The episode unpacks the origins of sizing systems that shape everything from our clothes to our furniture. The story begins in mid-20th century America, where anthropometric studies were conducted to collect data on body measurements. These studies—initially aimed at creating better-fitting military uniforms—focused on specific demographics, primarily white men and a limited sample of women. The result? A dataset that defined the “average” human body but was deeply biased and exclusionary.

What struck me was how this narrow dataset became the foundation for standardization across industries. The proportions and measurements derived from these studies still influence modern design, even though they reflect only a fraction of the global population. This “average” has been codified into the objects we interact with daily, creating a system that marginalizes anyone who doesn’t fit into its parameters.

For example, clothing sizes, which we’ve all struggled with at some point, are wildly inconsistent because they stem from these flawed beginnings. Even tools, chairs, and car seats owe their dimensions to this skewed data. Listening to Butt Stuff made me realize how much of the design world is rooted in a singular, exclusionary perspective—a perspective that perpetuates discomfort, frustration, and even discrimination.

Emilia’s suggestion sparked a deeper awareness in me: where does the idea of the “average” come from, and why does it persist? Her encouragement to look beyond Eurocentric perspectives and question the origins of standards was transformative. It reframed my research, shifting my focus from gender alone to intersectionality and the broader implications of design that fails to account for human diversity.

The concept of “average” was never neutral. It was created to serve specific purposes—managing populations, optimizing production, and reducing costs. But these purposes often excluded the realities of most people’s lives. As Emilia pointed out during our conversations, everyone relates to objects, but we all experience them differently. What’s ergonomic for one body can be inaccessible for another, making standardization not just a design choice but a mechanism of exclusion.

Radiolab’s Butt Stuff episode didn’t just explain where average comes from; it revealed how deeply embedded this flawed concept is in our world. It also validated my research’s core critique: that design is political, and challenging it requires unpacking the hidden histories of the systems we interact with every day.

I decided to read this book because I also wanted to understand the implications my research claim has on the bodies in a more existencial way of seeing our relationship with our own bodies. This book starts understanding the implications of asking What is body?

The author challenges the idea of the body as a stable, closed entity, proposing instead that bodies are fluid and permeable. She argues that bodies don’t just exist in spaces but also interact with them in complex ways, influenced by cultural norms and social expectations. She addresses how different identities interact with bodily boundaries. Race, sexuality, gender and class influence bodily experiences, suggesting that the fluidity of boundaries is felt differently depending on one’s social positioning.

I really enjoyed reading briefly her research on bodily fluids (such as sweat, tears, and breast milk) and men. She critiques the taboos around bodily functions, showing how they reflect cultural anxieties about control and purity.

• Bodies and their socially encoded meanings can be understood only in specific spatial, temporal and cultureal contexts

As suggested by Tim, I’ve been reading about Anthropometry, which is is the study of how to measure human’s bodies. There are tons of manuals and research surrounding this topic. In the book Anthropometry: Human Body Measurements and How to Use Them by Beata Mrgalska and Waldemar Karwowsk (2024), the authors ackowledge that there will never be an average human in Anthropometry. They say: there is no such thing as an average human or a 50th percentil human.

They also mention how there’s a lot of popultation sampling problems and how antropometric database is quite complicated to be fully standarized, so they say it’s necesary to compromise since the lack of data:

“The cost and logistical difficulties involved in such surverys will probably limit them to the more prosperous nations for the forseable future so that the development of a truly global anthropometric database is unlikely for many years to come.”

This book helped me visualize: there’s an akwnoledgement on the gap but here’s also an aknoledgement on how it’s easier utilizing incomplete data base, since it’s what exists. As Caroline Perez Criado mentions on her book, theres in gener a lack of data that faciliates like thought only for men.

This book has a focus on the belief that it is possible and desirble to replace judgemenr, adquired by personal experience and talent with numerical indicators of comparative performance based upon standarized data or metrics.

It’s focused organization and project management, and not really is trully connected to my own project but he discusses how an over-reliance on metrics can lead to rigid standardizations, which end up “invisible and detrimental to individual needs.” This aligns with my exploration of how design standards based on “average” bodies creates a gap on how people experience their own life.

In summer I had the (amazing) chance to have the time to read different books and authors that helped me create my own criteria through my journey. My main research area had key words such as design, gender, justice, sexism, misogyny and they were all referenced in my essay of Unit 3.

Now, in Unit 4 I’ve found a new perspective into my research, which is the approach of design from the lens of the average body and it’s limitations. I’ve asked help to Tim Arscott, our librarian. He has helped me to narrow my search and gave me a list of articles and books. I’ve also started my own search and these are some of the new articles I’m finding relevant to this fase, considering that I need loads of contextualization material for my evaluative report.

These are some of the main articles and books I’m working with at the moment and a little description of why it’s important to my research.

1. The Average Man Does Not Exist by Johan Molenbroek
2. Anthropometry: the study of the measurement of human bodies and ergonomics
3. The Tyranny of metrics by Jerry Z. Muller
4. The End of Average by Todd Rose
5. Mismatch: how inclusion shapes design
6. Bodies: exploring fluid boundaries

Evidence of contact with Tim Arscott.