Tall, long armed women (and young ones at that) are considered the most attractive, according to a study published in the Journal of Evolutionary Biology.
The comprehensive study was conducted by scientists in Australia and Hong Kong.
Are you surprised by the finding of long arms in women, as opposed to long legs?
“Physical attractiveness is an important determining factor for evolutionary, social and economic success,” states Robert Brooks, the study’s lead author, from the University of New South Wales.
According to Brooks, a woman’s body dimensions can indicate to the observer her suitability as a potential mate or longstanding partner, or even her potential as a sexual competitor.
For the study, 96 Chinese women between 20 and 49 were viewed in video form by 92 Australian adults (52 females and 40 males between ages 18-58).
Most of the Australians were of European heritage. The researchers contrasted the ratings of attractiveness by the Australian group, to the ratings given by a Hong Kong group, to eliminate cultural bias.
Among both the Australian viewers and the Hong Kong viewers, ratings for women who were taller, younger and lighter in skin tone were the highest for attractiveness.
A narrow waist, especially relative to height, was also a highly rated feature. Not surprisingly, body mass index (BMI), and hip-to-waist ratio, also scored in as attractive.
Taller models with “longer arms” were given high ratings. Legs didn’t matter much.
Conclusion by Brooks: The consistent ratings of attractiveness by women and men of Hong Kong and Australia, suggest “considerable cross cultural consistency.”
Now, I have a question. How were the viewers able to tell if a woman was tall?
Not all tall women have disproportionately long legs. I’ve seen six foot tall women with 32-inch inseams. I’ve seen 5’5 women with legs that belonged on a six foot tall woman.
If a tall woman is shown in a video just walking towards the camera, with nobody else around for scale, you cannot tell she is tall.
I’ve seen 5’9 and 5’10 celebrity women standing next to much taller men, and there was nothing about the bodies of these women to suggest they were tall; some even appeared to be short (long torsos, relatively short stocky legs), and I know they’re tall only because I know their height.
So I’m very curious how the viewers in this study knew that the women were tall.
As for the long arms, that’s obvious in terms of relative to the body. I’ve seen short ladies with disproportionately long arms, and tall women with arms that belonged on shorter gals.
And I’ve seen tall women with hands that hung practically down to their knees. Thus, arm span relative to height is not a function of height.
If you’re a tall, long armed woman who’s been despairing about your body, relax and remind yourself that these features are considered attractive.
