Hi, I do have curves caused by waist being narrow whereas hips being wide (comparatively speaking).
The reason my statistics does not SEEM too bad is, (I think) this: The measurements for waist and hips are circumferences. That means they include both the "left-right" and "front-back" measurements (I am sure there are better/more accurate descriptions; but I hope I am getting myself understood).
If someone has a (comparatively speaking) large measurement for hips, it can be for two reasons: a. either the hips are big in a "left-right" way (wide but thin buttocks), or b. they are big in a "front-back" way (not wide, but fat buttocks).
If
a, it will contribute to a look of wide hips. If
b, it may not contribute to such a look, but the hips might look fuller in silhouette.
I think my situation is a and yours could be b.
Of course, another factor could be that people might have different perceptions of what an hourglass figure should be like. Some people might think that only a very pronounced curve (as a result of waist-hips difference in width) could be classified as this shape. For others, a less pronounced curve would warrant the body shape being classified as such, especially when one is talking about male/female differences in body shape.
At any rate, my figure is definitely not typically male-like, that is for sure.
Quote from: switchy on September 18, 2012, 06:44:30 AM
I do not get it, 29÷33 = 0.88, which is very far from hourglass and in the healthy and normal range for males. My WHR is far below yours and yet no hourglass.
Have a look at :
http://www.topendsports.com/testing/tests/WHR.htm