Archives of Sexual Behavior

, Volume 42, Issue 7, pp 1199–1207 | Cite as

Men’s Oppressive Beliefs Predict Their Breast Size Preferences in Women

  • Viren SwamiEmail author
  • Martin J. Tovée
Original Paper


Previous studies of men’s breast size preferences have yielded equivocal findings, with studies variously indicating a preference for small, medium, or large breasts. Here, we examined the impact of men’s oppressive beliefs in shaping their female breast size ideals. British White men from the community in London, England (N = 361) viewed figures of women that rotated in 360° and varied in breast size along five levels. They then rated the figure that they found most physically attractive and also completed measures assessing their sexist attitudes and tendency to objectify women. Results showed that medium breasts were rated most frequent as attractive (32.7 %), followed by large (24.4 %) and very large (19.1 %) breasts. Further analyses showed that men’s preferences for larger female breasts were significantly associated with a greater tendency to be benevolently sexist, to objectify women, and to be hostile towards women. These results were discussed in relation to feminist theories, which postulate that beauty ideals and practices in contemporary societies serve to maintain the domination of one sex over the other.


Breast size Physical attractiveness Oppressive beliefs Sexism Objectification 


  1. Barber, N. (1995). The evolutionary psychology of physical attractiveness: Sexual selection and human morphology. Ethology and Sociobiology, 16, 395–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bartky, S. L. (1990). Femininity and domination: Studies in the phenomenology of oppression. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Bordo, S. (1993). Unbearable weight: Feminism, western culture and the body. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  4. Buss, D. M. (2003). The evolution of desire (2nd ed.). New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  5. Carter, P. (1996). Breast feeding and the social construction of heterosexuality, or ‘What breasts are really for’. In J. Holland & L. Adkins (Eds.), Sex, sensibility, and the gendered body (pp. 99–119). London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cornelissen, P. L., Hancock, P. J. B., Kiviniemi, V., George, H. R., & Tovée, M. J. (2009). Patterns of eye movements when male and female observers judge female attractiveness, body fat, and waist-to-hip ratio. Evolution and Human Behavior, 30, 417–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dettwyler, K. A. (1995). Beauty and the breast: The cultural context of breastfeeding in the United States. In P. MacAdam & K. A. Dettwyler (Eds.), Breastfeeding: Biocultural perspectives (pp. 167–215). New York: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
  8. Dixson, B. J., Grimshaw, G. M., Linklater, W. L., & Dixson, A. F. (2011). Eye-tracking of men’s preferences for waist-to-hip ratio and breast size of women. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 40, 43–50.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Dixson, B. J., Vasey, P. L., Sagata, K., Sibanda, N., Linklater, W. L., & Dixson, A. F. (2010). Men’s preferences for women’s breast morphology in New Zealand, Samoa, and Papua New Guinea. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 40, 1271–1279.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Dworkin, A. (1974). Woman hating. New York: E. P. Dutton.Google Scholar
  11. Einon, D. (2007). The shaping of women’s bodies: Men’s choice of fertility or heat stress avoidance? In V. Swami & A. Furnham (Eds.), The body beautiful: Evolutionary and sociocultural perspectives (pp. 131–158). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  12. Forbes, G. B., Collinsworth, L. L., Jobe, R. L., Braun, K. D., & Wise, L. M. (2007). Sexism, hostility toward women, and endorsement of beauty ideals and practices: Are beauty ideals associated with oppressive beliefs? Sex Roles, 5, 265–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Forbes, G. B., Jobe, R. L., & Revak, J. A. (2006). Relationships between dissatisfaction with specific body characteristics and the Sociocultural Attitudes Toward Appearance Questionnaire-3 and Objectified Body Consciousness Scale. Body Image, 3, 295–300.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Ford, C. S., & Beach, F. A. (1951). Patterns of sexual behavior. New York: Harper.Google Scholar
  15. Frederickson, B. L., Roberts, T. A., Noll, S. M., Quinn, D. M., & Twenge, J. M. (1998). That swimsuit becomes you: Sex differences in self-objectification, restrained eating, and math performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 269–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Furnham, A., Dias, M., & McClelland, A. (1998). The role of body weight, waist-to-hip ratio, and breast size in judgments of female attractiveness. Sex Roles, 39, 311–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Furnham, A., & Swami, V. (2007). Perceptions of female buttocks and breast size in profile. Social Behavior and Personality, 35, 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Furnham, A., Swami, V., & Shah, K. (2006). Female body correlates of attractiveness and other ratings. Personality and Individual Differences, 41, 443–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gallup, G. G. (1982). Permanent breast enlargement in human female: A sociobiological analysis. Journal of Human Evolution, 19, 111–123.Google Scholar
  20. Gerald, W., & Potvin, L. (2009). Boobs, boxing, and bombs: Problematizing the entertainment of Spike TV. Spaces for Difference, 2, 3–14.Google Scholar
