change into swans in their 30's.
Indeed, especially about the "starting a family" part, and surely it's most likely that somebody that looks good in their 40s did look good in their 20s too, but I wouldn't discount the opposite as such a remote possibility: no more than 20 years ago, gyms were often considered a place where strange sweaty men emitted grunting sounds and injected substances that were rumored to be usable as rocket fuel; Today, everybody and their dog attends at least a pilates class.
Maybe I am the odd duckling, but I do look better now at 34 than I did at 24, mostly because I had not discovered exercise yet at the timeAny women I know do not like "super-skinny" guys, in fact skinny is often cited as a major turn-off. I think by "thinness" they mean "lean" perhaps, or "not overwieght". (PS I did not read the link, only your list)
I guess it depends on what you mean by "skinny man"; In my view, a lot of the 6 feet tall, 160 pounds zero-muscle-tone guys I see around are in fact super skinny, and women definitely go for them...0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,217 Mod ✭✭✭✭
Join Date:Posts: 59144
Oh sure H. I'd also reckon what's "on offer" locally is going to have an effect as it's what you're used to. So on average British women are heavier than French women and the local men will likely respond to that. Interestingly it depends on age. EG Spanish women are noticeably thinner than Irish women at 20, but are the same or slightly heavier at 40 and heavier overall.H3llR4iser wrote: »Certainly; I can think of a couple, maybe three people myself, and we're talking people from Italy. But that number is out of how many? There will be a variance in every place, I'd say.
True dat too.Lol, for the sake of objectivity, it has to be said it goes the other way around too: when a man says "woman with meat on her bones" usually he means athletic body types (e.g. Lindsay Vonn) or hourglass figures (as insignificant as she is, I can think of no other example than Kim Kardashian); Many women will think size 20
Though I would say that Irish men are on average and in my experience far more accepting of bigger women than many European cultures. I've been around Italian, Spanish, French and Ukrainian blokes who have been very vocal and direct about it. To the point of "WTF?" coming from me.
Oh sure, there have been changes there and yep the 80's muscle men certainly changed that. I'd say there's also more "feminine" looking men about in movies these days. Younger looking too. One mad/interesting[delete as applicable] theory has it that this may be down in part to the contraceptive pill. Women on the pill have a general bias for less masculine looking male faces and the theory goes that this may be reflected in the guys they go for and lust after on the big screen.As for the variation over the last century yes, if you watch a movie from the '50s the average shape of the actresses bodies is quite a bit different than today's; However it always goes unnoticed that male actors changed dramatically as well: Until the late '80s, most of them where what would today be called "skinnyfat": thin but with lack of any muscle tone.
The Stallone of "Rambo" that was a sensation at the time, would look just a bit more muscular than the average actor right now.
Certainly. Like I said it holds outside of weight. The venus de milo, Titians nudes, Marilyn Monroe and Kate Moss have the same ratio but very different weights. The healthier the woman is the more likely she'll have those ratios. Interestingly and going on records of clothing manufacturers and shops, the hourglass is becoming rarer in the western population and has been since the 60's. Dietary changes likely a big part of that.The waist-hip ratio research makes a great point, but wouldn't you say that specific one is actually down to hormones/genetics, more than weight? There are plenty of thin women with hourglass figures and plumper ones with heavy tops and men-like hips.
and/or because they have more freedom of choice these days the inherent triggers are coming to the foreIt has always been the case, however as we progress the feeling is that women are paying more and more attention to the "visual part" than they did hitherto.
True the fitness boom has helped in this. Then again overall both genders are fatter than we were a generation ago. Again I think men can have the advantage in this. We don't get pregnant, our hormones don't have as much sway over time on body weight and we don't suffer a menopause. So a 50 year old bloke with effort in the gym can have a body that would be better than the majority of 25 year old men. Unless his testosterone levels drop of course. However that looks like lifestyle or environmental too as fit healthy men and men in tribal societies show around a 1% drop in test per year after 30-35. It seems the male menopause, the "andropause" is less an inbuilt thing than something with external forces at play.Indeed, especially about the "starting a family" part, and surely it's most likely that somebody that looks good in their 40s did look good in their 20s too, but I wouldn't discount the opposite as such a remote possibility: no more than 20 years ago, gyms were often considered a place where strange sweaty men emitted grunting sounds and injected substances that were rumored to be usable as rocket fuel; Today, everybody and their dog attends at least a pilates class.
Maybe I am the odd duckling, but I do look better now at 34 than I did at 24, mostly because I had not discovered exercise yet at the time
EG check out these Native Australians. The lad in the middle with the great face and fantastic beard was in his 60's. The lad on the left's neckbeard is surely the finest in recorded history.
