Pictures of the top-50 high-fashion models -- as of March 30, 2007 -- have been added to this site.
How many Versace gowns do you own? Have you purchased any Dior heels lately? Do these items appeal to you? Didn't think so. You know absolutely nothing about the high fashion industry so trying to apply your standards to their craft is useless and ridiculous. Fashion is first and foremost a business, if the runway models and the clothes were repulsive to the clientele then the designers would have to change or go bust. Maybe this is what the main fashion crowd likes. Young, lanky girls with low body fat percentages and striking facial features must be their preference just like you prefer frowzy, homely girls with vulgar bodies. You want to apply the aesthetics of the everyman to an industry that isn't interested in appealing to the everyman. The aesthetic preferences of the average man and woman is moot point because the average man and woman doesn't attend fashion shows. They can't afford $6,000 jackets or $12,000 trousers. Those who can afford these clothes (and are willing to shell out the dough) don't want to see your sloppy, trashy "glamour" models barreling down the runway in delicate meticulously made clothes. If these girls are admired and desired by the fashion crowd then let them be. The aesthetics of the high fashion industry don't and shouldn't affect you. The designers aren't trying to get rid of your slovenly dream women so why do you want to get of the girls they like?
Danielle: Your comment has already been addressed here. Designer clothing is highly desirable. Therefore, even if most buyers do not like the looks of fashion models, the buyers have no choice but to patronize the fashion designers. For instance, are you going to stop buying shoes if all of them came in packages with a repulsive picture on them?
I agree that high-fashion wear is beyond the reach of most people. However, what evidence is there that upper class individuals generally prefer skinny and masculinized women?
The aesthetics of the high-fashion industry definitely affects us in numerous negative ways. It prompts unnecessary dieting on the part of a number of girls and women, and the looks of high-fashion models trickle down to places where they don't belong as in beauty pageant contestants, lingerie models and the Sports Illustrated swimsuit magazine.
Regarding your statement...
The designers aren’t trying to get rid of your slovenly dream women so why do you want to get of the girls they like?
The homosexuals are avoiding feminine women even where they are needed...just look around this site for examples of beauty pageant contestants, lingerie models, etc. I am not advocating that the skinny and masculine women the homosexuals are using should be gotten rid of; a long-term goal of mine is to work toward establishing an alternative fashion industry.
How the hell do you intend to "establish an alternative fahion industry." There are already plenty of alternatives for people who don't wear high fashion. Most people already buy their shit from Target or Lane Bryant.The fashion industry is selling an image of decadence, wealth, and outrageousness. There is plenty of choice involved in buying a $3,000 skirt. High fashion buyers aren't forced to do anything. Your shoe analogy was weak because shoes are a necessity, high fashion is pure luxury. These wealthy people could always buy beautiful, tailored clothes from a good tailor or dressmaker but they don't do that because they are not just paying for the clothes, they are also paying for the image attached to a designer label. Designer clothes are associated with wealth and so is thinness. Ever hear the saying "You can never be too rich or too thin?" That pretty much sums up the image that the designers want to project.
You diss Victoria's Secret models but they are also selling an image of glamour. The Victoria's Secret fashion show is more of a promotional event than anything else. No one is going to wear the bizarre angel wings or popcorn bras to bed with their partner. These are costumes. The show is purely advertising. The "ideal figure" of a woman has gotten thinner while the average woman has gotten fatter. People covet and idolize what they can't have. It is brilliant marketing. If these advertisers have convinced the masses that these girls are the epitome of beauty then they have done their jobs well. You say that, in person, these girls do not appeal to the average person, I agree with you, but who are you to say that the designers must change their vision and their aesthetics to meet your demands? They have been very successful at promoting their own aesthetic thus far and judging from some of the comments on this board and the fact that high fashion is a billion dollar industry, they have been more successful than you. They have all the connections, and money and access to the media to promote themselves. What do you have? This little website isn't gonna affect shit. You gathered all this "scientific" data and it isn't going to make a bit of difference because you are a nobody. Your goal to establish an alternative fashion industry is ridiculous pipe dream. Give up!
