You are here

Is she the next hot Calvin Klein model?

Tera from Tera19

Take a good look at the woman from the front and ask yourself the same question again.

Tera from Tera19

The answer should be obvious, and if it isn't, then the following collage -- featuring some of the models used by Calvin Klein to display his Spring 2007 collection during a fashion show -- will definitely help.

Spring 2007 Calvin Klein collection displayed during a fashion show; skinny models; Gemma Ward, Lily Donaldson, Natalia Vodianova, Raquel Zimmermann and others

The model in question, by virtue of not approximating the looks of adolescent boys, is obviously too feminine for the job even though the combination of small breasts and some masculinization in her prevents her from being classified as an example of feminine beauty.  The model is Tera from Tera19; more picture of her below.

Tera from Tera19 Tera from Tera19 Tera from Tera19 Tera from Tera19

Tera from Tera19 Tera from Tera19 Tera from Tera19 Tera from Tera19

Her features partly rebut the "clothes hangar" excuse that fashion designer apologists put forth to defend the typical skinniness of high-fashion models.  The typical skinniness of high-fashion models is part of a package, including masculinization and youth, that helps them approximate the appearance of adolescent boys, the kind of looks preferred by the homosexual men who dominate the top ranks of the fashion business.



Kristin: Tera is not supposed to be an example of a feminine woman; the woman selected needed to be somewhat masculinized but nevertheless too feminine for the tastes of Calvin Klein.

Valentina Zelyaeva does not have a manly face, but she is not feminine. When one walks normally, i.e., arms swinging, the shoulders can appear narrower depending on the timing of the photograph; the right timing will reveal the actual shoulder proportions, and Zelyaeva’s shoulders are broad; also note manly arm length and physique that does not come anywhere close to an hourglass approximation.

Valentina Zelyaeva

Zelyaeva also has small breasts and petite buttocks; once again note no hourglass approximation.

Valentina Zelyaeva

The extent of masculinity-femininity of the body is reflected in the face, but in Zelyaeva we don’t see manliness in her face. This can be understood thus. The high placement of her cheekbones and her eyebrows/forehead dimensions are consistent with masculinization, but her face width at the level of the cheekbones and compressed gonial angles are conistent with feminization, but since her physique is masculinized, we conclude that parts of her face suggesting feminization do not correspond to feminization but reflect other factors, instead. Indeed, sex hormones only partly influence developing structures.

Anyway, most people would agree that Zelyaeva has a better face than Tera, but from the perspective of heterosexual men, Tera has a better physique.

On the other hand, my argument is certainly not that all high-fashion models are manly; there is variation among them, and some lean toward the more feminine, but the central tendency is clear, as in the collage above, and this tendency is for them to approximate the looks of adolescent boys.

I think the collage you put together really emphasizes the "clothes hanger" argument. The women are all made up similarly, the hair is pulled back, there is nothing striking about their appearance to distract from the clothes. I even find them unpleasant to look at because of the make-up (there are very beautiful girls among them, it's just an awful look) and rather let my eyes wander to the clothes (which are unfortunately pretty unflattering, ew).

Yes, I'd rather see beautiful women of lots of different body shapes ( willowy, curvaceous, big or small breasts, women just are great), but I really don't see the need to appeal to heterosexual men in a fashion show for women's clothing.

Kristin: Tera is 5-foot-6. 3 inches do not make a very big difference. A tall and feminine woman will easily have feminine skeletal proportions, not the masculinized ones of Valentina Zelyaeva.

Samuel: The collage does not support the "clothes hangar" argument. Most people would agree that both the women and the clothes they are modeling would look better if they had a little more flesh. If these women has a little more flesh, then with similar make-up and hair styles, there would still not be anything striking about their looks that would detract attention away from the clothes.

Besides, as I have pointed out previously, many aspects of fashion shows are not consistent with using fashion models as mere clothes hangars: the use of very famous models, several instances of excessive hip swaying, deliberate exposure of breasts/nipples every now and then, bizzare make-up, etc. One could also find skinny women with feminine faces, but feminine faces are uncommon among high-fashion models.

Most men and women aesthetically prefer women with above average femininity. Therefore, catering to heterosexual men in so far as the choice of fashion models goes will simultaneously be consistent with what most women agree are better looks in women.

Kristin: I don't know what you mean by "the weird thing is that all these supposedly femine women" except for some of the famous ones are "pretty unnattractive loking to many people." If you are talking about the attractive women section, then your statement is certainly not true since the European public will overwhelmingly though not universally aesthetically prefer these women to high-fashion models.

The main purpose of this site is to promote feminine beauty. If this site can help establish at least one mainstream outlet for the appreciation of feminine beauty, then I will consider it a success. This site itself cannot be the mainstream outlet since such an outlet will need to avoid nudity for obvious reasons.

