Bum, boobs or legs?

johnr1

doovdela wrote: »

Surely a nice bum/legs would compensate for boobs or does it matter to ye?

They would, and regularly do, but we're talking perfect world stuff here.

I'd personally be looking down the road ten or twenty years and trying to guess what she'll look like then, but in a relationship, once the attraction is there, it really doesent matter which bits attracted in the first place.

"But seriously, the overall shape is nice. As long as all her parts fit together nicely. She doesn't have to have AMAZING tits or INCREDIBLE hips or the like. Just as long as the body compliments itself."

This by HUNK sums it up nicely ^^^^^

lalee17

Bumbumbumbumbumbumbumbumbumbumbumbumbumbumbumbumbumbumbumbumbumbumbumbumbumbumbumbumbum

bnt

Hair helps, too:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hz8ul-gmLyA

shinikins

Larianne wrote: »

I'm tall for a woman too, but when I was size 16 I was fat! Even at size 12 I could do with a bit of toning up.

People used to say I could get 'away with it being tall'. I think they were just being polite.

Its all subjective though, if you have a small frame or delicate bone structure if course you'll look fat at size 16, regardless of your height. Likewise if you're flabby, but if you exercise and wear the right sized clothing then size 16 can hardly be considered overweight if you're tall.

strobe

shinikins wrote: »

Its all subjective though, if you have a small frame or delicate bone structure if course you'll look fat at size 16, regardless of your height. Likewise if you're flabby, but if you exercise and wear the right sized clothing then size 16 can hardly be considered overweight if you're tall.

Is it subjective though? I don't know much about women's dress sizes to be honest but a google for size 16 throws up this girl who is 5ft 10 and a model. She's fat. Not ridiculous american fat but she is fat.

Wibbs

shinikins wrote: »

I'm calling you both out on this, I wear a size 16, but I'm quite tall for a woman, but not out if the average height range. Most people guess I wear a size 12

I'm not making a value judgement S, I'm just saying size 16 would be too "big" for me all things being equal. They're going to be heavier than me for a start(which puts a fair few ladies off).

Larianne wrote: »

I'm tall for a woman too, but when I was size 16 I was fat! Even at size 12 I could do with a bit of toning up.

People used to say I could get 'away with it being tall'. I think they were just being polite.

Maybe, but again they may well have being telling the truth as they saw it. Like I say personal prefs and all.

johnr1 wrote:

The hourglass figure is hard to beat, but in EVERY photo you see of a girl with one, she's overweight.

I'd generally agree with that. Though again being subjective about overweight. In my personal experience and observation, lots of, if not most men(esp Irish men) seem to prefer more meat on the bones compared to me. They prefer more "solid" women. They'll describe a woman in a size 14 as slim to them. Even when they say they like smaller in famous types and the rest I've seen guys have the choice of that body shape and still go for bigger.

I'd defo be more the outlier in this. I've yet to have a long termer with a woman above 8ish-10, most were squarely 6-8's indeed. I just prefer the less is more thing. Small framed, more delicate/slim athletic looking women, thin wrists and ankles etc appeal more to me and contrary to some they can have perfectly rounded figures at that size.

stupidusername

SV wrote: »

All hope is not lost for Irish women after all!
you are Irish aren't you

I am. but i am terribly bad at judging things also.

The_Thing

Why is there no option to vote for a woman's face. All the rest - a great bum, great boobs, great legs, is just a bonus in my opinion.

RoyalMarine

face then bum.

legs nd boobs are not as essential as these 2.

flutterflye

Wow, the amount of men who like bums!
My husband is a bum man too.
I just don't understand biologically why guys would like bums.
I mean boobs and hips signify fertility, but what about bums?

py2006

Hmmm I think I go for bum and legs then boobs!

Nothing like a gal who looks good in a pair of jeans! :P

strobe

flutterflye wrote: »

Wow, the amount of men who like bums!
My husband is a bum man too.
I just don't understand biologically why guys would like bums.
I mean boobs and hips signify fertility, but what about bums?

I think it's because your bum is the first place a lot of people put on weight so a well toned bum is a good indicator of general overall health and fitness. You never see a sports star with a flabby ass... So I reckon we are evolutionarily (is that a word?) programmed to find a nice bum attractive.