Oh oh H, if 6 feet tall(well 5'11) and 160 lbs is super skinny(knock 20lbs off for me), I'm gonna be on next years Trocaire box.I guess it depends on what you mean by "skinny man"; In my view, a lot of the 6 feet tall, 160 pounds zero-muscle-tone guys I see around are in fact super skinny, and women definitely go for them...
On jane82's over generalised point, about women being smarter in choice? I dunno about that as I've seen women mates make as many "WTF is she thinking" choices as my male mates. However it makes sense that they would have to be more careful. Since God was a boy, they're the ones who have run the risks of pregnancy and childbirth and abandonment after the child is born, so selecting a man to have sex with is of higher risk. Contraception, modern medicine, never mind societal changes have certainly taken much of the sting outa that, but I'd bet the farm that a level of care is much more in evidence than in men.Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.
0 -
-
Oh sure H. I'd also reckon what's "on offer" locally is going to have an effect as it's what you're used to. So on average British women are heavier than French women and the local men will likely respond to that. Interestingly it depends on age. EG Spanish women are noticeably thinner than Irish women at 20, but are the same or slightly heavier at 40 and heavier overall.
Actually, that is something I wanted to say but didn't get to (the post was too long already). What you see around you tend to influence you; However, to me it seems like while men are more "open" to exotic looks, women tend to be more rooted in the "homegrown" style, quite possibly unconsciously and due to all the supposed social advantages (support network, position etc.).True dat too. Though I would say that Irish men are on average and in my experience far more accepting of bigger women than many European cultures. I've been around Italian, Spanish, French and Ukrainian blokes who have been very vocal and direct about it. To the point of "WTF?" coming from me.
It's a bit of a complex matter; It is safe to say that some of these guys are often being unreasonable (in other words: some of them aren't exactly chiseled from alabaster, but expect a glamour-model type woman to take interest in them); However there are a plethora of social aspects behind their attitude.
Many populations put much higher pressure on people's appeareance; In Italy for example, one of the very first comments that are made upon meeting somebody that you didn't see for some time will be about weight: "Hello Carlo, you lost some weight/you got so fat/when will you lie down the cookies/will you ever start eating a bit!". It can easily be a spectacularly infuriating attitude, but it's no worse than the complete lack of pressure that seems to exist in Ireland - but I am digressing.Oh sure, there have been changes there and yep the 80's muscle men certainly changed that. I'd say there's also more "feminine" looking men about in movies these days. Younger looking too. One mad/interesting[delete as applicable] theory has it that this may be down in part to the contraceptive pill. Women on the pill have a general bias for less masculine looking male faces and the theory goes that this may be reflected in the guys they go for and lust after on the big screen.
Interesting...definitely interesting. Have no idea about the merits, as the preference for "feminine" features is a long standing one - even Elvis looked quite on the girly side, if compared with the burly men of his time!and/or because they have more freedom of choice these days the inherent triggers are coming to the fore
Only natural; Again, absolutely fine with me - as long as they admit to being attracted to eye candy, rather than keep the "looks are meaningless" charade
True the fitness boom has helped in this. Then again overall both genders are fatter than we were a generation ago. Again I think men can have the advantage in this. We don't get pregnant, our hormones don't have as much sway over time on body weight and we don't suffer a menopause. So a 50 year old bloke with effort in the gym can have a body that would be better than the majority of 25 year old men. Unless his testosterone levels drop of course. However that looks like lifestyle or environmental too as fit healthy men and men in tribal societies show around a 1% drop in test per year after 30-35. It seems the male menopause, the "andropause" is less an inbuilt thing than something with external forces at play.
The general concept is faultless and while it is true that we have a few advantages here and there, there are other factors to be considered as well; Women and their hormonal woes are the same today as say 30 years ago, yet nowadays you see most new mommies shed the "baby fat" in a matter of months, while many women back then would simply never get anywhere near their original shape;
Also before the fitness boom kicked in women were usually much less physically active than men as they were less involved in casual sports (e.g. most boys and adult men would at least play an occasional football game with their friends) and in hard physical labour. This exacerbated issues such as osteoporosis and made it much easier for women to gain weight compared to men.
Today, with the end of most physical labour, the start pilates classes and too much football on TV, we're seeing the opposite: we are the ones whose waistline tends to balloon exponentially, while many ladies keep reasonably fitEG check out these Native Australians. The lad in the middle with the great face and fantastic beard was in his 60's. The lad on the left's neckbeard is surely the finest in recorded history.
