You are here

Fashion models with and without make-up

The following pictures are taken from a Dutch site.  Note the masculinization of the women; make-up serves to make them look a little more feminine.  The Dutch site has 300-plus comments.  Many commentators, most if not all women, point out the masculinization of these women and some wonder how these women got to be models.  When I was a kid, I was stumped myself.  Regular readers of this site should know the answer very well.

Shown from top to bottom: Rhea Henderson, Caroline Ribiero, Missy Rayder, Devon Aoki, Emily Sandberg, Eva Herziogova, Naomi Campbell, Adriana Lima, Yfke Sturm and Sophie Dahl.  Click image for larger version.

Fashion models with and without make-up; Rhea Henderson, Caroline Ribiero, Missy Rayder, Devon Aoki, Emily Sandberg, Eva Herziogova, Naomi Campbell, Adriana Lima, Yfke Sturm and Sophie Dahl



Exactly what you said. No comments for the obvious fact that these women are naturally ugly (both before and after make up)

Masculine, ugly, freckly, bony...

If these women aren't chosen to be fashion models based on their natural, feminine, beautiful looks, then what are the criteria based on? Hmm...suspicious...

These are women?!

Models are not picked from the average population for being "beautiful" or "femenine" they are selected because they have a particular look that translates better in photography and runway shows.The fashion industry itself is not necesarily about beauty ,is about impact,attitude and controversy.

I understand that the majority of people are atracted to more clasicaly beautiful women ,that are more "femenine" so to speak.

But majority ,meaning the average joe/jane ,knows nothing about fashion ,or photography ,or has a particularly refined taste...

Majorities being made out of average people,have average ,ordinary tastes.

The fashion industry concentrates on the population that can afford its luxury items,wich have a more refined and particular taste and want to stand out from the average working or middle class person.Therefore women of higher social status percieve beauty and style in very different way the average woman does,so do men.

Men of higher social status wont be attracted by the same type of women the average joe preffers.Therefore pretendig this people should be adressed using average or ordinary women as models,makes no sense.
Models serve the sole purpose of looking a particular way on pictures or fitting into sample sizes (clothing samples just look better and are easier to make in certain sizes).Designers simply cannot go thru all the hassle of fitting each model individualy to make the best out of their shapes.If a designer were to have 15 voluptuous women as with noticeably differents shapes and fitting needs it would make all the process just ridiculously tedius.Plus how would a designer solve an emergency situation ,example,a model gets sick and cant do the job, then who will fit into that outfit???Are they supossed to magically fitted all over again or fin a girl with the same exact curves?(having in mind they would be ideally voluptous and ultra "femenine") Voluptous,or average bodies(wich are not the same of course) have too wide of a range of shapes... in oposition to the typical fashion model bodies, who tend to be more similar due to lack of curves.
Thin fashion models are a necesity of the fashion industry for more than one reasson.
While a voluptous model ,would be the femenine "ideal" it would complicate the process to an unpractical extreme.
Comercial models are closer to the average person and are often used to market diverse products that are not fashion or luxury items (such as fragrances)
The tipical ,average ,ordinary "hot" girl ,would simply not appeal to those of higher status and an aquired taste.

Adrian: Fashion designers pick models that appeal to them. The central tendency of their choices are at odds with majority preferences, including the heterosexual rich elite (both men and women). You have cited no evidence that rich heterosexual elite have a different taste in women compared to the average person. I have cited plenty of evidence regarding people's aesthetic preferences, and in these studies it has not been documented that upper class individuals prefer more masculine-looking women. The fact is that the dominant designers, male homosexuals to be more precise, have preferences at odds with the heterosexual majority.

Of course, high-fashion models are expected to have a restricted range of physique variation because the designers would rather have them fit into their designs. I have addressed this since the very beginning, but a restricted range could be anywhere along the spectrum of physique variation. Using slender and feminine women within the 5-foot-6 to 5-foot-8 range would work very well, too. It should be obvious why the skeletal proportions of high-fashion models are generally not feminine.

Eva and Naomi are older and their heydays are behind them so they have no more baby fat reserves to cover up their angular features.

The high fashion world stopped exclusively promoting classical, commercially appealing beauties at the end of the supermodel era. Eva Herzigova and Naomi Campbell are throwbacks from that era but every other model here is a representative of the different aesthetic direction that the fashion world took.