  21. Gitter, A. G., Lomranz, J., Saxe, L., & Bar-Tal, D. (1983). Perception of female physique characteristics by American and Israeli students. Journal of Social Psychology, 121, 7–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1996). The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 491–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gurung, R. A. R., & Chrouser, C. J. (2007). Predicting objectification: Do provocative clothing and observer characteristics matter? Sex Roles, 57, 91–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Harrison, K. (2003). Television viewers’ ideal body proportions: The case of the curvaceously thin woman. Sex Roles, 48, 255–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hill, M. S., & Fischer, A. R. (2008). Examining objectification theory: Lesbian and heterosexual women’s experiences with sexual- and self-objectification. The Counseling Psychologist, 36, 745–776.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Horvath, T. (1981). Physical attractiveness: The influence of selected torso parameters. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 10, 21–24.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Jacobi, L., & Cash, T. F. (1994). In pursuit of the perfect appearance: Discrepancies among self-ideal percepts of multiple physical attributes. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24, 379–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kleinke, C. L., & Staneski, R. (1980). First impressions of female bust size. Journal of Social Psychology, 110, 123–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Koff, E., & Benavage, A. (1998). Breast size perception and satisfaction, body image, and psychological functioning in Caucasian and Asian American college women. Sex Roles, 38, 655–673.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Little, A. C., Jones, B. C., DeBruine, L. M., & Caldwell, C. A. (2011). Social learning and human mate preferences: A potential mechanism for generating and maintaining between-population diversity in attraction. Philosophical Transaction of the Royal Society B, 366, 366–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lonsway, K. A., & Fitzgerald, L. F. (1995). Attitudinal antecedents of rape myth acceptance: A theoretical and empirical re-examination. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 704–711.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lynn, M. (2009). Determinants and consequences of female attractiveness and sexiness: Realistic tests with restaurant waitresses. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 38, 737–745.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Manning, J., Scutt, D., Whitehouse, G., & Leinster, S. (1997). Breast asymmetry and phenotypic quality in women. Evolution and Human Behavior, 18, 223–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Marlowe, F. (1998). The nubility hypothesis: The human breast as an honest signal of residual reproductive value. Human Nature, 9, 263–271.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Martino, W., & Pallotta-Chiarolli, M. (2005). “Being normal is the only way to be”: Adolescents perspectives on gender and school. Sydney: University of New South Wales Press.Google Scholar
  36. Mazur, A. (1986). US trends in feminine beauty and overadaptation. Journal of Sex Research, 22, 281–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Millsted, R., & Frith, H. (2003). Being large-breasted: Women negotiating embodiment. Women’s Studies International Forum, 26, 455–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Pascoe, C. J. (2007). Dude, you’re a fag: Masculinity and sexuality in high school. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  39. Pawłowski, B. (1999). Permanent breasts as a side effect of subcutaneous fat tissue increase in human evolution. Homo, 50, 149–162.Google Scholar
  40. Pond, C. M. (1998). The fats of life. New York: DK Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Rhodes, G. (2006). The evolutionary psychology of facial beauty. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 199–226.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Salska, I., Frederick, D. A., Pawłowski, B., Reilly, A. H., Laird, K. T., & Rudd, N. A. (2008). Conditional mate preferences: Factors influencing preferences for height. Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 203–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Sanchez, D. T., Kiefer, A. K., & Ybarra, O. (2006). Sexual submissiveness in women: Costs for sexual autonomy and arousal. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 512–524.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Seifert, T. (2005). Anthropomorphic characteristics of centerfold models: Trends towards slender figures over time. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 37, 271–274.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Singh, D., & Young, R. K. (1995). Body weight, waist-to-hip ratio, breast size, and hips: Role in judgments of female attractiveness and desirability for relationships. Ethology and Sociobiology, 16, 483–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Smith, K. L., Cornelissen, P. L., & Tovée, M. J. (2007). Color 3D bodies and judgments of human female attractiveness. Evolution and Human Behavior, 28, 48–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Spence, J. T., Helmreich, R., & Stapp, J. (1978). A short version of the Attitudes toward Women Scale (AWS). Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 2, 219–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Strelan, P., & Hargreaves, D. (2005). Women who objectify other women: The vicious cycle of objectification. Sex Roles, 52, 707–712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Swami, V. (2007). The missing arms of Vénus de Milo: Reflections on the science of physical attractiveness. Brighton: Book Guild.Google Scholar