Eipc beards indeed...and at this point, we shall all change over to "Native Australian lifestyle", whatever it may be. Clearly, it works!Oh oh H, if 6 feet tall(well 5'11) and 160 lbs is super skinny(knock 20lbs off for me), I'm gonna be on next years Trocaire box.
Lol my man, can I get you a burger?
I honestly pulled that value out of my arse; I was 210 lbs at my lightest on a 6'2" frame, so you can see my viewpoint is somewhat skewed! I am starting to think the guys I'm talking about might be like 90 lbs! :eek:0 -
Call Me Jimmy wrote: »As a very skinny chap I would be very surprised (and delirah and excireh) if 'thinness' is what they mean here as a positive. As someone said, 'not a fatso' is what I think is meant.
My current partner is very skinny and I love his skinniness, he always slags me for "caressing his hip bones" when we cuddle I wouldn't have put it high on my list (no real physical attributes would be tbh) before him but it certainly wasn't a turn off either
I have a thing about nice manly hands, a lot of girls I know do too.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
I'm surprised facial hair isn't on the list, that's a important one for me. I much prefer men with stubble/beardiness than clean shaven.
Also messy hair. I dislike short hair on men, any length after short hair to chin length is attractive to me.
Also biceps. I have never checked out a guys ass but seeing a guy flex his biceps while stretching stirs something in me.
They're my top three.0 -
What an odd article.
I don't think I've ever broken down a guy's body parts in that kind of detail in my life, consciously or subconsciously, and I'd say most women would be more about the bigger picture.
Every time I've consciously thought about the "type" of man I tend to go for, that will actively change and I'll barely have 'I like athletic men' out of my mouth when I'm suddenly dating or fawning over a skinny guy who smokes 60 a week and hasn't seen the inside of a gym in two decades. (That one's true actually)
There are things that I'd probably clock and that would peak my sexual interest - eyes, hands, chest, thighs, teeth (why isn't teeth on the list? Teeth are crucial), but at that point I'd likely have already made my mind up about the guy through the overall package of his physical presence, eye contact, his humour and social skills and his reaction to me - and those individual features are not really gonna influence me that much at that stage. Except to serve as a good aul perve
But I think judging on how men and women check each other out and how that brings attraction into play, the OP's list would be a kind of secondary thing and the addition of a good aRse or nice pair of hands would be a bonus in a guy I already fancy.0 -
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Pawwed Rig wrote: »I don't think anyone here is taking it that seriously. At least I hope not.....
The general direction of the thread suggests that they are.
0 -
Advertisement
-
H3llR4iser wrote: »
<snip>
10) Chest/Shoulders muscles;
9) Penis;
8) Neck;
7) Hair;
6) Height;
5) Long Legs;
4) Eyes;
3) Flat stomach;
2) Thinness;
1) Buttocks;
</snip>
Again, it was always the men who treated women like commodities and poured over pictures of breasts (well I didn't myself), but this might now shed light on the other half of that story :rolleyes:...
In any case, if I wanted a relationship, this is what I'd be looking for in a woman...
1) Good Personality;
2) Tolerant (accepts me for what I am - I don't want a man changer);
3) Fair and Honest;
4) Human (not something out of the 'Hunger Games');
5) Intelligent;
6) and so on...
The other list regarding men - well...
1) Buttocks - What's the big deal???
;
2) Thinness - Well yeah, that's a good thing IMO :cool:;
3) Flat stomach - something that most males would want :cool:;
4) Eyes - Good Eyes helps expression;
5) Long Legs - well it's a good thing, but is it that important;
6) Height - again, a good thing, but is it really that important;
7) Hair - then again, many shaven heads look well and smart;
8) Neck - again, do these women know we're people?
;
9) Penis - well obviously, there are some women (along with some men) without much of an upstairs department :rolleyes:;
10) Chest/Shoulders muscles - again, we're people, not commodities!; 0 -
Middle Man wrote: »1) Buttocks - What's the big deal???;
Might have something to with running and hunting back in caveman times. The arse muscles are unique to humans among the primates and help out a lot with running. A tight muscular butt may have indicated that a man would be a good runner and hunter.
Maybe.0 -
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,217 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Join Date:Posts: 59144
Well indeed. It's the usual populist stuff, or researchers trying to justify grants, but there's likely something to it, or similar studies.Middle Man wrote: »The other list regarding men - well...