Of course you will say that the supermodels were all "masculine" and people only thought they were beautiful because they were famous. I wonder how they became famous in the first place. You may say that designers heavily promoted them but are these current models any less promoted? Why are the high fashion models of today unable to reach the same heights of fame as Linda Evangelista and Christy Turlington?

I think the supermodel era ended when people got bored of constantly seeing a glamazon army in the catwalks and on the magazine covers. Popular culture also played a part when grunge music and style came to the forefront. Designers took their inspiration from this new movement and when they incorporated these ideas into their new collections they found that the glamazons could not represent them. Supermodels could never be anything but glamazons so when fashion needed them to be something other than glamorous they couldn't deliver. They couldn't do grunge and they certainly couldn't do heroin chic.

Models like Kate Moss, Shalom Harlow and Amber Valletta came to the forefront because they could do anything. They could be styled to look like a junkie or they could be elegant and even glamorous. They ushered in a new era where models had to have an edge. They have to have a certain amount of versatility to able to last.

You would surprised to see how some of those models you posted can transform into anything with the right styling. I have seen Rayder, Sturm and Ribeiro look very glamorous and I’ve seen them look very hard and mean. Will the "feminine" models in your "alternative fashion industry" demonstrate the same versatility? Will designers be able to go for any kind of look they want without it looking “put on” or unnatural? I don't think so.

You almost make it sound as if there is some gay designer conspiracy where they want to only promote “manly” models and rob the white, hetero men of this world of some greatly deserved erections. The designers and the modeling agencies want models that can “be anything”. Your “feminine” models may be able to look sexually appealing to some straight men but can they do anything else?

Danielle: As young individuals, Naomi Campbell did not have angular facial features, but Eva Herzigova did. The reasons for the supermodels’ fame are straightforward. The supermodels were a predominantly 1980s to mid-1990s phenomenon. During this period, there was no internet in the beginning, and it hadn’t caught on much by the mid-1990s. So what the public saw was very glamorous, made-up, air-brushed pictures of the supermodels, sometimes in carefully selected poses, and the models were heavily promoted by the industry. There were no alternative industries heavily promoting feminine beauty. So why wouldn’t these women become famous?

The fashion world did change. The supermodels at their peak were too heavy for the tastes of the homosexuals (in relation to your reference to heroin chic), who wanted the models to look more like boys in their early adolescence, but the process of shifting the norms among models takes time and this process would be facilitated by increasing tolerance of homosexuality on the part of the public. You make it sound as if the public’s preferences determined who would be supermodels and the public’s boredom with them ended the supermodel era when the facts are that the homosexuals would have a harder time passing off more young-boyish-looking women as supermodels, especially with the rise of the internet, where candids of the models would be spread all over the net and people would leave all sorts of nasty comments about their looks in blogs and forums.

You talk about models needing “a certain amount of versatility to able to last.” There is no need to use make-up, breast implants, carefully-selected poses and airbrushing to make a masculine model look feminine; one could simply use a feminine model. Similarly, if one needed a masculine-looking model, why use analogous procedures to make a feminine model look masculine? Why not just use a masculine model? Why not use an attractive woman who is in the middle of the masculine-feminine range so that she can be more easily made to look more masculine or more feminine instead of leaning toward a central tendency that is clearly toward the masculine side of average? Your comment also ignores many scenarios where feminine models would be most appropriate yet masculine ones are used by the industry. And, do the homosexuals need models to last? No. Only a few big names continue to do high-fashion modeling well into their twenties; for most others it is over if their hips grow too wide and they start growing breasts. With the homosexuals increasing choosing more slender women, a very large proportion of the models have been coming from the impoverished Eastern European nations because these poor girls would be more willing to starve themselves compared to the generally better off Western European/white American girls, and there is a high turnover rate among them because the supply is greater than the demand, and the homosexuals want the ones who like boys in their early adolescence, a look that is more difficult to maintain with increasing age.

I have never portrayed a gay designer conspiracy to rob heterosexual men of what pleases them. The homosexuals are simply selecting models to suit their tastes.

Your hypothesis on why supermodels lost popularity does not convince me. How has the Internet affected the popularity of fashion models? Are you saying that because the public has more access to candid photographs of fashion models they lost interest in them? I really don't buy that considering that supermodels like Cindy Crawford were regular tabloid fodder in their heydays and they were heavily photographed. I thought you were complaining about a lack of outlets that promoted "feminine" beauty. Judging by your attractive women section it seems that there still aren't very many outlets that promote beautiful "feminine" women.

