Are women's thighs usually bigger than men's thighs?

[Troubles]

I ask because I've noticed that my thighs are pretty big in comparison to most men's thighs (they're 21 inches around at their thickest). Is this par for the course or an aberration?

[Omar Little]

According to this site: http://andreaportman.tripod.com/averages.html
the mean thigh circumference for men is 20.35 inches. The mean thigh circumference for women is 20.12 inches. At 21 inches you are slightly above the mean for both.

[Broomstick]

Taking into account that men are usually a bit taller than women, the closeness in those two measurements would seem to indicate the proportionally women's thighs are larger than men's, even if they're smaller in absolute terms.

It would be interesting to compare thigh measurements of men and women who are of the same height.

[Imago]

Originally Posted by Broomstick

It would be interesting to compare thigh measurements of men and women who are of the same height.

Good luck finding a man of 5'0" to compare me to!

Actually, that could be part of the problem with measuring. Since it seems to me (not like I have any actual data) that taller people tend also to be lankier (some kind of "stretched out further" effect?) the mean measurement of taller women's thighs might be narrower in proportion to their bodies than women of average height.

[ClevelandProud]

Q) Why does fat deposit on the hips and thighs of women and around the stomachs of men?

Monday, May 15, 2006

"A) … Hormones drive the deposition of fat around the pelvis, buttocks, and thighs of women and the bellies of men.

For women, this so-called sex-specific fat appears to be physiologically advantageous, at least during pregnancies. …”

http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...t-deposit-on-t

[KlondikeGeoff]

I don't know, but I'd be willing to volunteer to start measuring women's thighs. I already have a tape measure.

[Johanna]

There are lots of songs praising the beauty of big leg girls.

[Elendil's Heir]

Fat bottoms, I know. Big thighs... not so much.

[kenobi 65]

Originally Posted by Johanna

There are lots of songs praising the beauty of big leg girls.

I don't know, but I've been told, big-legged women ain't got no soul.

[ultrafilter]

Originally Posted by Omar Little

According to this site: http://andreaportman.tripod.com/averages.html
the mean thigh circumference for men is 20.35 inches. The mean thigh circumference for women is 20.12 inches. At 21 inches you are slightly above the mean for both.

The average man is significantly taller than the average woman, so based on these measurements, yes, women do have bigger thighs relative to their frames.

[chaoticbear]

Originally Posted by Elendil's Heir

Fat bottoms, I know. Big thighs... not so much.

Missy Elliot seems to think so.

I've got a cute face
Chubby waist
Thick legs in shape
Rump shakin both wayz

[curlylonghair]

Originally Posted by Troubles

I ask because I've noticed that my thighs are pretty big in comparison to most men's thighs (they're 21 inches around at their thickest). Is this par for the course or an aberration?

I tend to think they are bigger pound for pound and height wise.

I am 5 7" 124lbs athletic my husbby is 5 10" 170 athletic. we are both in good shape but my thighs are 22.75" and his are 21"

if I was his height and weight what would mine be? 25"?

we've talked or teased that my thighs are thicker and stronger than his... He finds its sexy that i'm athletic. and yes we tested the theory and mine are stronger

[epbrown01]

Originally Posted by curlylonghair

and yes we tested the theory and mine are stronger

Tested how?

[Zapp S.]

As someone already mentioned, women tend to store their fat around the hips and thighs, while men store their fat around their abdomens. So this can explain why women's thighs are bigger. Stronger? Not so much. Also compare a skinny woman to a skinny man. Woman would have smaller thighs, even though not by much. In fact, lower body sizes for a man and a woman do not differ all that much when controlled for height, it is the upper body where men are substantially bigger. Back to the strength. Even at the same size, women are weaker. This can be observed at weightlifting records for say squat, where men's records are bigger than women's in the same body weight categories.

[curlylonghair]

Originally Posted by epbrown01

Tested how?

lol like leg wrestling, leg press with weights. also endurance... i can do many more plie squats, like 100 more while holding a light weight lol !

[elfkin477]

Originally Posted by Omar Little

According to this site: http://andreaportman.tripod.com/averages.html
the mean thigh circumference for men is 20.35 inches. The mean thigh circumference for women is 20.12 inches. At 21 inches you are slightly above the mean for both.

I have a lot of difficulty believing that the average is really that low for women considering the other average measurements. I wear pants that are 2-3 sizes smaller than the US average (depending on if 12 or 14 is the current average) and my thighs are bigger around than that. The average waist size is 31" so the average thigh size being just 20" doesn't seem very probable.

[curlylonghair]

Originally Posted by elfkin477

I have a lot of difficulty believing that the average is really that low for women considering the other average measurements. I wear pants that are 2-3 sizes smaller than the US average (depending on if 12 or 14 is the current average) and my thighs are bigger around than that. The average waist size is 31" so the average thigh size being just 20" doesn't seem very probable.

i agree, us girls of today are more athletic and active than they were in years past. 20"? sounds like they are measuring one type of person.
I just took out a tape measure and that figure looks really skinny. my hubby said Hey, I am only 1" bigger than that.... I said, well 20" is like a twig lol
and I wouldn't be considered a big girl at all, size 7, 26" waist. I'm average size I would say.

[ChickenLegs]

Just checked. My thighs are 17". But then again, my name...

