The Science of the "Ideal" Male Physique

[Alexanderr]

Inb4 this thread gets misinterpreted but

it should be about having as much mass as possible without having excess bodyfat

if you can be lean at 110+ KG that will mog lanky david laid to death

View attachment 3458263
This mogs laid to death

Women don't prefer nearly as much muscle mass as men tend to think, and research backs this up. The ideal is lean, balanced muscle—not excessive bulk. Honestly, a lot of the drive for huge size seems to come from men trying to intimidate other men, not from what women actually find attractive.

 

[Alexanderr]

I don't think it completes the aesthetic at all. Which is why you have women thirsting over "dad bods" or really, athletic guys with a slightly higher (but healthy) bod fat percentage. If you have a V shaped body with good shoulders, chest and back, you're set. Abs can be taken or left. At least, that's what I've seen from women.

I get what you're saying about the "dad bod" and some women preferring athletic builds with higher body fat, but to say that abs don't contribute to the aesthetic is, I think, misinterpreting the data.

Sure, a well-developed upper body with broad shoulders, chest, and a V-taper is highly important and creates a strong impression, but a defined core provides valuable information about fitness and leanness which directly influence a woman's overall assessment of you.

So, while I agree that abs are not the most important component, they are essential for a visually complete, healthy, and fit physique, and I think the research is pretty clear on that point.

 

[Alexanderr]

Not sure about this one. I highly doubt forearms are less attractive to women than legs, traps possibly too since they give you that "built" look.

The placement of traps, calves, and forearms in Tier 4 is based on their limited signal value for strength and health in initial assessments of attractiveness compared to Tier 1 and 2 muscles.

While they can contribute to overall aesthetics and convey fitness, legs (Tier 3) are prioritized due to their association with balance, athleticism, and overall body proportions, and therefore a more significant signal of mate value than the muscles placed in Tier 4.

This is not to say that these are not important muscles to train, but there is a clear hierarchy in the literature as to which muscles are most indicative of fitness and are therefore perceived as more attractive.

 

[JohnnyRamone]

I get what you're saying about the "dad bod" and some women preferring athletic builds with higher body fat, but to say that abs don't contribute to the aesthetic is, I think, misinterpreting the data.

Sure, a well-developed upper body with broad shoulders, chest, and a V-taper is highly important and creates a strong impression, but a defined core provides valuable information about fitness and leanness which directly influence a woman's overall assessment of you.

So, while I agree that abs are not the most important component, they are essential for a visually complete, healthy, and fit physique, and I think the research is pretty clear on that point.

What do you say to stuff like this?







Whenever I see women asked this, it comes after arms, shoulders, chest, back. Quite a bit further down actually. Sometimes even below things like glutes.

 

[william2605]

What about this @Alexanderr

 

[Posmo]

So just train shoulders to give wider frame appeal and stay lean pretty simple

 

[truechadpreet]

High IQ thread

 

[william2605]

Wonderful thread, straight to the point and easily digestible.

What do you think

 

[autistic_tendencies]

Something I see often overlooked when looking at the ideal physique is the importance of Grecian ideals. Using a calculator can give someone meaningful measurements to pursue

Neck calves and something else are supposed to be between 16 and 18 inches ideally

 

[Alexanderr]

What do you say to stuff like this?







Whenever I see women asked this, it comes after arms, shoulders, chest, back. Quite a bit further down actually. Sometimes even below things like glutes.

You're right, when asked directly, women probably won't name legs as a key trait for attractiveness.

However, as we see in the studies, the legs contribute to the overall impression of athleticism and proportionality, and they're linked to a good leg-to-body ratio (LBR), which has some significance.

They're generally less salient than upper body musculature, no doubt, but that doesn't mean they should be neglected, as they contribute to a balanced and more attractive physique.

Basically, they still impact your overall impression, even if women won't explicitly call them out.

I suppose there's an analogy to be found when we look at the face. When asked what they like about someone's eyes women generally only mention simple stuff like eye shape or color. They'd never mention UEE, IPD, medial canthus, etc. despite those being crucial to a good eye area.

It's hard to be precise when saying what makes someone attractive since very few traits are attractive in isolation. Most only matter when accounting for the whole.

 

[Alexanderr]

View attachment 3469535
What about this @Alexanderr

Pretty close to the ideal, I'd say for most women. Maybe a little skinny for some, but especially for younger women I imagine this is what a lot of them would find very attractive. His shoulders could be wider though.

 

[Alexanderr]

So just train shoulders to give wider frame appeal and stay lean pretty simple

It's very simple, yeah. Train hard for a year or two, milk your newbie gains, stay lean and you're pretty much there. Maintaining afterward is easy.
If you don't naturally have wide shoulders, I'd suggest training the delts, in particular, to help achieve the V-taper or make it more pronounced.