Share this article on:

Redefining the Ideal Buttocks: A Population Analysis

Gaxiola-García, Miguel Angel M.D.; Lugo-Beltrán, Ignacio M.D.

Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery: April 2017 - Volume 139 - Issue 4 - p 1023e
doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000003199
Letters

Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Department, Centro Médico Nacional 20 de Noviembre ISSSTE, México City, México

Correspondence to Dr. Gaxiola-García, Centro Médico Nacional 20 de Noviembre Edificio E, Félix Cuevas 540, Colonia Del Valle, Delegación Benito Juárez 03229, Mexico, drgaxiola@gmail.com

Back to Top | Article Outline

Sir:

We have read the article published recently by Dr. Wong et al.1 The authors intent was to define patterns of ideal buttocks aesthetics in a most innovative way, taking into account preferences of an anonymous lay male population by their choices over a series of digitalized photographs.

We consider it has been a great asset of the authors taking into account cultural differences in the appreciation of beauty. Although only one respondent is from our country, ethnicity of our common patient population has been included (11.8 percent).

Of note, to clarify an aspect pointed out by the authors, although in our previous report presumed aesthetic ideals were set on beautiful model bodies in photographs, subsequently, when these ideals were put into practice at our department, none of our patients was a model; all of them were upper middle class women, mainly housewives already with children. The only atypical trait was possibly a tendency toward healthier nutritional and exercise habits.2,3

In our opinion and experience, aesthetic canons evolve as a result of shifts in cultural values. As a matter of fact, mainstream media role models have shifted preferences to a wider hip. Indeed, regional patterns also exist in our country, with northernmost colleagues performing even lateral hip implants in contrast with a slender appearance that is sought in the central region of the country. Of course, patient size and body habitus must be emphasized to avoid generalizations; as a rule of thumb, aiming at projecting the central aspect of the buttock is of utmost importance, always preserving proportion.

As the authors point out, and like everything on earth, beauty paradigms evolve or even shift completely from time to time. Always having safety as the main value, it is part of our task as plastic surgeons counterbalancing that which is most desirable to the patient with that which is permitted in the context of a natural and sophisticated appearance.

Back to Top | Article Outline

DISCLOSURE

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest related to any aspect treated in the text. There were no royalties nor economic benefits.

Miguel Angel Gaxiola-García, M.D.

Ignacio Lugo-Beltrán, M.D.

Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Department

Centro Médico Nacional 20 de Noviembre ISSSTE

México City, México

Back to Top | Article Outline

REFERENCES

1. Wong WW, Motakef S, Lin Y, Gupta SCRedefining the ideal buttocks: A population analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2016;137:1739–1747.
2. Cuenca-Guerra R, Lugo-Beltran IBeautiful buttocks: Characteristics and surgical techniques. Clin Plast Surg. 2006;33:321–332.
3. Cuenca-Guerra R, Quezada JWhat makes buttocks beautiful? A review and classification of the determinants of gluteal beauty and the surgical techniques to achieve them. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2004;28:340–347.
Back to Top | Article Outline

GUIDELINES

Letters to the Editor, discussing material recently published in the Journal, are welcome. They will have the best chance of acceptance if they are received within 8 weeks of an article’s publication. Letters to the Editor may be published with a response from the authors of the article being discussed. Discussions beyond the initial letter and response will not be published. Letters submitted pertaining to published Discussions of articles will not be printed. Letters to the Editor are not usually peer reviewed, but the Journal may invite replies from the authors of the original publication. All Letters are published at the discretion of the Editor.

Letters submitted should pose a specific question that clarifies a point that either was not made in the article or was unclear, and therefore a response from the corresponding author of the article is requested.

Authors will be listed in the order in which they appear in the submission. Letters should be submitted electronically via PRS’ enkwell, at www.editorialmanager.com/prs/.

We reserve the right to edit Letters to meet requirements of space and format. Any financial interests relevant to the content of the correspondence must be disclosed. Submission of a Letter constitutes permission for the American Society of Plastic Surgeons and its licensees and asignees to publish it in the Journal and in any other form or medium.

The views, opinions, and conclusions expressed in the Letters to the Editor represent the personal opinions of the individual writers and not those of the publisher, the Editorial Board, or the sponsors of the Journal. Any stated views, opinions, and conclusions do not reflect the policy of any of the sponsoring organizations or of the institutions with which the writer is affiliated, and the publisher, the Editorial Board, and the sponsoring organizations assume no responsibility for the content of such correspondence.

The Journal requests that individuals submit no more than five (5) letters to Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery in a calendar year.

©2017American Society of Plastic Surgeons