We reg readers want samples of the various 'legs' used for comparison. Paris cause she has legs (Jobs doesn't, just a backbone)
Polish researchers have discovered that the perfect set of legs is five per cent longer than the average, meaning that your run-of-the-mill Polish woman at 5ft 4in tall with an inside leg measurement of 29in would require 30.5in legs to compete with the celebrated pins of Oz popstress Kylie Minogue. Minogue has, of course, …
long legs mean high speed (something our HUNTER-gatherer ancestors would appreciate). I do not think cholesterol/diabetes/cardiovascular disease was a serious problem when you could take your pick from cholera, malaria, plague, lions, angry mammoths/woolly rhinos, starvation, war with neighbouring tribe and all other forms of "natural" population control.
And indeed, parnter selection is often based on things the opposite thinks are hot.
hmm is it just me that finds Kylie really annoying? Squeaking voice and bordering on the ginger side?? Feel well overdosed on Kyliemania now and wish she would just disappear for a while.
Now Penélope Cruz thats more like it......have a google you know you wanna, and watch Volver :)
These were just silhouettes? I'm not sure I'd be interested enough to really evaluate the choices properly.. At the very least, pictures of the whole 'package' would make a better survey. Best of course would be an actual visual 'measurement' encounter, but where to find an obliging set of body doubles*??? Icon self-explanatory
What about artists's models? They are used to posing nude in front of audiences, and (probably) would not mind being judged this way...
"Still, he was pretty unequivocal about why people don't much like short legs, viz: said legs are linked with "a higher risk of cardiovascular disease and type II diabetes and with higher levels of a body fat called triglyceride, which is linked to the clogging of the arteries, heart disease, strokes and insulin resistance in men".
After hundreds of thousands of years of evolution this is probably a deeply ingrained instinct.
I know that's the first thing that pops up when I gaze at a woman's legs.
I've heard the same basic idea, and the same basic explanations, quite a few timnes over the years.
Repeating the tests is good science. If you can't repeat an experiment, is it ever going to be science?
And a vague general indicator of health and fitness, I can go with that. But 99.9% of our ancestors didn't know any of this medical stuff, so I really doubt the detailed list of deadly faults has any relevance
...when I checked my El' Reg RSS feed in Firefox I just knew that Mr Haines would be the author of such a fine article!!
Keep up the good work sir! Although I feel it only appropriate that on behalf of the El' Reg's readership I request that you use your powerful position in international journalism to request a similar study concentrating on Bulgarian airbags!
Once a topic has been researched, follow up reseach is essencial to confirm or deny the earlier results, in this instance might I suggest lots and lots of follow up research... Oh, and may I put myself forward for one of these prestigeous testing posts when the next round of leg/breast research is being conducted?
Ah... now then AnonCow, just for the record, "I have no preference for the left leg, or for the right leg, but somewhere inbetween".
And finally, I seem to remember reading someplace that the ideal length for a pair of legs is, "long enough to reach the ground".
Now then, where's my CAMELskin coat?
...if attractive legs are 5% longer than average, humans will select each generation to have legs relatively longer than the last. Therefore, the leg-vs-body ratio will increase ad infinitum.
This suggests that rather than huge heads with big eyeballs, pop-culture representations of aliens should actually consist of tiny torsos on top of fifteen-foot-long gams. Excellent.
Right. But that does not fit the data, because the 10% longer legs (instead of 5%, the winners) were *less* attractive.
"But 99.9% of our ancestors didn't know any of this medical stuff, so I really doubt the detailed list of deadly faults has any relevance"
Er, that's not really how evolution works, mate... You don't need to be choosing the characteristic (consciously or not) -- otherwise non-human organisms wouldn't evolve, right? If you choose the "good" one (and the propensity to make that choice is inheritable), your descendants will be better off than those who do the "wrong" choice. Not that I really have a reason to think this particular case of the longer legs has anything to do with that anyway...
Penguins have quite short legs.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019