I was not trying to make it seem like the general public was responsible for the decline of the supermodel era. I think they gradually lost interest in the lives of the supermodels when they started to retire from modeling. The people in the insular high fashion world were the ones who got tired of the supermodel look. When the supermodels got older and retired they weren't replaced with other glamazons. They were replaced with women like Erin O’Connor, Stella Tennant and Kirsten Owen. The public liked the looks of the supermodels in general. You cannot prove that they didn't. It is fairly obvious that the heroin chic models lacked the classic good looks that the supermodels possessed and the general public admired.

You think the models are made up to look "feminine" when they are only made up to look glamorous or elegant. High fashion models rarely get breast implants. You are thinking of VS models. Most of the regular VS models don't do regular high fashion work and those that do don't have boob jobs. You have argued that "feminine" women cannot be made to look "masculine" at any angle so why should modeling agencies scout girls who can only sport one look? You have argued that "masculine" women can be made to look "feminine" with the use of lighting, posing and makeup so why wouldn't scouts choose girls who can be anything and therefore make more money for the agency? You are ignoring the role that modeling agencies play in the success and the promotion of models. They are the people in the fashion industry who want their models to have long lucrative careers. You are right that only a few models last well into their twenties but their agents often play a large role in the success and longevity of a model.

if u coverup the right side and just look down the left lane, it looks like a bunch of army recruits!

I agree with Adrian's comment somewhat. Birds of a feather tend to flock together.

Also, I always thought that television shows and movies were specifically picked due to the demands of the general population. Someone who used to work in the media told me this. The same goes for people who are conscious of a higher brand of beauty and taste.

I would not date a guy who wears football jerseys and drinks beer, because that's just not me. I suspect that most men of higher class and taste wouldn't date a women who is what we call "white trash." He might sleep with her, maybe, but not date her.

Erik, please stop do such a thing. the women you posted I saw them with my own eyes, face to face and they are beauty. you picture are fake. if I could post the pictures I have you will see they are prettier than the women you state.

Models are chosen for having a "blank canvas face" meaning no natural beauty

hello, if many of you females, pulled your hair back just the same, stipped yourself of makeup, gave a blank stare, had your photo taken and cropped in the same manner... you would more than likely look the same... or worse.

its their androgynous traits that account for their versatility and success

You have to admit that Adrianna Lima is very beautiful before AND after makeup. She looks very feminine.

Male and female both are human? got nose, mouth, eyes and heart the same. with photoshoping, camera teahnic, makeup etc. u would make the different person on the picture. I find all of them are look ugly on your pictures but I see all of those fashion models look beautifull on the other pitures outside this site. I think all of them look feminine however they are not that super-beautifull but I they are quite beautifull for my standard because I sure in this world has a lot of people with dispoportion face. you can try visit the country like sudan, congo, papau new guinea or some where in south east asia. I know there are a lot of people that look terrible than those fashion models much. It's not their fault and it's because the enveroment where they are living. by the way I don't find those fashion models are masculine even they are not that gorgeous. I assume the person who say those girls are masculine would be fell from being masculine males because he even couldn't recognize which one is male ? which one is female? :) those ugly pictures of the fashion models above are the result of light condition, makeup, photoshoping.

More of fahion models above.

About Avon Aoki, it's like I said before on this site that the japanese has very strong character of inner eyelids fold, also chinesse. but as I observe more of chinese have bigger eyes than japanese. this due to china is big and has many tribes. but the most as I have seen, the people part south east asian- caucasian and the people part native american Indian-caucasian tend to look 85-100 percent caucasian. some original native american Indian in canada already look like euresian people (ussr.) awhile some origianl native south east asian people already look like Uzbekistani or central asian. that's the reason why native american part aucasian and south east asian part caucasian tend to look 100 caucasian.

Avon Aoki isn't look like caucasian but she looks okay, however she isn't pretty in my openion but she is feminine.

Naomi Campbell is truly beautiful bot with and without makeup.

the pic of adrianna Lima looks better without makeup

These women are not all ugly...especially Adriana Lima, you can not say that she is not beautiful.

cool. you soo should put makeup on everyday rather than leave it till the last minute

To be fair, Devon Aoki, Naomi Campbell and Adriana Lima look fine, they are still clearly female even without makeup, they do not look significantly masculinsed.

But the rest of them look like men, maybe some of them are even attractive to women!

