January 16, 2013
Surprisingly enough (to me at least), I don’t get a whole lot in the way of questions about body types or what bros consider “perfect.” Maybe it’s because asking the question means taking stock of your own shortcomings (which no one wants to do), or maybe it’s because girls assume that every guy has the same fantasy: 5’8”, tan, blonde, with huge boobs, a drum-tight ass, and a BMI that somehow hovers around 15%. And in one sense that’s correct, no bro is going to willfully turn that down. But it’s also incomplete. Bros have a complicated relationship with your body and attractiveness in general, and rather than answer directly the few questions on the subject that I do get, I’ve elected to tackle the broader issue in a format that will hopefully make me some fucking money in the future (Are you reading, Simon & Schuster? I know you are.)
The problem with asking what bros "look for" is that we operate on a few different scales that are at odds with one another. The first, most primitive, and most often implemented measure is what I call the binary scale. It’s simple – would you fuck her, yes or no? It has a kind of elegance to it because it's simple. This is the kind of evaluation system you see applied at 3AM as a party is closing down and you’re looking to get your D wet. It’s not ideal, but it’s effective. Look at that girl. Would you fuck her? Cool, go lay some pipe.
The 1-10 Scale: If we drill down another layer, we get to the much-publicized but massively overrated 1-10 system. Basically, a 1 is someone Patrick Bateman wouldn’t fuck with an actual jackhammer, and a 10 is someone for whom you’d sell your mother into sexual slavery if it meant having a conversation about licking her armpit. It’s great, and all guys use it, but it has its faults, one being that it’s not linear. The difference between a 1 and a 2 is negligible, but the difference between an 8 and a 10 is bigger than the difference between a 1 and a 7. That makes it subjective and therefore flawed. As a bro, you may have a girl in your econ class who is, relative to everyone you know, perfect. Does that make her a 10? If so, what about Candice Swanepoel? Candice, in addition to being a Victoria’s Secret model and a person who will not stop fucking texting me, is built like a female comic book character specifically designed to make nerds compulsively choke their chickens. She is about as close to objectively perfect as it gets. So if that girl in your econ class is a 10, where does that leave Candice? There’s no such thing as an 11. That’s the problem with the 1-10 scale. It’s usually only applied to women whom you admire from afar. Ask a bro to give his girlfriend a number and see how that goes.
The problem I think a lot of girls have when evaluating their own bodies is that they look to the media for a measuring stick. Any professionally produced still image of a model or actress is going to be edited to the point of un-reality. Considering there’s money involved, why wouldn’t they? Everyone knows that the camera really does add a good 10 lbs (except on instagram where girls can look misleadingly hot).
In real life, actresses who look great on film are actually way skinnier than you think, often to the point of being unattractive. For example, Jennifer Lawrence, Hollywood’s “it” girl of the moment, gets a lot of attention for her body. Some people say she’s “too fat” to play certain roles, while others applaud her for making it as an actress with a “real woman’s body.” Please. In real life, Jennifer Lawrence is hot as fuck. She’s hotter than you or anyone you know, and the only thing “real” about her is how passionately I’d hump her if she’d just lift the fucking restraining order and give me a chance.
Physical beauty has always been the manifestation of what we consider healthy. There was a time when it was hot to be pale and chubby because it meant you had money for food and didn’t work outside as a field hand. Now things are a little different in that thin is considered the true ideal, but not without its fair share of backlash against the Vogue models who promote "an unhealthy body image by being too thin." Maybe, but that's your own insecurity to handle, because in reality, bros' expectations are not so skeletal.
In real life, as cheesy as it sounds, a girl is hottest when she’s the best, healthiest version of herself, the same way everyone looks best with their natural hair color. Guys aren’t complete retards, and we intrinsically know when a girl is at odds with her body. If a girl’s a little "heavier" but it looks “right” (i.e., Jennifer Lawrence) that’s better than someone who’s starved themselves to an unnatural weight. It’s the same for someone who is what others might call “too skinny” but is just naturally that way.
