The perfect girl

In my reception room, on two vintage marble tables, there are some big artsy books. Boticelli. Toulouse Lautrec. Tizian. One with the best sculptures in history. And of course, Helmut Newton and a nice big one with my best pics. To which I added another big one, a collection of all Playboy centrefolds since the first issue until a few years ago, when my hubby bought it.

You might have got the trend all these books depict the nude female beauty. Not going to write again about why we ladies are better looking than you guys been there several times.

What is interesting is to see how the perception of beauty changes in time and, to a certain extent, in space. And mostly in the last century or so.

Egypt brought us slender women, tall and mysterious, with quite revealing outfits. Greek nudes were young women with young, round faces, small, perky breasts and relatively round bodies. Nothing excessive, but a bit of reassuring body fat. Baby fat mostly, no real fold which should not be there. Then, between the 15th and the 18th century (say between Titian or Michelangelo or da Vinci or Durer- and Rubens), nude ladies got a lot more body fat and maturity. You do see skin folds, the thighs get thicker, the butts larger, the faces even rounder. But the breasts remain small.

The 18th century brought us the quasi-generalisation of corsets and incredibly small waists. Fashionable breasts became a bit bigger, without excess. This is less evident in nudes, you cant really make a woman look normal with a 50cm waist in the nude.

Compare this with France of the late 19th and early 20th century. Women are very thin, with very small breasts, short black hair and they smoke through long, slim cigarette holders.

Then something happened, just after WWII, when triumphant USA started to impose its new standard of female beauty: big breasts. I mean BIG BREASTS. Women had womanly forms, they were soft and plump without being excessively fat, their hair was made into huge artistic messes or buns, and they wore conic bras which made their breasts look event bigger than they were. If you look at a beauty contest from that time, nude or dressed, you know from the outset who would win it: the lady with the biggest boobs. In the 50s-60s, Marilyn brought back the womanly woman, the hourglass shape. Her boobs were not enormous, but quite sizeable. Then all hell broke loose mammary implants became popular, used and abused.

Later in the 70s, all of a sudden, big fashion designers brought to prominence incredibly thin models with very long legs. Youthfulness became the fashion. Twiggy. Now I agree that most clothes look nicer on tall, slim ladies and they can move more gracefully than short, plump ones. But also, most designers were gay and their teste was a bit skewed towards a boyish appearance.

In the 80s, aerobic was the new religion, bodies became more toned, more athletic, without exaggeration. Steroids were reserved to guys, but women had to show a bit not much of muscular definition.

Then, in the 90s, the fashion seems to have gone back to insanely (in the true sense of the word) thin bodies not in the painted nudes though, and not really in the Playboy centrefolds. There, ladies do get thinner, boobs smaller, but nothing really to raise medical concerns, like in fashion.

Finally, the 21st century seems to be the century of body building. OK, in all honesty, there seems to be a bit more diversity in tastes, and the ladies posing nude are not always using steroids, but still, the winning body seems to be one with 5-6% body fat, implants (sorry guys, our boobs are 90% made of fat, we cant have that level of muscle definition and also have sizeable breasts without the help of a kind surgeon), defined glutes and large muscles. Steroids change the shape of the lips and increase the clitoris, making them prominent, the women look ready to fight and win combats.

In parallel, there is return to a wish of youth, with women who dont want to look like male bodybuilders trying hard to look 15 yo. Small boobs, relatively thin bodies invade nudist beaches (OK, not really, nudism is actually declining, you need specialised places like Sinsheim to attract the youth). And of course, its interesting to see in the Playboy book how pubic hair is diminishing until complete disappearance. But we had another topic about this, I will not insist.

Of course, there are general theories about the reasons of these changes. In times when food is scarce, extra weight means extra fecundity or at least more chances to raise the offspring. Conversely, when food is abundant, thinness means will power and is noble. In the same vein, when physical work is the norm for women, being a bit plump, with no visible muscles and a pale skin looks different and more noble. When most of us sit in front of a desk most day, being muscular and strong becomes the attractive exception.

I also believe that the age of the viewer matters. Guys, when you are in your teens most girls have small breasts so you are more interested in big ones. On the contrary, when you get older your access to young girls becomes scarce, so you start to appreciate more a youthful appearance small breasts, slim bodies, not necessarily the hourglass shape. The proof? Most of you will say that you prefer smaller breasts, while all these custom-made AI girlfriends (and most sex dolls), who are likely more attractive for young, inexperienced boys, have huge boobs.

But fine, lets stop here. Which female body type do you prefer? (Ill also tell you which one I prefer).

• Flag
• Edit
• Delete
• Quote
• Reply