Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and physical attractiveness, particularly feminine beauty, is hard to quantify. We are all aware how dependent it is on race, fashion, historical and cultural factors, and other subjective determinants, as well as personal preferences. This has always fascinated me--just what does "pretty" or "beautiful" really mean? A look at art throughout history makes it pretty clear that what is considered an attractive female face or figure has not remained a constant through time. In general, I suspect men are programmed by evolution to be attracted to women who are potentially effective reproductive partners, i.e., we look for youth and health. But even given these constraints, there is still a great deal of leeway, both in what men consider attractive as well as variation amongst individual women.

The young lady in the optical illusion animation we discussed below is, in my opinion, the perfect female physical body type as far as sexual attractiveness is concerned. But it is a very rare one, she is not only young and healthy, it is pretty clear that she is also a dancer, or perhaps an athlete, and has developed her figure in a way that has always been rare until very recently. Even amongst athletic women, there are variations from sport to sport: figure skaters, volleyball players, and dancers have different body types, determined both by their training methods, but also by the demands of their sport. I find all these physical stereotypes different, but attractive, although equally competent athletic bodies, such as runners, gymnasts and swimmers do not appeal to me as much.

Fashion has a great deal to do with it. Clothing is usually designed to accentuate or diminish certain physical attributes, and any man can tell you that most women look better with their clothes on than off. Most actresses and certainly fashion models are, in my opinion, way too thin, but their figures are optimized to look good in contemporary fashions. Men also vary in their preferences. The ideals of feminine beauty in Renaissance paintings or Roman sculpture are quite different from that of the average contemporary American male, who seems to be primarily attracted to twelve-year olds with long legs and enormous breasts. Socio-economic considerations may also play a role. Fat, pale women were all the rage in the past (probably because these body types suggested an aristocratic lifestyle with access to an adequate diet). Today, slimmer, well-tanned figures are the preferred paradigm, probably because they indicate healthy exercise, diet, and leisure (hence wealth). In the past, thin, tanned women worked in the fields. Today, when most everyone works in an office, thin and tan means they can afford to join a gym and a tanning salon, or can travel to sunny climes and engage in outdoor sports.

These considerations are completely subjective, of course, and we usually choose our mates for reasons other than optimum physical beauty. Still, the issues I outline above must influence our behavior, and they must reflect certain cultural processes at work in our society. Therefore, it is worthwhile to consider them and their effect on us, both individually and collectively.

And remember: "Beauty is only skin deep, but ugly goes all the way to the bone".