[ChickenLegs]

Womens' thighs are proportionally bigger because their asses are bigger. Their asses are bigger because their hips are bigger. Their hips are bigger for childbirth.

You can't put skinny thighs on a big ass. That would look funny, like sticking two toothpicks in a potato. They gotta taper down.

[Ambivalid]

Originally Posted by curlylonghair

lol like leg wrestling

Sorry if this is a stupid question but what is leg wrestling, exactly? I'm picturing arm-wrestling, just with legs instead. It's looking kinda odd in my head.

[dirty hippie]

I love thunder thighs!

[Hilarity N. Suze]

Originally Posted by Ambivalid

Sorry if this is a stupid question but what is leg wrestling, exactly? I'm picturing arm-wrestling, just with legs instead. It's looking kinda odd in my head.

Let's see, I saw this at parties. You lay down, head to toe, waists in approximately the same place. Hook the near leg of your opponent and try to roll him off his back.

The ladies usually one, but in this configuration when the guy rolls off his back, guess where he ends up.

curlylonghair may have a different sport in mind.

[TriPolar]

I knew a woman weightlifter/bodybuilder who was very proud that her thighs were bigger than her waist.

[Ambivalid]

Originally Posted by Hilarity N. Suze

Let's see, I saw this at parties. You lay down, head to toe, waists in approximately the same place. Hook the near leg of your opponent and try to roll him off his back.

The ladies usually one, but in this configuration when the guy rolls off his back, guess where he ends up.

Great username/post combo.

[md2000]

Originally Posted by ChickenLegs

Womens' thighs are proportionally bigger because their asses are bigger. Their asses are bigger because their hips are bigger. Their hips are bigger for childbirth.

You can't put skinny thighs on a big ass. That would look funny, like sticking two toothpicks in a potato. They gotta taper down.

I think it's more along the lines of evolutionary results...

If women piled on the beer belly like men do, it would impede the ability of the stomach to expand during pregnancy. So they are more likely to take the same fat and distribute it neatly (?) around the rest of the mid-to-lower body and under the skin generally.

Of course, some excessively obese women do pack on the belly (let her tell you she's expecting, don't ask if you don't know... ) but usually not until the other repositories are also full and (just my observation) the incidence of excessively slack belly in that situation seems much higher in females than obese males. Sue Johanssen of "The Sex Show" referred to it as an "apron" where the stomach hangs down below the crotch.

OTOH, both sexes could benefit from exercise... Starting with me.

[Thudlow Boink]

Originally Posted by Ambivalid

Sorry if this is a stupid question but what is leg wrestling, exactly? I'm picturing arm-wrestling, just with legs instead. It's looking kinda odd in my head.

If you had watched the first-ever episode of "Late Night with Conan O'Brien" you would have seen George Wendt leg-wrestling with John Goodman. Alas, I can't find a video clip online anywhere.

[rhubarbarin]

I'm skeptical about the data Omar Little posted too. I remember reading that women had significantly bigger legs on average, let me see if I can find that data.

21" is a small measurement for the largest part of the leg IMO. Mine are almost 20" and I wear a 00 in pants. Of course, the only place I carry any weight on my body is at the very tops of my thighs and my butt, the rest of me is a stick. It would definitely be possible for me to bulk my quads enough that my leg would be bigger than my (unusually small) waist. oO

[Cartooniverse]

Originally Posted by Elendil's Heir

Fat bottoms, I know. Big thighs... not so much.

Don't be so quick there.........

Ah loves me some big thighs.





And, the non-testosterone-driven answer. An inch one way or the other- no matter what the height to weight ratio- might well be attributed to water, musculature of one woman compared to another, etc.

There's both a NASA-funded study and an adult film sneaking around here somewhere.....

[actualliberalnotoneofthose]

I'm a man. My calves are around 17 and thighs 26. My overall body fat percentage is not very low but my legs are muscular. I'm surprised the male average is that low- since so many people lift weights these days. However I notice a lot of of top-heavy men walking around, guys who don't seem to reAlize they make weights for lower body exercises, too.

[md2000]

Originally Posted by actualliberalnotoneofthose

I'm a man. My calves are around 17 and thighs 26. My overall body fat percentage is not very low but my legs are muscular. I'm surprised the male average is that low- since so many people lift weights these days. However I notice a lot of of top-heavy men walking around, guys who don't seem to reAlize they make weights for lower body exercises, too.

Guys whose biceps are bigger around than their head, tend to look at their biceps and pecs in the mirror. I don't recall to many situations where you would see guys checking out how their thighs or butt look in the mirror...

Women, on the other hand...

[elfkin477]

Originally Posted by rhubarbarin

21" is a small measurement for the largest part of the leg IMO. Mine are almost 20" and I wear a 00 in pants.

Your measurements seem very proportional. Which is why it seems completely unbelievable that it's also roughly the same average for women who wear size 12-14 pants as the average woman does.

[epbrown01]

Originally Posted by actualliberalnotoneofthose

However I notice a lot of of top-heavy men walking around, guys who don't seem to reAlize they make weights for lower body exercises, too.

Exactly. On the fitness forums they look with disdain on the people that only work the "ego muscles" - abs, pecs, biceps. Everyone gloats endlessly about how they do deads and squats for "real strength." It's true, but it's not like everyone that does is picking up cars and stuff.