  50. Swami, V. (2008). Methodological and conceptual issues in the science of physical attraction. In I. L. Nillson & W. V. Lindberg (Eds.), Visual perception: New research (pp. 232–256). Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers.Google Scholar
  51. Swami, V. (2011). Love at first sight? Individual differences and the psychology of initial romantic attraction. In T. Chamorro-Premuzic, S. von Stumm, & A. Furnham (Eds.), Handbook of individual differences (pp. 747–772). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  52. Swami, V., & Barrett, S. (2011). British men’s hair colour preferences: An assessment of courtship solicitation and stimulus ratings. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 52, 595–600.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Swami, V., Buchanan, T., Furnham, A., & Tovée, M. J. (2008a). Five-factor personality correlates of perceptions of women’s body sizes. Personality and Individual Differences, 45, 697–699.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Swami, V., Coles, R., Salem, N., Wilson, E., Wyrozumska, K., & Furnham, A. (2010a). Oppressive beliefs at play: Associations among beauty ideals and practices and individual differences in sexism, objectification of others, and media exposure. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 34, 365–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Swami, V., Einon, D., & Furnham, A. (2006). An investigation of the leg-to-body ratio as a human aesthetic criterion. Body Image, 3, 317–323.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Swami, V., & Furnham, A. (2008). The psychology of physical attraction. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  57. Swami, V., Furnham, A., Balakumar, N., Williams, C., Canaway, K., & Stanistreet, D. (2008b). Factors influencing preferences for height: A replication and extension. Personality and Individual Differences, 45, 395–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Swami, V., Furnham, A., Chamorro-Premuzic, T., Akbar, K., Gordon, N., Harris, T.,…,Tovée, M. J. (2010b). More than skin deep? Personality information influences men’s ratings of the attractiveness of women’s body sizes. The Journal of Social Psychology, 150, 628–647.Google Scholar
  59. Swami, V., & Harris, A. S. (2012). Evolutionary perspectives on physical appearance. In T. Cash (Ed.), Encylopedia of body image and human appearance (pp. 404–411). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  60. Swami, V., Jones, J., Einon, D., & Furnham, A. (2009). Men’s preferences for women’s profile waist-to-hip ratio, breast size, and ethnic group in Britain and South Africa. British Journal of Psychology, 100, 313–325.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. Swami, V., Miller, R., Furnham, A., Penke, L., & Tovée, M. J. (2008c). The influence of men’s sexual strategies on perceptions of women’s bodily attractiveness, health and fertility. Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 98–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Swami, V., & Salem, N. (2011). The evolutionary psychology of human beauty. In V. Swami (Ed.), Evolutionary psychology: A critical introduction (pp. 131–182). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  63. Swami, V., & Tovée, M. J. (2009). Big beautiful women: The body size preferences of male fat admirers. Journal of Sex Research, 46, 89–96.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. Swami, V., & Voracek, M. (in press). Associations among men’s sexist attitudes, objectification of women, and their own drive for muscularity. Psychology of Men and Masculinity.Google Scholar
  65. Tantleff-Dunn, S. (2001). Breast and chest size: Ideals and stereotypes through the 1990 s. Sex Roles, 45, 231–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Tantleff-Dunn, S. (2002). Biggest isn’t always best: The effect of breast size on perceptions of women. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32, 2253–2265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Tantleff-Dunn, S., & Thompson, J. K. (2000). Breast and chest size satisfaction: Relation to overall body image and self-esteem. Eating Disorders, 8, 241–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Thompson, E. H., Pleck, J. H., & Ferrera, D. L. (1992). Men and masculinities: Scales for masculinity ideology and masculinity-related constructs. Sex Roles, 27, 573–607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Thornhill, R., & Grammer, K. (1999). The body and face of woman: One ornament that signals quality? Evolution and Human Behavior, 20, 105–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Tovée, M. J., & Cornelissen, P. L. (2001). Female and male perceptions of female physical attractiveness in front-view and profile. British Journal of Psychology, 92, 391–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Ward, L. M., Merriwether, A., & Caruthers, A. (2006). Breasts are for men: Media, masculinity ideologies, and men’s beliefs about women’s bodies. Sex Roles, 55, 703–714.Google Scholar
  72. Wiggins, J. S., Wiggins, N., & Conger, J. C. (1968). Correlates of heterosexual somatic preference. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 10, 82–90.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. Wolf, N. (1990). The beauty myth. London: Chatto & Windus.Google Scholar
  74. Zelazniewicz, A. M., & Pawłowski, B. (2010). Female breast size attractiveness for men as a function of sociosexual orientation (restricted versus unrestricted). Archives of Sexual Behavior, 40, 1129–1135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of WestminsterLondonUK
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyHELP University CollegeKuala LumpurMalaysia
  3. 3.School of PsychologyNewcastle UniversityNewcastle-upon-TyneUK

Personalised recommendations