quote:
Originally posted by TheTimeTrust:
Hmmm... now that's faulty logic, Cap -- you should be ashamed of yourself.

Just because I don't like women who are twice my weight and require "special seating" in airplanes and movie theatres does NOT mean that I like women who have stick-figures and nonexistent hips or butts like little boys that are so popular nowadays. I happen to like curvaceous women with the hourglass figure -- big hips and medium-sized breasts -- such as Marilyn Monroe, NOT Anna Nicole Smith or Roseanne Barr. [biiiig grin]
I know what you're saying. Similarly, however, just because I find women of this one's size attractive doesn't mean I don't find women of other sizes attractive. It's only around that size zero that I start yelling "Dammit! Someone get off their ass and make that girl a damn sandwich!" (No, that has nothing to do with my screen name.)

According to a nutrition and dietetics prof at my school with about thirty years of experience and two doctorates, the 'average' 22-year-old American woman is 5'4", 155 pounds, and a size 12. Granted, that's at the tail end of college, but there's generally not too much deviation except for a few genetic variables, whether or not the woman has had/is having children, and a handful of percentage points accounted for by serious aberrations in diet and physical activity.

Besides, that's not one magic number that defines average. There's a sizeable window around that outlining the range of healthy body types, and there are a number of women of that age that are either a size 6 or a size 20 without doing anything differently from any other woman who might fall closer to the middle of that. In this thread I've been dealing with generalizations and significant - not even extreme - tendencies, not necessarily advocating one particular body type as 'right' for an attractive woman to have. Variety is the spice of life, my friends, so by all means, hit the spice rack hard. [cool]