Wibbs

Actually I'd add a waist as an option. Waist smaller than hips a biggy.

flutterflye wrote:

Wow, the amount of men who like bums!
My husband is a bum man too.
I just don't understand biologically why guys would like bums.
I mean boobs and hips signify fertility, but what about bums?

Could be a few things. Could be a holdover from our primate past. Apes go for bums too. Bums and shapely bums are narrower at the top and spread wider, which gives the ideal hip waist ratio which signifies reproductive health. Women with the .7 ratio are far far less likely to be infertile. Its a constant in history too.

johnr1

flutterflye wrote: »

Wow, the amount of men who like bums!
My husband is a bum man too.
I just don't understand biologically why guys would like bums.
I mean boobs and hips signify fertility, but what about bums?

I think in this thread, bums = bums+hips, seeing as hips dont have their own spot in the poll.
See Wibbs post above re waist hip ratio, but in my opinion despite the science which disagrees with me, it should read, waist-hip-boobs ratio.

On hips specifically, the line from a womans waist to leg can be impossibly beautiful:):P

Just to throw something else in the pot, does anyone else find those dimples which some women have on their back roughly in line with their ovaries ridiculously sexy ?

shinikins

strobe wrote: »

Is it subjective though? I don't know much about women's dress sizes to be honest but a google for size 16 throws up this girl who is 5ft 10 and a model. She's fat. Not ridiculous american fat but she is fat.

So is this model, Crystal Renn. The girl you linked doesn't look as if she's done a days exercise in her life, and is only 16, so a lot of her weight may well be puppy fat. `My point was, that not every woman who wears more than a size 12 is fat. Hell when I was a size 12 i was incredibly thin, and had several people ask me if I had an eating disorder.

bryaner

DaveDaRave wrote: »

Stop encouraging fat women to stay fat.

Nob.

strobe

shinikins wrote: »

So is this model, Crystal Renn. The girl you linked doesn't look as if she's done a days exercise in her life, and is only 16, so a lot of her weight may well be puppy fat. `My point was, that not every woman who wears more than a size 12 is fat. Hell when I was a size 12 i was incredibly thin, and had several people ask me if I had an eating disorder.

Crystal Renn? Wikipedia says UK size 12. She says herself in this interview here she wears a size 6 to 8 (I presume those are US sizes) dress. Her agent says 'solid size 10' in the same interview. No size 16 girl she be as far as I can see. [my google fu is strong :pac: It also tells me Tara Lynn is the most famous size 16 model. Guess what, she's fat.]. But whatever, can't believe I'm in a conversation about women's dress sizes, I better go build a wall or something before I start going fruity.

garbanzo

(.) (.)

dsmythy

bryaner wrote: »

Nob.

No, we're talking about women parts in this thread.

Wibbs

strobe wrote: »

Crystal Renn? Wikipedia says UK size 12. She says herself in this interview here she wears a size 6 to 8 (I presume those are US sizes) dress. Her agent says 'solid size 10' in the same interview. No size 16 girl she be as far as I can see.

+1 I prefer the slimmer Renn TBH.

shinikins

strobe wrote: »

Crystal Renn? Wikipedia says UK size 12. She says herself in this interview here she wears a size 6 to 8 (I presume those are US sizes) dress. Her agent says 'solid size 10' in the same interview. No size 16 girl she be as far as I can see. [my google fu is strong :pac: It also tells me Tara Lynn is the most famous size 16 model. Guess what, she's fat.]. But whatever, can't believe I'm in a conversation about women's dress sizes, I better go build a wall or something before I start going fruity.

Because Wikipedia is suuuch a reliable source of information given that anyone can change it.....

Your Google FU is on the blink, Tara Lynn is a US size 16 which is a size 20 here, which makes Crystal Renn a ***drumroll please*** UK size 16!!!!!!

strobe

shinikins wrote: »

Because Wikipedia is suuuch a reliable source of information given that anyone can change it.....