I disagree with what you said about "the homosexuals avoiding feminine women even where they are needed." "Feminine" women aren't really "needed" anywhere. You would like to see them in lingerie but what you want doesn't matter to "the homosexuals." There is no difference between putting a skinny model or a "glamour" model with an hour glass figure on the Victoria's Secret runway. Straight men might find them more sexually appealing than the skinny girls but it doesn't change the fact that the average woman does not look like either one of these two types of models. That is the exchange of one unobtainable ideal to the other. It may give straight men more jack off material but thats it. You say the purpose of lingerie is to make women look more sexually appealing to their male partners so they should choose models whose bodies appeal to straight men. That makes little sense because lingerie (unless its a constricting corset) does not change a woman's body type, it cannot make their bodies meet "objective" standards. Either way most women will fall short. Nothing is achieved.
You say that beauty and femininity is largely objective. I think that is bull. As a matter of fact I think the promotion of an "objective" beauty standard is big waste of time unless you want to sell some shit or you have other shrouded idealogical dogma to promote. Despite what you may think, there is nothing worthy, noble or important about promoting "objective" standards of beauty. I think you goals are shallow, worthless and unachievable. Insulting these young models by likening them to transexuals does not help your case either. If you don't think that calling them M-F trannys is not insulting then you are more delusional thanI thought. You say that these skinny girls don't belong in Sports Illustrated, but I say that if the issues they are in sell well then they belong in Sports Illustrated. Admit that you're a narcissist who thinks that his tastes should be catered to and promoted over other people's tastes even though these other tastes are dominant and very profitable.
Wonderful website! I showed it to all of my guy friends and we all agree. I always thought most fashion models looked like hideous hags! The women posting to you must be ugly twiglets who like the idea of the fashion industry portraying ugliness as something to strive to attain! While I disagree with some of the comments (I think Heidi Klum is very pretty, and exotic features like a strong jawline can be exotic and appealing on a female) most of what you said is dead on! My girlfriend showed me the pictures of the top fashion models...good Lord...I would do a double take if I walked past them on the street - out of sheer horror- are they women? are they men? are they mutants? aliens? I cannot tell!
Since when is a size 6,8,10 or 12 woman with hips, curves, a delicious waist line, nice tushy, breasts and smooth skin a BAD THING? When did skin and bones, knobby knees, sallow complexions and masculine features become standards of "feminine beauty." I wonder how many of these high fashion models actually menstruate and are capable of bearing children? The key to female beauty is all biological. As males, we are driven towards youth and beauty - clear skin, feminine features, hourglass figures, breasts, hips - all signs of youth, health and fertility. These walking skeletons with dog faces DEFY the rules of nature and the rules of attraction.
These models do help designers sell clothes...but probably only out of shock value...I mean, you will remember the image of a hideous creature scuttling down the runway like a tarantula in a trench coat...that image is burned into your brain forver (nooooooooooooo! nightmares!) Beautiful women: Charlize Theron, Sophia Loren, MArilyn MOnroe, Jennifer Lopez, the old shcool playboy models (before they all started having implants, nosejobs and fake blonde highlights. Fashion models : BOW WOW WOW.
I think the main reason why high-fashion-models are so skinny, is that they have to show clothes and not lure men onto the stage. Besides, less body mass means less cloth to use. Okay, they're tall so this means they still have a lot of body mass, but the audience sitting in the last row have a better chance to witness the show, if the models on stage have towering heights.
I am a female with masculinized features but this does not make me unattractive. I sometimes wonder why so many people even tell me I am beautiful. Even good looking masculine and feminine men, find me attractive. There is sonething about the evolution that leads us into accepting unisexuality. I have a theory that this could actually be caused by industrialization. Men and women no longer feel assigned to produce offspring but have the urge to gain personal and communal productivity. A man or a woman's priority nowadays is not to populate the world in order to secure mankind but to save and pamper themselves with their immediate society...consider this.
Sorry for my English.
fashion models are certanly less feminine and sexy in comparison with "glamour"(porn in my opinion)models. your ideal woman is not the most bautiful because for example you affirm that prominent cheekbones are masculine but you don't remember that if a woman has, during growing,high estrogen levels, she probably will have prominent high cheekbones...are you a doctor or similar?what do you do?
fashion models have more simmetrical faces than average women.do you consider simmetry to judje beauty?fashion models have also fuller lips, with a big distance between eyes, they have big eyes,thin noses,high forehead, beautiful skin...some of your "beautiful" woman have big noses,small eyes, irregular smiles...some of glamours are very beautiful and they are very sexy and feminine...I tell you some fashion models that are consider beautiful by the fashion industry and also by men.tell me what do yuo think about them:letitia casta,monica bellucci,daniella sarayhba and past models:brigitte bardot,carol alt...