Now look at Candice and her clingy VS model friends - sure they’re skinny as shit, but they still have boobs, asses, and muscles. The problem with walking that razor-thin line in the middle of course is that it’s much easier to go to either extreme, which no one wants. Let’s explore those.
I know Kate Moss holds a high position in betch mythology, but no one wants to fuck a walking clothes hanger. No one wants to see your spinal column. It’s bad enough that you all owe us a rib, so walking around with them on display is just rubbing it in. The appearance of fertility is a hard-wired measure of attractiveness, and a girl with her hip bones poking out doesn’t look like she could have a solid bowel movement, let alone a fucking baby.
Then of course there’s the phenomenon known as “skinny fat”, when girls forget that when you lose a bunch of body fat, something should take its place. There’s nothing grosser than a girl who’s 5’8” and 115 lbs but has a droopy old man ass. I know it’s easy to just not eat, but it’s no good if you eat so little that you’re too weak to pick up a weight every once in a while.
If you call yourself “curvy” but are really just one big curve, yeah you’re probably too fat, both from an attractiveness and a health standpoint. The mistake most girls make is that there’s probably a lot more leeway here than you think. Most guys are pretty into hips and boobs and butts, and if you have those things by virtue of a little extra padding that’s fine. I’ll let you in on a little secret: squishy things feel good. Most guys would rather sleep next to something soft than cower in fear because they worry your elbows might give them puncture wounds. Curves create a figure, which is sexy. That’s why VS models are hot and couture runway models are not. Still, that’s not an invitation to go apeshit at Five Guys. Stomach squishes in a little when you poke it with your finger? Fine. Stomach hangs over any time you try to wear something below your belly button? Hit the gym.
Um, a lot, weird omnipotent voice asking questions in the headers. It’s just that being hot doesn’t necessarily lead to attraction. Think about just about every love song you’ve ever heard sung by a man, or the girls you hear guys talking about in your class or office. What do they have in common? In most cases men aren’t singing about or gawking over their wives or girlfriends, but women they don’t know, ones they think they want but can’t have. That’s because while there’s such a thing as being too ugly to love, there’s no such thing as a woman who’s too hot to be annoying or eventually intolerable. That’s why we fantasize over models/actresses/girls we don't know, because they may as well not be real, since we'll never get to see how high maintenance and annoying they really are. We’ll never have to deal with them bitching about their skin breaking out, agonizing over what to wear, or whining about their weight. As long as they remain at a distance, they’re as perfect as we want them to be.
In real life attractiveness is huge, but no one’s going around assigning numeric values to girls and ranking them like a sorority hopeful on pref night. Instead, people tend to date those they view as at least equal to themselves in terms of physical beauty. Everyone knows or has at least seen a couple where one person is a total smokeshow while the other looks like they hide under bridges and lick the bottom of peoples’ feet when they walk by. You wonder how, but it’s simple. The hot one has terrible self esteem, and the ugly one thinks they’re hot shit. And you know what? As long as their personalities agree with one another, the two of them can be perfectly happy that way.
When it comes down to it, hotness takes a backseat to agreeableness. Every guy I know would rather spend a lifetime with an attractive enough girl who’s awesome to be around than 20 minutes with a physically stunning girl who’s an insufferable bitch. Beauty also fades. Unless you grew up fat, you’ll never look as good at 25 as you did at 18. Bros know that. That’s why when you send me an email saying you’re sooooo hot but no guys will talk to you, I laugh. You may be hot, but above all you’re oblivious. A hot girl with no personality is like a Ferrari with no engine: Beautiful but useless. Also like a Ferrari with no engine, a bro might stick his dick in your tailpipe, but he’s not going to want to stick around for very long. Maybe this wasn’t the best metaphor to use.
There’s nothing wrong with being hot and owning it. In fact, that just adds to the seven-layer dip of sexiness. But again, the hottest (and not inconsequently) coolest girls are the ones who know who they are, know what they’ve got, and present it in the best way possible. Unlike Candice, who’s so insecure I’m considering changing my phone number.
Cause you don't wanna miss a thing