Which is why I also posted the interview where she says herself that she is a size (US) 6-8 and her agent says 10. Unless of course the girl herself and her agent are too unreliable a source of information for you too? :annoying rollyeyes smilie:



(For future reference btw if you scroll to the bottom of the page of a wikipedia article or just click the little numbers in brackets you can check the references to confirm or refute anything posted on it. It's a winning system.)

shinikins

strobe wrote: »

shinikins wrote: »

Because Wikipedia is suuuch a reliable source of information given that anyone can change it.....

Which is why I also posted the interview where she says herself that she is a size (US) 6-8 and her agent says 10. Unless of course the girl herself and her agent are too unreliable a source of information for you too? :annoying rollyeyes smilie:



(For future reference btw if you scroll to the bottom of the page of a wikipedia article or just click the little numbers in brackets you can check the references to confirm or refute anything posted on it. It's a winning system.)

Roll your eyes all you want, she is still a UK size 16, and definitely not fat. Your basically arguing my point by posting those links!

holystungun9

starfish

SwarfegaHead

A good set of child-bearing hips. Lort.

Christina Hendricks is a fine specimen of womanhood.


Also, for the larf:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ldTtAURFwSg

amacachi

Chest is probably at the bottom of the list of importance.

Bipolar Joe

Legs, then boobs then butt. Or butt then boobs. I dunno.

loremolis

Bipolar Joe wrote: »

Legs, then boobs then butt. Or butt then boobs. I dunno.

You're living up to your name.:)

Bipolar Joe

It's hard to decide, man! Legs definitely first, I love a good, strong pair of legs, the type that can crush me. But asses and boobs, I like 'em all.

Sephiroth_dude

A nice bum all the way

HazDanz

Legs catch my attention.

In fairness though they all catch my attention

LightningBolt

Jeremiah 16:1 wrote: »

Some people take "curvy" to mean fit and healthy but having a shapely hourglass figure and a bum that sticks out and boobs that stick out a bit as well. http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_6fOvAXxoGEk/TJdn0HulksI/AAAAAAAAC9M/x45ER0tP77g/s1600/christina-hendricks-sexy-for-new-york-magazine-3.jpg

Others take "curvy" to mean , yes, boobs and bum that stick out, but also rolls of fat everywhere and not that healthy looking.

Unfortunately the latter kind think this kind of "curvy" is good...

Before anyone takes offence the stick thin end of the scale isn't good either.

HazDanz

LightningBolt wrote: »

Unfortunately the latter kind think this kind of "curvy" is good...

Agreed. Some of those dresses accentuating their "curves" are just not a good fit.

W.Shakes-Beer

Has to be a nice arse! An arse with a slight firm bounce to it.

The best arses are the ones attached to a fine set of legs, wrapped up in some nice close fitting jeans.

Boxtyeater

Bipolar Joe wrote: »

It's hard to decide, man! Legs definitely first, I love a good, strong pair of legs, the type that can crush me. But asses and boobs, I like 'em all.

Good call Buddy...No need for arxing around then.

Larianne

shinikins wrote: »

Roll your eyes all you want, she is still a UK size 16, and definitely not fat. Your basically arguing my point by posting those links!

She is not a size 16 in those J Crew shots. No way. It states she is now a US size 8 in those shots. She might be a size 16 now, if she put on weight since March of this year.

Here's her modelling card at Elite: http://www.elitemodellondon.co.uk/details.aspx?modelID=535613&ln=&nav=1&subid=5572&mainsubid=5572&divID=&indx=0&letter=C

Wibbs

shinikins wrote: »

Your Google FU is on the blink, Tara Lynn is a US size 16 which is a size 20 here, which makes Crystal Renn a ***drumroll please*** UK size 16!!!!!!

Eh unless the lassie is approaching 6 feet ten there is no way in hell she's a size 16 or anything like it. http://fatchic.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/crystal_renn.jpg http://blockdelete.blogg.se/images/2010/crystal-renn2_121121264.jpg http://imagesgonerogue.com/2010/10/crystal-renn3.jpg and especially here; http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_MjIoRfXgjkk/TQTPQ_ZtesI/AAAAAAAACCY/2jlciBX8oAg/s1600/crystal-renn6.jpg

I'm a fairly good judge of the clothes size thang in the ladies. I've been wrong under pressure maybe 5 times in my life(one recently a Boardsie I thought was an 8 who was a 10). Ms Renn or more like a 12ish, at a push a low 14 at her fullest and a 8-10 otherwise.

