The most attractive female body shape according to science – and it’s got nothing to do with being slim

THEY say beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but experts now say otherwise.

A new study claims to have cracked the code for the perfect woman’s body – and it’s not about the golden waist-to-hip ratio as we all thought.

German scientists now think the most attractive women have a pronounced ‘S’ shaped contour from the chest to their thighs.

They believe curviness, now called “thicc” might be something our brains are hardwired to find attractive on an evolutionary level.

This might explain why shapely icons like Marilyn Monroe or Kim Kardashian often steal the spotlight over straight-bodied slim celebs, like Kendell Jenner and Hailey Bieber.

According to researchers from the University of Konstanz, a woman’s overall ‘curviness’ boosts attractiveness, not just a slim waist.

This flips ancient research on its head, which for centuries has pegged a 0.7 waist-to-hip ratio as the ideal – which is where the waist is 30 per cent smaller than the hips.

The new findings, published in Scientific Reports, suggest that while a lower ratio might suit slimmer women, curviness is the real charm factor for fuller body types.

Previous studies have suggested there may be several evolutionary advantages of a curvaceous body.

For example, scientists have suggested the reason why men find larger breasts more attractive as they look like they could feed their offering more easily.

Psychologists have said rounded buttocks may have evolved as a desirable trait because they provide a visual indication of the woman’s youth and fertility.

For the latest study, Professor Ronald Hübner showed 80 men and women simple line drawings of female figures.

The drawings were designed so that waist-to-hip ratio and curviness were perfectly matched, making it impossible to judge them separately.

This setup allowed researchers to confirm previous findings that the waist-to-hip ratio played a role in predicting attractiveness.

Participants rated each drawing on a scale from 1 to 100, with 1 being “not attractive at all” and 100 being “most attractive possible.”

As predicted, the drawings with the hip-to-waist ratio closest to 0.7 were consistently rated as more attractive.

On average, a “normal weight” drawing with the ideal waist-to-hip ratio scored 74 for attractiveness, while a similar-weight body with a one-to-one ratio scored only 54.

In a second experiment, the researchers made a new set of drawings where curviness and waist-to-hip ratio were no longer perfectly aligned.

The drawings of torsos were made using curves found in pictures of real women wearing extremely tight corsets to force the most severe curves.

A group of 98 male and female participants were then shown the set of pictures and once again asked to rate them on a scale of one to 100.

As before, a waist-to-hip ratio of 0.7 was rated the most attractive for the smallest body types.

But when it came to larger, wider bodies, having a smaller waist-to-hip ratio ceased to be a good predictor of attractiveness.

In fact, the largest body width with a ratio of 0.7 was rated as the least attractive body type with a score of just 17.

Overall, the torsos with a curviness level of three were rated as the most attractive for their body width, regardless of their hip-to-weight ratio.

In their paper, published in Scientific Reports, Professor Hübner and his colleagues wrote: “Theoretical considerations suggest that the waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) cannot serve as a valid indicator of curviness, contrary to what is frequently assumed, either implicitly or explicitly.

“Consequently, one of these two attributes must be a more effective predictor of a woman’s body attractiveness. The results of this study clearly show that curviness is far superior to the WHR in this respect.”