19

I have often heard that only recently slim women were considered as more attractive in western society. It is referenced a few time in this Slashdot thread: Government Should Ban Skinny Models To Curb Anorexia, Say Researchers. There is also this webpage by the some municipality that wants to show that the new trend started in the 1900's while in the 1890's:

Actress Lillian Russell at 200 lbs. or 91 kg. is the most celebrated beauty of the time. Wikipedia Image of Lillian Russel

They of course don't have any reliable source and I don't consider 90kg as 'that' fat (she may be 6'6"). So anyway, is there any evidence that before the 1900's, or for some specific time, fat was considered as the norm of beauty?

rjzii
  • 16,884
  • 4
  • 92
  • 102
Zenon
  • 1,864
  • 1
  • 16
  • 18
  • 1
    To be honest, I think this question is why to broad as it stands right now since different cultures have different standards of beauty as noted by @coleopterist If this was narrowed down a bit it could be a good question. – rjzii Jan 06 '14 at 16:15
  • @rob it is already narrowed down to Western society (I've removed coleopterit's pseudo answer). – Sklivvz Jan 07 '14 at 09:14
  • 1
    @Sklivvz Even then I think the point still stands since within Western societies there are a number of different cultures and subcultures. Even class differences could account for differences ideals of beauty. – rjzii Jan 07 '14 at 16:05
  • Seems the there's at least now a cross-cultural preference for lean. Seems to have been in Ancient Rome and Egypt as well, going by certain art pieces. That said the question is vague. Women can be large absolutely or only proportionately. Other answers suggest a cycle. There's also false information to contend with. Apparently Marilyn Monroe had the same measurements as Elizabeth Hurley, the remarks of the latter not withstanding, she wasn't plus sized. – R. Romero Aug 03 '21 at 21:25

1 Answers1

9

Examples from the past

There's plenty of examples, but I think the most famous ones are the sculptures of mother goddesses from our distant past:

Mother GoddessSource: Wikipedia

Closer to home, you need to look no further than Botticelli. His Venus is way plumper than today's top models:

Venere BotticelliSource: Wikipedia

Why is it so?

One known factor correlating male mating preferences with female body size is hunger, as hungrier man prefer plumper women. This is likely an evolutionary adaptation:

Using this revised methodology, we found that operationalized intra-individual resource scarcity affects preferences for body weight: 30 hungry male participants preferred figures with a higher body weight and rated as more attractive heavier figures than 31 satiated male participants. Hungrier men were also less likely to be influenced by cues for body shape, supporting extant cross-cultural studies on female physical attractiveness.

Sklivvz
  • 78,578
  • 29
  • 321
  • 428
  • 5
    I like this analysis but I think the answer is still only partial and needs a lot more examples and documentation. So +1 but plenty of room for other responses. – matt_black Mar 03 '12 at 15:14
  • 12
    The mother goddess shows only what has been the view of a 'fertile woman'. Not necessarily 'beautiful woman'. Venus' body is not skinny, but hardly fat. – Boris Mar 03 '12 at 19:24
  • 1
    @Boris regarding the mother goddess, one can see whatever interpretation they like. However, finding lots of these figurines and *no skinny ones* gives us a good idea of the aesthetic sense of that culture. Regarding Botticelli's venus - she's certainly not obese, but much more fat-rich than the current cultural icons of beauty. Compare with e.g. [Angelina Jolie](http://www.glamour.com/fashion/blogs/slaves-to-fashion/2012/01/15/0112-best-dressed-golden-globes-2012-angelina-jolie-fa.jpg) – Sklivvz Mar 03 '12 at 20:37
  • @matt_black what did you have in mind? – Sklivvz Mar 03 '12 at 20:37
  • 1
    From the wikipedia link: goddess who represents motherhood, fertility, creation or embodies the bounty of the Earth. This is not my interpretation. In fact it is you who are interpreting this to be 'beauty' while it isn't explicitly mentioned anywhere. – Boris Mar 03 '12 at 20:58
  • @Boris, my point is that [this](http://www.augadha.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Spring_Fertility_Goddess.jpg) is a modern fertility goddess. When an artist draws the "perfect fertile woman" it will take inspiration from the common aesthetics of his time. Thus, an obese fertility goddess is a sign that obese women were considered "perfect fertile women" at the time. – Sklivvz Mar 03 '12 at 21:09
  • 1
    Fertility is a desirable quality in a woman. That does not equal it to beauty. – Boris Mar 03 '12 at 21:21
  • 1
    @Sklivvz I like the direction of your reasoning but two examples don't make a statistical case especially when they are separated by the best part of 10,000 years. I guess I'm looking for a statistical study. For example, has anyone ever estimated the BMI or vital stats of female artistic subjects over time? – matt_black Mar 04 '12 at 00:33
  • @matt_black, but the question asks for any example and specific time. – Sklivvz Mar 04 '12 at 00:51
  • @Sklivvz Fair point: i'm overgeneralising to answer a broader question. – matt_black Mar 04 '12 at 13:41
  • 9
    @Sklivvz: just because media want to make us think that anorexic women are beautiful that does not make it true... I would classify Botticelli's Venus as a normal person (in terms of weight, that is). It is Angelina Jolie who is underweight. – nico Mar 05 '12 at 17:06
  • 1
    @nico from wikipedia, angelina "has been named the world's "most beautiful" or "sexiest" woman by various media outlets, including Vogue in 2002,[3] Esquire in 2004,[120] American FHM and British Harper's Bazaar in 2005,[4][121] People and Hello! in 2006,[5][122] Empire in 2007,[123] and Vanity Fair in 2009.[6]" – Sklivvz Mar 05 '12 at 17:12
  • 6
    @Sklivvz: not saying she's ugly, but I definitely prefer Venus :) – nico Mar 05 '12 at 17:30
  • 2
    The word [Rubenesque](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Rubenesque) has come to mean _plump and sensuous (referring to the figure of a woman)_, thanks to the depiction of women in the paintings of [Peter Paul Rubens](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Paul_Rubens). Of particular note is his work titled, [The Three Graces](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:The_Three_Graces,_by_Peter_Paul_Rubens,_from_Prado_in_Google_Earth.jpg). –  Jan 06 '14 at 14:32
  • 3
    I must have different eyes than you because that Venus is no way "way plumper" than the average woman considered attractive today - at most she's maybe one size larger and would not be considered overweight at all by any man alive today if they saw her walking down the street. –  Jan 06 '14 at 13:08
  • I think that 'richness' would cover more bases than simple hunger. I.e. tanned woman are (were?) considered more attractive in the West (because they had time to lounge in the sun), whereas fair woman are considered more attractive in India (because they don't have to work in the sun). Note also that (from my limited knowledge) 'fat' is still considered beautiful in many poorer places on the planet. – Benjol Jan 07 '14 at 13:12
  • As a follow-up: it would be interesting to see if poor and rich people in a same country/culture have differing 'standards' in this regard. – Benjol Jan 07 '14 at 13:14
  • @ben I can't really add that based on speculation. The hunger claim is supported by a study... if there *were* a study supporting the "apparent wealth" hypothesis, I would include it, but I couldn't find it. – Sklivvz Jan 07 '14 at 13:22
  • @Sklivvz. Understood. If I'd had more than speculation I'd have hazarded my own answer ;) – Benjol Jan 07 '14 at 14:29
  • Is this answer a little original research-ish? – Andrew Grimm Oct 17 '15 at 23:32
  • 9
    *His Venus is way plumper than today's top models* – I have not found a single male yet who considers top models particularly attractive → [follow-up question](http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/q/30455/16889). – Wrzlprmft Oct 18 '15 at 09:21