Women's body structures have changed

Anyone else notice how the structures in general of women's bodies have changed over the past 100 years? Look at a women in a swimsuit or dress in the 1930s and place it next to a woman in swimsuit or dress today, there are more difference than just the change in styles and clothes and swimsuits. Womens' bodies had a more soft roundness and not as much defined definition, put some 1920s or 1930s pictures right next to some 21st century pictures and you can see overall in general differences in the shoulders structures, curves, hips, legs, even facial structure. It's less soft looking, more muscle definition in their legs today, and shoulders a bit less soft and more defined. As you know their definitions today aren't ripped, they're just more defined than back then. And something softer looking about their faces back then too (some of that though may be differences in facial expressions since modern women carry more assertiveness). Who else has noticed this?

Also, I have seen YouTube videos of real flapper girls dancing in the 1920s and 1930s, and then I saw some modern videos of girls today at a flapper themed party dressed up and dancing 20s and 30s style to 20s and 30s style music, and I could tell the differences, not just in comparing the old and modern picture video qualities, but I could tell the differences just in the differences between the old and modern women's body structures and faces.

There's differences in men too. You ever seen a man considered muscular in old films or photos? They looked big and developed but didn't have the ripped definition muscular men got today.

Voting Results
90% Normal
Based on 10 votes (9 yes)
Help us keep this site organized and clean. Thanks!
[ Report Post ]
Comments ( 14 )
  • NashamaTheWeird

    That's because of a combination of factors. First off, there is a higher obesity rate today than there used to be, second of all fitness regimens today are more intense, third of all, women wore different sorts of undergarments back then than they do now, fourth of all, cosmetic surgery was not as widespread, and fifth of all (and perhaps most importantly) beauty standards have changed and as a result so have the body types featured in movies and advertisements.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • Ellenna

    Some were, some weren't and what's attractive at any given time is culturally determined

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • That's sort of true, women were more natural, and looked more pure, in the sense that they didn't get tatoos and their facial expressions helped show how their attitudes had the more old fashioned softness and less assertiveness. Also, a lot more women wore dresses then.

    In some ways, they're more attractive today. Because of better body definition, women have sexier legs today. And for guys who find it very important, women wear sexier clothing today showing off alot more skin.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • Celebrities did look more natural back in old Hollywood before they all started getting nose jobs, facelifts, and botox injections all over their face, on their lips, etc.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • Ummitsme

    Women have discovered the gym since then. Yoga pants/leggings and Instagram have driven female fitness to a whole new level.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • SIYB

    You know why? They had different beauty routines dude. I can agree people's faces are different from then. But I honestly think it's because people are more mixed now. People started having sex with other races and white people didn't just have white babies anymore. But they wore corsets, even in the 30's. That was a thing that was still very relevant. It just wasn't as extreme as the standards in the 1800's and back. Bras were shaped different and didn't have padding for awhile so that's why most boobs were small or pointy. They had very bizzare exercise routines for women because they had to stay looking feminine. And they also had bizzare makeup and hair routines as well. Beauty and beauty routines just aren't the same anymore.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
      -
    • e51pegasi

      Better nutrition today may have a part to play as well.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
    • I think also that evolution is continuously making each new generation structured bone and flesh shaped slightly different from the generation before it. Look at people's facial bone structure, and women's shoulder bone structure in the 1930s compared to today, some of it is purely due to bone structure. That combined with all the other stuff I was saying in my comment before this one.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
        -
      • _Mehhhh_

        Evolution doesn't work that quickly, and interracial relationship rates (while high) are not SO high that everyone or even a majority are mixed.

        I put the changes down to lifestyle and surgery, for the most part. Both men and women are taller now on average than they were then, and fashion and beauty trends are different. Surgery is more common in both of the only-two genders, men work out harder while women have more diet fads, womens' hairstyles have got longer and men wear more facial hair.

        Comment Hidden ( show )
          -
        • I know that evolution is slow, but every generation has had those very little changes. There are websites that have claimed proof that women's average breast sizes have gotten a little bigger over the past 60-70 years. Of course, not all websites which claim proof automatically means that there's really been proof. I still think that there may have been tiny evolutionary changes which has made facial structures just that little bit different from a few generations ago. But, that is pretty minimal for the most part over only 50-100 years. You are right about alot of the differences in facial structures are probably more to do with the gradual process of mixed babies over the past 40 years. I'm saying 40 years because before the 1970s, mixed couples were still rare.

          Comment Hidden ( show )
        • That's true about surgury and procedures today which so many celebrities today get, which is of course another reason looks today are different. You didn't have celebrities getting all these facelifts and botox injections in the old days.

          Comment Hidden ( show )
      • Ellenna

        You can't judge such things without taking into account who is being depicted: obviously photographers and filmmakers are going to focus on people who fit the current stereotype of what is attractive

        Comment Hidden ( show )
    • How do you know it's a dude who posted this, SIYB? You are right about what you were saying about more mixed race babies being born over time and that making a difference. I also agree with different exercise routines today. Today they're more intense and specifically developed for shaping various body parts, which I'm sure helps explain better body definition today. That and more specified types of diets now. The faces are different I think between different makeup and like I said in my post about different more assertive facial expressions in women today, since women are more assertive than 50 to 100 years ago. I don't think the clothes, like corsets, bras, etc. have much to do with the changes I was talking about, because I was talking about changes in body structure with the body parts that were showing then verses body parts showing now, such as legs, shoulders, etc. That's why I was talking about matching 30s swimsuit pictures to today swimsuit pictures. Womens' shoulders and legs were showing then and showing now in my comparison pictures.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
    • NashamaTheWeird

      The beauty routines were totally different! Women in the 1930s would shave off their eyebrows or pluck them extremely thin and draw them in in a pencil thin, half moon shape. That alone would have had a huge impact on the appearance of the face.

      Comment Hidden ( show )