Rhea Henderson, Missy Ryder and Eva Herziogova stand out the most masculine

Although here is one such place where they don't agree with this site:

I just saw the movie "War" and OMG!! Devon looks so hot in it. Having a look at her here without make up, is well, scary!

First, "Eastern European" nations aren't impoverished --- that's not only a stretch, but it reeks of worldly ignorance.. While those in the Russian sphere of influence are certainly economically less prosperous at the moment than their Western counterparts, and would consider forms of income other's wouldn't as readily, the word "impoverished" stirs images concocted by the American Cold War propaganda machine whose aim was to discredit the Soviets. The truth of course was that no one in the Eastern Block was homeless because all were guaranteed housing by the state. The divide between rich and poor did not exist for the most part. In short, just because the economy is doing poorly doesn't mean the populace is in Somalia-mode. We're talking about Europe here, not Darfur or Calcutta. Did it occur to anyone that maybe the reason many models hail from said reason is because there is a greater number of women there that meet the criteria needed to be a model? Sorry guys, but Nigerians do really run better than Joe the Plumber from Arkansas.

That being said, there is no doubt that homosexual designers exert some influence over the models which are chosen. To what degree, I'm not sure. Models who are androgynous seems to be more versatile for photography and fashion modeling. The sexually ambiguous nature of many models today allows for them to be made more masculine or feminine using makeup as needed. On the other hand, I have a suspicion that a restrained femininity, not masculinity, seems more resistant to age-related problems, such as sagging of facial tissue. Wrinkles are less of a problem with makeup and photoshop.

really, after watching anyhting like that I come to think: thanks god, cosmetic was invented! no wonder these firms are so prosperous: just think how many products are used every day by women NOT to look like the models above. as for the masculinisation, it's really sad, but present time women are really not so feminine as they used to be( and it's sad. forthermore, it has many other negative consequences (have read a lot on the topic at different blogs and books (download mainly from and each piece really gives food for thought

Has makeup honestly made any of these women appear any more feminine?

In all honesty no. People say that make up can make someone look more feminine, but in my opinion that is not very true.

What effect does high estrogen levels have on the face? It largely effects the bone structure and perhaps the skin. Other than that, everything else is due to genetics.

All the makeup did for these women was even out their skin tones. It also made some of their eyelashes and lips to appear fuller. Otherwise it didn't do much.

Fuller lips and eyelashes are rarely drastically changed by high estrogen levels. These features depend more on genetics. For example, a blonde haired blue eyed woman will rarely have extremely full dark eyelashes. Just because she needs makeup doesn't mean she is trying to look more feminine, just more attractive. There are many other factors to being attractive other than femininity.

Makeup will often make someone look more attractive, but not more feminine. I actually think that certain hairstyles have more an affect on making someone appear more feminine than makeup. Hairstyles can cover sharp glonial angles, cheekbones, etc. However, makeup only evens out skin tone and adds color where it needs to be added. Although feminine women will tend to have nicer skin, poutier lips, and rosy cheeks, in the end genetics has a higher effect on this than pure hormone levels. I have met many feminine women with uneven skin tone or acne, and many masculine women with naturally beautiful skin and no acne.

Now, one can argue that certain makeup can hide shadows and "soften" the face up. This is not true. Shadows are shadows. Makeup can appear the skin underneath the shadow to look lighter, however the effect is generally small and not very drastic. It would be unoticable. A woman with sunken in eyes will rarely be able to make them appear less sunken in with some cover up. She would have more success shaping her eyebrows a certain way.

Therefore, my conclusion is that makeup has little affect on making anyone appear more feminine. If you are not feminine, makeup will not make you appear more feminine. However, makeup CAN make someone appear more attractive based on other things. Even if you are masculine, brighter eyes, lips, and rosy cheeks will make you appear more attractive because they will make you appear "healthier". Generally, the appearance of someone healthy is attractive. Features of health may be strong pigmentation in certain areas. For example strong thick hair will always be viewed as more healthy than fine limp hair...what I have:( Similarly full eyelashes will appear healthier than thinned out ones. Slightly tanned skin will appear healthier than pale white skin that looks as if it had never seen sun. Rosy cheeks make someone appear healthy. Clear skin obviously appears more healthy.

Femininity holds a STRONG correlation to attractiveness. But I think that equal to that or soon after comes someone who looks healthy. That is what make up does. It makes someone appear healthy, because it alters someones coloring in certain areas to appear richer and healthier. Period.