EDIT I feel for the Renn wan. Must be a right PITA to be lauded on the one hand as a "plus size" and then scrutinised after that. She eats a happy meal and the press is hounding her. Either an example or a sellout. FWIW I think she's pretty gorge.

Wibbs

Larianne wrote: »

She is not a size 16 in those J Crew shots. No way. It states she is now a US size 8 in those shots. She might be a size 16 now, if she put on weight since March of this year.

Here's her modelling card at Elite: http://www.elitemodellondon.co.uk/details.aspx?modelID=535613&ln=&nav=1&subid=5572&mainsubid=5572&divID=&indx=0&letter=C

+1 36, 26 36? That spells fwoooar on so many levels, but size 16 it does not. Jeez now ye have me getting the unsavoury hots for Ms Renn.

later12

I wonder if the women and gay men are giving 'ass' a possibly undeserved large share of the vote.

OP should have followed the tradition of our wiser forefathers and disallowed women the vote.

later12

Wibbs wrote: »

Eh unless the lassie is approaching 6 feet ten there is no way in hell she's a size 16 or anything like it. http://fatchic.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/crystal_renn.jpg http://blockdelete.blogg.se/images/2010/crystal-renn2_121121264.jpg http://imagesgonerogue.com/2010/10/crystal-renn3.jpg and especially here; http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_MjIoRfXgjkk/TQTPQ_ZtesI/AAAAAAAACCY/2jlciBX8oAg/s1600/crystal-renn6.jpg

I'm a fairly good judge of the clothes size thang in the ladies. I've been wrong under pressure maybe 5 times in my life(one recently a Boardsie I thought was an 8 who was a 10). Ms Renn or more like a 12ish, at a push a low 14 at her fullest and a 8-10 otherwise.

EDIT I feel for the Renn wan. Must be a right PITA to be lauded on the one hand as a "plus size" and then scrutinised after that. She eats a happy meal and the press is hounding her. Either an example or a sellout. FWIW I think she's pretty gorge.

I'm so confused.. are you a boy or a girl?

Saila

later10 wrote: »

I'm so confused.. are you a boy or a girl?

a lad Im pretty sure..

sonic85

not into one in particular its a package type situation. combination of everything works best

Paparazzo

I vote for overall womanly shape. I prefer a slight bit of weight to give a nice overall figure.
like this
http://www.newsgab.com/attachments/celebrity-pictures/12068d1156937026-martine-mccutcheon-tiny-busty-black-bikini-martine-1.jpg

Wibbs

Saila wrote: »

a lad Im pretty sure..

A lad may be a stretch, but defo male.

fonecrusher1

Its all about the personality. If you can't have an intelligent conversation with your partner then whats the point. You need her to be equal to you intellectually.

And massive tits.

Bipolar Joe

Unfortunately, personality wasn't an option.

entropi

fonecrusher1 wrote: »

Its all about the personality. If you can't have an intelligent conversation with your partner then whats the point. You need her to be equal to you intellectually.

And massive tits.

Personality is not a physical trait though...massive tits as You say, will do for that:pac:


Of those options, legs and ass first and second, although only women will have boobs...

LittleMissLost

I'm a girl, so I didn't vote.

I do find thought that even though most guys say they prefer shapely girls I think they're usually just saying that.

I'm 5'5" and used to be around 10 1/2-11 stone (a healthy size 10-12). When I lost weight rapidly (down to 8 stone and quite thin size 6-8, borderline eating disorder) I found I got way more male attention?

Bipolar Joe

LittleMissLost wrote: »

I'm a girl, so I didn't vote.

I do find thought that even though most guys say they prefer shapely girls I think they're usually just saying that.

I'm 5'5" and used to be around 10 1/2-11 stone (a healthy size 10-12). When I lost weight rapidly (down to 8 stone and quite thin size 6-8, borderline eating disorder) I found I got way more male attention?

I've never dated a thin chick. Chubby gals all the way!

howardmarks

A hole. Do sure