"the European public will overwhelmingly though not universally aesthetically prefer these women to high-fashion models"

you don't even know 0.000001% of the "european public" so you can't assume they prefer your so called atractive women over fashion models. i've looked through your attractive women section and only find very few of them attractive, facial-wise or physically. you are not the majority of european men; sorry to break it to you.

i just looked through your attractie women section again and i take back what i said about them not having attractive bodies. since you seem to always prefer big breasted women over small breasted ones, i assumed they were all big (i haven't visited this site in a while). i prefer small to medium sized breasts. the thing i don't like most about those women are their faces. they may be feminine, but they're not pretty.

dot: Neither you nor I constitute the European public. The argument that people of European ancestry will overwhelmingly though not universally prefer the women in the attractive women section to high-fashion models is based on evidence from numerous studies showing that the public overwhelmingly aesthetically prefers women with above-average femininity. It is obvious that the women in the attractive women section are more feminine, on average, than high-fashion models, who happen to have below average femininity. Go through the site properly prior to commenting.

Whereas people have their own preferences, there is broad agreement about what constitutes attractiveness in the general public, and your disagreement does nothing to undermine the broad agreement in the population.

maybe a better way to tackle this issue is to dissect the facs of feminine women who are cnsdired pretty--- right now almost none of the femme women on ur site have rpetty faces--so its hard to say--yes. mr. holland--ur absolutely correct. maybe vieers should post pics and we could openly debate whether this woman looks femme and why?

Kristin: Femininity is not up for debate since this is a matter of objective assessment. Attractiveness can be debated though, though the debate will likely not be productive given individual variation in tastes. You find almost none of the feminine women shown within this site (presumably in the attractive women section) to have pretty faces and some homosexual men will even find their faces [and physiques] to be ugly, but most people [of European ancestry for sure] will rank the faces of the women shown in the attractive women section as having above average attractiveness, which is what matters since this site is targeting the general Western public.


I think all your site does is display your prejudices and preferences in terms of a woman's look.
Your use of a quasi scientific approach to belittle woman of a certain shape and look and for that matter race shows you up for what you really are.
It is interesting that all the women you pick as exemplifying your idea of good looks/beauty are young women from porn sites - what does this really say about you?

yeah, Ross, agreed, I just posted something similar myself. This is very similar to what Hitler said about blonde/blue eyed Nordic women being the only feminine women out there compared to the "dark" non-"Aryan" women.

Where is Erik from? Is he from Europe?

And the pedophile issue, I'm sorry Erik but you clearly are the type who likes 16yr old girls. If you're over 23, that's pretty gross (as a former 16 yr old girl, I can tell you teen girls find men like you really creepy)

Ross: It is easy for you to accuse me of using quasi-scientific arguments, but you have not shown that the arguments are quasi-scientific. See if you can show the latter. Belittle is an inappropriate words as far as the comparisons go. Pointing out the masculinization in masculinized women is stating a fact. If a woman looks like an eunuch or male-to-female transsexual, then there is no easy way of saying this nicely, and to say so is not to belittle. There is no criticism of the looks of women from an ethnicity standpoint within this site.

As far as the sourcing of the women in the attractive women section goes, as already explained, only some of them are taken from porn sites, several have been taken from sites depicting artistic nudity but no pornography, many women are nude models that do not involve themselves in pornography and some don’t post nude. The majority of the women are taken from adult-oriented sites because the male homosexual domination of the fashion business is so extensive that the vast majority of feminine and attractive women that refuse to pose nude or to deal with the casting couch remain out of the limelight. If this site is successful in the long run, you will see mainstream appreciation of feminine beauty and a correspondingly increased proportion of non-nude women in the attractive women section.

grrrrforgotten: You are clearly a retarded individual...bringing Hitler into the picture! The women shown in the attractive women section are 18-plus; they don’t look 16, and two are even in their thirties. Besides, pedophilia is defined as a preference for pre-pubescent children.

maybe if this site tpouched on non-northern euopean beauty further---- you might avoid these comments--eric--as of now, you should possible rename it as anglo-saxon/nordic feminine beauty, as the spectrumof women that it really covers only includes 15 percent of the world. if you want to use some models of femininty for medit. women--try sarah shahi(there are tons of [ics of her on for hispanic women--- just ask for suggestions vs. comparing ana barros to a northern european women---and ana is obviously of african/mediterranean heritage. i realize you have awesome intentions. i am just offering my opinion.

Erik, they're quasi-scientific because on MANY occasions you cite research articles of questionable repute and then project their conclusions to your anecdotal evidence (i.e., indicating that women in pictures you posted have certain testosterone levels by their WTR without actually gathering endocrinological data on them).

As a statistician at the CDC I find your method of "proving" your arguments to be not only scientifically ludicrous (see above example) but also reprehensible from a public health standpoint. Not only would they not hold up to scientific peer-review OR editorial review by the likes of Wiley or Oxford they CERTAINLY would not withstand the scrutiny of the MMWR.

While I understand your possible desire to rationalize the current unhealthy ideal of beauty I am disappointed in your ability to actually do so.

Jen: You, too, have not shown how my arguments are quasi-scientific. You mentioned questionable studies without citing them and describing what makes them questionable. I am not inferring actual testosterone levels based on pictures. However, I have cited enough evidence to tell masculinized women apart from feminine women based on photographic evidence; see, for instance, hormonal data regarding waist-bust proportions and face shape, as well as the feminine vs. masculine page.

If you are a statistician with the CDC, I presume that you are familiar with the necessity of substantiating the claim that an argument is scientifically ludicrous if you make it, rather than just leaving an accusation. Substantiate your criticism.

Click here to post a new comment