If you check out the "how to" books in the photography section of any good book store, you will find specialty "technique" items on a number of categories.

You will find "how to Photograph nudes," becaue it's "artistic" and therefor permissible. (Including male nudes has only recently become truly permissible.) You will not find much of anything in these books about how to choose your model by body type - because if you can handle (not intending any pun) the subject properly - it doesn't really matter.

You will rarely find much of anything on "cheesecake" photography, possibly, although debatably, the only category where the model is as important as the "rendering."

You should find a number of guides to "glamour photography," all of which will make ONE key point - that a good glamour photograph must appeal to women. That's the whole lesson plan in a nutshell.

Fashion models are generally "slender" often to the point of anorexia, because the target "audience" is female. They must be "attractive enough" to be "not distracting," and may even be "sexy" to a point - if that's the kind of stuff they're showing; but they must not be sensual in any sense of the word.

If you look at old-timey female stars of the legitimate movie trade, the majority of them were, in fact, quite "sensual;" (and often quite jiggly?) so that they played a real tight-rope game of being non-threatening by virtue of "having great character" - or were limited to roles where they suffered great tragedies. Think Doris Day, Kim Novak, Debbie Reynolds in the first category, and maybe Anna Magnani in the other.

With the trend in more current movies and TV toward "action" plots where "the girl does everything" (she may have a conscience, but that's not quite the same thing as character) the trend is back to the skinny, non-sensual actress. The extreme example might be Ally McBeal, which would have been nothing but high-dollar smut pornography if Ally had a figure. An "attraction" to one of the "unjigglies" probably is as much "star cult" as sensual.

If what you're really interested in is what attracts guys, it's basically what's inside - especially if what's inside is visible, believable, pure unbridled, single minded lust for your guy. Feed him enough of aphrodesiac ego and he'll want you - no matter what you look like within reason (but cuddly is nice too).

(Visibly lusting for someone else's guy will often make a whole lot of people "not like you," usually - eventually - including the guy.)

Of course - your mileage may vary.

John