I'd also like to add that often with high fashion models makeup is used to make the model more "exotic" or even more masculine. Fashion is often very avant garde, they are not trying to evoke the cute girl next door with nice hair, a nice smile and a nice body. They are trying to evoke something exotic, sometimes strange, sometimes even ugly. Often times makeup will be used to make someone appear morbid looking or futuristic looking, etc., depending on the theme of the show.

Therefore, it is inaccurate to claim that high fashion models need makeup because it makes them appear more feminine. This isn't true. If they were chosen because they are masculine in the first place, then why would someone want to feminize them afterwards? I suppose it fits Erik's "pedophile theory", but NORMAL little boys don't wear makeup. This would deter from the look of an adolescent boy, which is the look Erik claims homosexual fashion designers are attracted to when they select these high fashion models.

I agree that fashion models are disporportionatley masculine. I always noticed that. However, they also often have strange bone structure not seen on common men or women. I believe that the reason the masculine ones are so represented in high fashion is because masculinity and masculine features will always make a woman look strange, and that strange look is precisley what fashion is about these days. Maybe the "homosexual" designers that dominate the fashion industry also choose them for the reason that they emulate what they would want to appear like. That is my theory. I think homosexual men are men who have brains structured more like women. Therefore they think like women, and they like masculinized women to represent "them" and their work because they are attracted to that look, the way they would want to look. A masculine woman is just a feminine version of a feminine man. Think about it. It makes sense. I don't know about the pedophile theory. I haven't seen enough research to conclude that homosexuals have a tendency to be pedophiles. I have seen a lot of research and have observed myself(although for some reason there are few homosexuals around where I live) that homosexual tend to act, look, and think like women. Therefore, I believe my theory is more plausible at least at the moment, until more research would be done on the link between homosexuality and pedophilia. I believe that homosexual men choose masculinized fashion models because they appear strange which translates into "exotic" for them, and also because those women look like them only more feminine. Period.

Why do homosexuals hold a monopoly in the fashion world? Well they think like women, why wouldn't they be good at what women do? Women like clothes, and so do homosexuals. It's simple. I'd also like to add that fashion is a very hard industry to get into. Generally, women are not interested in becoming so ambitious for that field. Women want to settle down and have babies. The women in the fashion industry are rarely family types if you notice. Homosexuals don't have to worry about having babies, they can't. They don't have to stay home and take care of them, they can pursue their careers instead.

So lets see. What type of person would and could pursue a career in the fashion industry?

Women: Yes
Men: Generally no, but ah we have the homosexual man who's brain seems to be wired more like a woman's than a man's

So we have women and homosexual men. But we are not done. We have to subtract women who are more interested in families as a life goal, than a career.

So, now we have homosexual men and women that don't want families. Hmmm... I wonder why homosexual men dominate the fashoin industry? Is it maybe because the majority of women WANT a family over a career? Isn't this the way we are actually wired?

So there you go, that's is my theory. I only thought it up in like 5 minutes but it sounds good to me.

Godis, you are incorrect about what makeup can "do" as far as hiding shadows, flaws, etc. It most certainly can make a woman look feminine, which is why we don't see men openly admitting to wearing it (and some actually do).

Professional makeup artists know this, and watching them work every day, I have seen them transform mediocre faced women into absolute beauties. What makes the difference is the added element of femininity. The right textured concealer, for example, can soften sharp angles, which you and I both know adds femininity. Some of this makeup is considered "professional grade" and isn't the typical drugstore brands that are available to a mass consumer market. Those are lighter textured, and don't do much else except even out skin tone. Colors for eyes and lips add a more dramatic effect, helpful in creating certain "looks". You are correct in stating that they don't do much for adding percieved femininity. However, women are the targeted consumers for cosmetics. It is understood by both men as well as women that the addition of makeup adds femininity, and neither really questions this.

As far as women being "wired" to have babies, well, not all are content to do that. Some don't have a choice either. I'd like to think that when I start a family, there will be a choice. However, with today's horrible economy, a two income family is preferable. I'd also like to add that many models have children. So how is it that they aren't wired for motherhood, or whatever it is that you meant?

adriana lima is still beautiful without makeup :)

adriana lima is still beautiful without makeup :)

I concur.

It is an era of economic revolution. The fashion designers select their models considering various factors/ parameters in their mind i.e. remuneration, personal likings, biasedness towards a specific body physique, age, features matching their outfits, relationships and future business plans.