Youth, vigour.1) Buttocks - What's the big deal???;
Indeed. Testosterone, in very basic terms builds lean tissue and reduces fat. Leaner guy usually means higher test, youth and reproductive fitness.2) Thinness - Well yeah, that's a good thing IMO :cool:;
Taller men tend to live longer and tend to get promoted more often than shorter men. Height, or a difference in height depending on the population is considered more attractive to women. The protective factor?5) Long Legs - well it's a good thing, but is it that important;
6) Height - again, a good thing, but is it really that important;
They can, but again a head of hair suggests youth. Few 20 year old men are fully bald, but many 50 year old men would be(again it depends on population. IE Amazonian tribesmen almost never suffer from male pattern baldness).7) Hair - then again, many shaven heads look well and smart;
Not sure if serious.8) Neck - again, do these women know we're people?;
Why? At the extreme a micropenis may well leave a woman sexually unsatisfied, particularly if her sexual response is more intercourse geared. Yes such a man might get her off by other means, but all things being equal a guy with a larger penis is gonna hit the spot more. Reverse it. Imagine a woman whose vagina is so large the guy feels nothing or next to nothing. Yes she'll be able to get him off in other ways, but that could also cause major frustration. Now if every other aspect of the relationship is brilliant then OK, but it's certainly going to be a weak spot in the fabric of the relationship.9) Penis - well obviously, there are some women (along with some men) without much of an upstairs department :rolleyes:;
Put it another way; among the great apes, human males have the largest penises. This was most likely selected by human females throughout our evolutionary history, so it seems it is or was important.
Aye, but if one wants to be utterly reductive about it we do view each other on a very basic level as relationship and, or reproductive commodities/attributes. The more choices in mate selection a man or woman has these attributes will be more in play.10) Chest/Shoulders muscles - again, we're people, not commodities!;
In some societies the fat man is considered the better, because he has amassed so many resources or delegated people who provide him with resources. In our society the "fat cat" businessman with the "dollybird" might be an example of that.But then wouldnt a big fat arse mean he was great at getting food.
A hunter with a tight little arse is one thats catching potatoes. A hunter with a fat arse fat belly catches loads of grub.
Anybody involved in exercise will tell you that youd have to be a super master hunter to get fat in the wild.
Quite the number of studies have found that all things being equal people tend to end up with people who are of a similar level of age(within ten years), attractiveness, social background and educational status to them(but with subtly different immune systems). Where outliers occur it's usually, but not always because of the man's status(this will surely change with changes in female equality). Women who fit closest to their cultures beauty ideal and men with high status have the most mate choice.Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.
0 -
-
Middle Man wrote: »Again, it was always the men who treated women like commodities and poured over pictures of breasts (well I didn't myself), but this might now shed light on the other half of that story :rolleyes:...
In any case, if I wanted a relationship, this is what I'd be looking for in a woman...
1) Good Personality;
2) Tolerant (accepts me for what I am - I don't want a man changer);
3) Fair and Honest;
4) Human (not something out of the 'Hunger Games');
5) Intelligent;
6) and so on...
The other list regarding men - well...
1) Buttocks - What's the big deal???;
2) Thinness - Well yeah, that's a good thing IMO :cool:;
3) Flat stomach - something that most males would want :cool:;
4) Eyes - Good Eyes helps expression;
5) Long Legs - well it's a good thing, but is it that important;
6) Height - again, a good thing, but is it really that important;
7) Hair - then again, many shaven heads look well and smart;
8) Neck - again, do these women know we're people?;
9) Penis - well obviously, there are some women (along with some men) without much of an upstairs department :rolleyes:;
10) Chest/Shoulders muscles - again, we're people, not commodities!;
Women have differing tastes. What I like in a man is a couple of the above, not all. I'd say almost all women are the same. This is not a set list of what all women want in a man. It doesn't specify exactly what those things should look like either, just that those particular women have a particular taste in those particular things.
Reasonably fit (no beer belly but not a wash board stomach either), average height (I don't fancy tall men), average willy (not miniscule), broad and kind eyes would be my preferences from the list above.
Personality trumps it all though. Kind, sincere, mentally stable, reasonably intelligent and good fun would be the main attributes I'd want in a man.
Job title or status has never been important to me although I wouldn't go for a terminally lazy man either.0 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
Oh oh H, if 6 feet tall(well 5'11) and 160 lbs is super skinny(knock 20lbs off for me), I'm gonna be on next years Trocaire box.
I'll drop a 20c in your collection box. :pac:
5'10 myself and 155 lbs. Not exactly super skinny but lets go with athletic.
Someone mentioned confidence earlier and it shouldn't get overlooked in this conversation. I have mates who wouldn't be stand outs in a crowd but they have a confidence that allows them punch well above their weight. If you can combine it with charm you're on to a winner.0 -
Advertisement
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
Advertisement