# .7=Beauty? **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [August 10, 2002, 3:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/7-beauty/123240 "2002-08-10T03:59:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 11\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Wolfian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/7ea924/32.png) [@Wolfian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wolfian)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2002, 3:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/7-beauty/123240/1 "2002-08-10T03:59:43Z")
Has anyone else heard [this theory](http://dubinserver.colorado.edu/prj/kga/Ratio.html) ? > [@](#): > > Defining a universal standard of body beauty seems nearly impossible considering the differences that are observed cross culturally and across time. But if our ideals of size change from one time and place to the next, our taste in shapes is amazingly stable. A low waist to hip ratio of .6 to .8 meaning the waist is 60 to 80 percent of the hips is a biological indicator of health and fertility in females. I first heard it on some newsmagazine a few years back, but I just starting thinking about it today. I broke out the big stack o’ porn [sup]TM[/sup] and a calculator and sure enough, all but 3 models out of the ones I glanced at were in the .6-.8 range (an interesting one actually had a ratio of 1.1 even though I found her very attractive). I then did some googling and found the above link. So what do you guys think. Coincidence? Just the way the female body is made? Has any study came out to poke holes in the theory? ---
**Author:** ![moe.ron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ed8c4c/32.png) [@moe.ron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/moe.ron)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2002, 6:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/7-beauty/123240/2 "2002-08-10T06:09:22Z")
Yeah, I’d believe it. Of course, I’d look at the face before any other part of the body, because to me, that’s the most important part (especially eyes). The thing is that, IMHO, when you look at different periods in time, you’ll see different visions of beauty. Art is a prime example of this. Visions of beauty in times of famine, are usually a little bigger, but not to the point of being fat. Also, in the past, untanned skin was thought to be attractive. I myself am rather fond of paler women, just because I know in 20 years, they won’t be as wrinkled. But in the past, these were indicators that a person never had to leave their house to survive, and was well-fed. Of course, everything in moderation. When you can count someone’s ribs, you know someone ain’t eatin momma’s home cookin. FWIW, prime attractiveness for men’s waist proportion is .85. Ladies? ---
**Author:** ![Zyada](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zyada/32/3028_2.png) [@Zyada](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zyada)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2002, 12:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/7-beauty/123240/3 "2002-08-10T12:32:07Z")
This came out in Newsweek (IIRC) many years ago. One of these days, I’m going to find the story again and photocopy it. The .7 waist to hip ratio is fairly constant across cultures. It holds true for both Twiggy and the pre-historic fertility goddesses. Nor is it a coincidence - this works out to be the proportions with the highest rate of fertility as well. ---
**Author:** ![Mooney252](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7c8e57/32.png) [@Mooney252](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mooney252)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2002, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/7-beauty/123240/4 "2002-08-10T15:42:55Z")
Broader theory – someone has quantified the entire concept of beauty, including all facial proportions. It discusses eye spacing; proportion of lips to face; shaping of L/R sides. I’ve never been able to find a concise reference to the theory, despite having tried several times on Google. ---
**Author:** ![Koffing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/898d66/32.png) [@Koffing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Koffing)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2002, 12:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/7-beauty/123240/5 "2002-08-12T12:12:09Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by moe.ron \* > **Also, in the past, untanned skin was thought to be attractive. I myself am rather fond of paler women, just because I know in 20 years, they won’t be as wrinkled. But in the past, these were indicators that a person never had to leave their house to survive, and was well-fed.** This may be a WAG, but I’m willing to bet that this particular fact wasn’t quite as universal as the waist to hips ratio… ---
**Author:** ![turner](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/22d042/32.png) [@turner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/turner)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2002, 11:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/7-beauty/123240/6 "2002-08-12T23:43:39Z")
I saw this on the Discovery Channel a while back, so, being an engineer, I had to check. My wife came home, I measured her and said, (MISTAKE 1), " I love you anyway." I then went on to explain the .7 Ratio. So she decided she wanted to check how lose to perfection she was. First, she did the division of the two measurements. She made a mistake (CLARIFICATION: My wife is a very intelligent woman) so I said, “No Hon, you have the decimal in the wrong place.” She then tried to calculate what her waist needed to be, so she multiplied her hip measurement by .7 and again made a math error. I , (MISTAKE 2) jumped in again and said, “Hon, you forgot to carry the two.” She then got frustrated and said, “JEEZ!!! Where’s my head!!!” I then couldn’t resist (MISTAKE 3, 4, 5, 6) and said, “Up your ass, that’s why your hips are too big” Irresistable, but bad idea. ---
**Author:** ![Cosmopolitan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/94ad74/32.png) [@Cosmopolitan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cosmopolitan)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2002, 3:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/7-beauty/123240/7 "2002-08-13T03:28:32Z")
I have one thing to say, **turner** ::wally :smack: I hope y’all have a well appointed guest room! ---
**Author:** ![Sinshine](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f04885/32.png) [@Sinshine](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sinshine)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2002, 3:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/7-beauty/123240/8 "2002-08-13T03:37:43Z")
I am a 10. Not a .7 _goes to check_ Okay, I’m a .77 Like I said, I’m a 10. ---
**Author:** ![Wolfian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/7ea924/32.png) [@Wolfian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wolfian)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2002, 6:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/7-beauty/123240/9 "2002-08-13T06:06:20Z")
[QUOTE] \*Originally posted by turner \* **I saw this on the Discovery Channel a while back, so, being an engineer, I had to check.** [quote] And that’s why Dilbert is single. 😉 > [@](#): > > \*\*She then got frustrated and said, “JEEZ!!! Where’s my head!!!” I then couldn’t resist (MISTAKE 3, 4, 5, 6) and said, “Up your ass, that’s why your hips are too big” > > Irresistable, but bad idea. \*\* You said that aloud? You’re my new hero. ---
**Author:** ![slortar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/6bbea6/32.png) [@slortar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/slortar)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2002, 2:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/7-beauty/123240/10 "2002-08-13T14:55:44Z")
I’m surprised he still alive to post that. Maybe he’s posting from hiding? ---
**Author:** ![turner](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/22d042/32.png) [@turner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/turner)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2002, 11:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/7-beauty/123240/11 "2002-08-14T23:21:30Z")
It cost me a dozen yellow roses. (I don’t want her to know, but it was worth it) 😃