Are you kidding me????
Papua New Guinean people are stunning! Yeah so a portion of the people there may not be as good looking but so does any other country. Japan has its share of ugly people as well as good-looking ones. Papua New Guinean people, especially the papuans (half asian/ half black) are gorgeous. So don't diss them

I can't say I'm not pleased to see this, I'm actually devilishly pleased. I am growing sick and tired of trying to be perfect, to wear a ton of make-up, wigs and what-not. It's so ironic that even though men say we look great without make-up, they still turn their heads after such modern followers of Eve.

well they dont look bad in the first place so when they wear makeup it looks alright,but other people with bad skin or whatever dont really look that good evan in makeup.

absolutely agreed. Finally someone gets it. These women are beautiful, without makeup.

I don't think these models are unattractive in any way. Instead, I think they broaden the definition of beauty, making more diverse looks beautiful. These models are from all over the world, which makes it impossible to have one global definition of beauty. The more I travel, the more I realize how diverse women are and how my definition of beauty expands with each new country I visit.

Anyone would look different with make-up on, whether you are a male or female, model or not. However, some of these girls DO look very masculine without their make-up on.

As far as women being "wired" to have babies, well, not all are content to do that. Some don't have a choice either. I'd like to think that when I start a family, there will be a choice. However, with today's horrible economy, a two income family is preferable. I'd also like to add that many models have children. So how is it that they aren't wired for motherhood, or whatever it is that you meant?

they look just as pretty in these pictures!

girlygirl i like messy hair! and i absolutely love not spending an hour on my hair every morning, straightening or curling or whatever. i wash, towel dry, and go. my hair is natural. if that means it looks a lil messy thats fine with me. that doesnt mean i wont get all dolled up every once in a while, or that i dont like people who do try and make their hair look nice everyday. its just not how i am.

Oh my! Some them looked like men without the makeup!

what a huge difference makes make up. I cant believe

fashion you mean THAT strange inaccessible thing you are claiming to be occupied by the homosexuals! Man, if there is one thing I can tell is that fashion is an art and it is a fact that the art is THE homosexual thing since like ALWAYS!!!! listen, from Da Vinci to Warhol they are all gays, the fact that you do not APPRECIATE or not able to APPRECIATE art as an expression of a human soul does not make them idiotic! How many people think they can paint like Picasso (counting my mom must be like a billion). The model are not chosen for their beauty but for impact of their features on the people. Everybody knows Kate Moss is not beautiful, but she is...SMASHING... yeah she smashes those little cute monkeys that I see in you attractive list. Fashion is like art i.e. it is not for everybody. Hahahahahaaha.

Much ado about nothing. Yes, makeup can help improve beauty but this is as much an indictment on us as it is the women.

"Models are chosen for having a "blank canvas face" meaning no natural beauty"

This is the best comment made so far in this article! it has been proven and many times said that no model has to be beautiful!!

Interesting as we are in a year where "natural" finishes is our aim in the fashion world. I do like a natural look myself, so girls if you have good skin, go natural!

Ok some of these faces look really freakish to me. But I’ll have to admit, makeup does transform a woman’s face quite a bit.

They are very masculine indeed. It's not hard to understand why they are models though.

Oh forgoodness sake. Wipe most womens make up off and pull their hair back and they will look more masculine. Ridiculous article.

Make-up really has the power to change the way a person looks. Of course, the quality of make-up matters too. There are sites which offer cheap make-up and discounted cosmetics which are also high quality and affordable, check them out!

and whats wrong with freckles... i think these woman are beautiful with and without makeup and all the woman that are saying they are ugly stop acting like u look gorgeous with makeup on alright?

However they can be psychologically more feminine, that is why they have chosen to be models.

I agree with most of your comment, but feminine looking women do not look all the same. Isn't it like saying that women with skinny bodies and bony facial structures also do, which destroys your whole theory? And how exactly are skinny women and manly looking women more classy? For higher tastes, because they are different? A woman's worth is judged by her behaviour, stop acting so superior. You're not, at the end od the day doctors, lawyers, singers, teachers, engineers and architects, people with real jobs are still feminine looking and incredibly more classy than half of the models who do nothing for society but strip when asked and snort coke. At the end of the day even if I have curves and I fave full lip, big eyes and a less prominent nose I still study, and a virgin. Pretty women are not trashy, you just sound incredibly jealous.

Click here to post a new comment