Submitted by Admin on Tue, 04/10/2007 - 02:25
Submitted by Admin on Wed, 03/21/2007 - 19:28
Submitted by Admin on Fri, 03/16/2007 - 03:12
The female hourglass figure obviously reflects sexual selection. However, sexual selection acts on male-female differences to start with. Therefore, what prompted shape differences in the first place? Boguslaw Pawlowski and Marzena Grabarczyk have written a paper on this, and it is addressed here.
Submitted by Admin on Thu, 03/15/2007 - 01:51
Submitted by Admin on Wed, 03/14/2007 - 23:56
Excerpts from an online survey of 25,000 individuals in 45 countries (Jan. 30, 2007):
Submitted by Admin on Wed, 03/14/2007 - 22:26
Miscellaneous news items of interest...
Submitted by Admin on Mon, 03/12/2007 - 00:52
Lauren, a fan of this site, sent me the following article to let me know that that I am not the only person to have made some of the core arguments presented here. Although it dates to 2002, it is worth reproducing here. I have bolded some parts that point out some of the key issues mentioned within this site, and have added a few comments (in italics).
Submitted by Admin on Sat, 03/10/2007 - 00:37
Mostly a compilation of the more masculine contestants in the upcoming Miss USA 2007 beauty pageant, to be held March 23, 2007...
Submitted by Admin on Fri, 03/09/2007 - 17:25
Submitted by Admin on Fri, 03/09/2007 - 06:35
Achim Schützwohl reported the results of a study that exposed men to line drawings of women, in pairs, with front-view waist-to-hip ratios of either 0.5, 0.7 or 0.9, varied by altering waist size. Each pair of images was shown for a duration of 1.25 seconds, and the male participants were asked to judge the figures for attractiveness, fecundity, health and pregnancy status. A shortcoming of the study was using the crude line drawings originally used by Devendra Singh, previously discussed in an entry addressing various confounds related to waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) and attractiveness in women. Another shortcoming was not using more subtle variation of WHR.