Well yea.... "dress size" has been shrinking over the years while people have stayed more or less the same shape. Just because a size 8 is now a size 0 doesn't mean people are getting fat.
It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion. It is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed, the hands acquire shakes, the shakes become a warning.
-Kujako-
Actually I think this is an interesting topic so I'll expand a little on what I said.
There seems to be two distinct strategies for male reproduction when it comes to heterosexual interactions.
1. Capitalize on early pair bonding and exclusivity
2. Capitalize on fertility and resources
In the first option males are attracted more to neotenous traits, which may (but don't have to) include slenderness, hairlessness, submission/physical weakness, large eyes, and the list goes on.
In the second option males are attracted more to exaggerated feminine traits, such as large breasts and butts, while other traits take a backseat.
Judging by the manifestation of heterosexual attraction in our society (and many other societies), both of these strategies seem to be successful. On this basis, I think it's a little unfair to prioritize one over the other in advertisements, and just plain dumb to trait combine between the groups (which almost always requires synthetic alterations).
Right? Fit and healthy people are attractive, nearly 100% of the time. How much you weigh is largely irrelevant to how good you look if you're fit. People just diet instead of exercising because its the lazier option, but at the end of the day it always nets you worse results.
it's amazing how Tenn is dumbfounded by the idea that people can still be attracted to women who fit into a 14 or higher. I guess they're all size 2 super models up there in candaland.
The good news is.
This problem eventually is going to solve itself.