Women who idealise hourglass figures are ‘less satisfied’ with their bodies, study finds

The hourglass figure ‘might be as unrealistic, unattainable, and harmful to women’s body image as the thin-ideal’

<p>The ‘slim-thick’ ideal may be ‘more threatening’ to women’s body image than the ‘thin’ ideal</p>

The ‘slim-thick’ ideal may be ‘more threatening’ to women’s body image than the ‘thin’ ideal

Women who idealise hourglass figures, such as that of Kim Kardashian and Kylie Jenner, are likely to feel greater dissatisfaction about their weight and appearance, according to a new study.

This is likely because western media has seen a shift towards a curvier body type – characterised by having a large bottom and thighs, small waist and stomach – becoming more favourable in recent years, researchers at York University in Toronto, Canada said.

The findings are based on a study which recruited 402 women aged between 18 and 25 from a range of ethnic backgrounds and split them into four groups.

Each group was shown 13 Instagram images. The first group was presented with pictures of the women with this curvy body type, named “slim-thick”.

The second group was shown images of “thin” women – those with small waists and slender thighs.

The third group was shown images of “fit” women with athletic figures. The last cohort - the control group – were shown 13 images of furniture.

The women’s satisfaction with their appearance, body and weight was measured before and after exposure to the images, finding that they all experienced greater dissatisfaction in all three categories.

However, the women shown images of slim-thick models reported more weight and appearance dissatisfaction and less satisfaction with their bodies overall.

The researchers concluded that the desire to achieve a “slim-thick” body, which has become more popularised by mainstream media, “may be more detrimental to women’s body image than thin-ideal imagery”.

The study noted that similar to the body types made popular by supermodels like Kate Moss in the early noughties, “this [slim-thick] body type might be as unrealistic, unattainable, and harmful to women’s body image as the thin-ideal“.

Researchers said the findings show that the “threat” of the “slim-thick” ideal should be considered by medical professionals when treating eating disorders and by brands when promoting products.

“Most body image and eating disorder prevention and intervention efforts are focused on combatting the thin ideal and drive for thinness,” the study said.

“While these efforts are important, they may be excluding important targets of treatment for women who ascribe to a curvier ideal.”

“Further, campaigns or advertisers that use curvier models with the intent to promote body-inclusiveness and body positivity should be aware that slim-thick models may be more detrimental to women’s body image than thin models.”

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Please enter a valid email
Please enter a valid email
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Please enter your first name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
Please enter your last name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
You must be over 18 years old to register
You must be over 18 years old to register
Opt-out-policy
You can opt-out at any time by signing in to your account to manage your preferences. Each email has a link to unsubscribe.

By clicking ‘Create my account’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Join our new commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in