I appreciate the rest of your articles and I think the majority of these are true. ciao.
and also what about rich men who married topmodel? everyone can observe that top model often married very rich,beautiful and powerful men?do you think that this men don't really love their wives?I think yes and I think they want a topmodel in the biginning of their relashionship for their appereance.what do you think about?
I?m agree with you but I think you are not completely impartial...
face is not beautiful solely because of longitudinal symmetry, for instance, monkey face, dog face, horse face is never pretty, notwithstanding how strikingly symmetrical it is. And those fashion models, regarding their outrageous honorars, money for nothing, except promoting unhealthy, masculinized looks, it is them, who are insulting,because their role is wrong, but stating facts, although unpleasant for them, is not an insult. I like petite stature in women, not too big breasts, but slender, dainty figure, fine facial features, but fashion models are nothing like this: too tall, projecting bones, knoby joints,wide shoulders, large feet, altogether bony, robust faces
Danielle: Steps that can be taken to set up an alternative fashion industry are described here. Your statement that there are plenty of alternatives for people not wearing designer clothing implies that you have not understood what an alternative fashion industry will be about. It will be about high-fashion/designer clothing and feminine models.
The shoe analogy is not weak. Whereas high fashion is a luxury for the masses, it is a necessity in social settings for the rich/elite. The prevalence of excess body fat is indeed lower among upper class white individuals, but this does not mean that their norms or desires pertaining to body fat level hover anywhere in the neighborhood of the skinniness of high-fashion models.
You should see my addressing Victoria’s secret in terms of a criticism of the homosexuals selecting the models rather than dissing the models themselves. The use of bizarre costumes for advertising purposes does not justify the use of masculinized lingerie models.
The “ideal figure” of women has gotten thinner because of the increasing impact of homosexual fashion designers. If brilliant marketing means that people should be made to covet what they cannot have, then feminine beauty is more difficult to achieve that skinny and masculine looks (at least the skinny part can be acquired by numerous women). The advertisers have not convinced the masses that high-fashion models are the epitome of beauty or else you would not observe a strong public preference for above average femininity and normal body fat levels in women. The homosexuals have unfortunately convinced some girls and women though.
Like I said before, I am not saying that the designers must change their visions and aesthetics to meet my demands. The designers will change nothing on their own. An alternative fashion industry needs to be set up.
You are right, I am a nobody. This does not mean that I will remain a nobody. I also do not need to be anybody to achieve some of my goals. And, I am not giving up.
There is a big difference between using skinny women and using voluptuous women for lingerie modeling. Victoria’s Secret uses a lot more women with breast implants than what you would see in a haute couture show. Why? Obviously because there is a need for some curves. But why not use feminine women with natural curves to start with?
You are saying that since wearing lingerie without a corset does not change a woman’s body type, it doesn’t matter whether a masculine or feminine model is used to sell lingerie. Well then, most women buying skin creams do not possess and cannot acquire blemishless, smooth baby-like skin seen in advertising. So why not use women with skin blemishes to sell skin creams? The answer is that you want to convey that “the use of our product will make you acquire these looks.” Therefore, there is an appropriate look. The message conveyed by a lingerie model should obviously be “use this product and acquire the sex appeal of this woman.” The sex appeal is in reference to the preferences of heterosexual men. In other words, the appropriate choice for a lingerie model is a woman on the feminine side, not a masculinized woman made to look more feminine via posing tricks and implants.
You may chose to think that beauty and femininity are not largely objective, but I have cited plenty of evidence to support my arguments. I am not trying to promote objective standards of beauty; I am trying to promote feminine beauty; the information on objectivity merely shows what most people prefer. If some female models have the looks of transsexuals, then it is sometimes necessary to say so.
The Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue has little competition and hence will sell reasonably well, which does not mean that it does so because of the looks of the women it features. The “tastes” I am promoting are harbored by the majority of individuals, and arguing that someone should cater to this majority is not being narcissistic.
Jack: Skinny high-fashion models do not help designers sell clothes. A good marketing principle is to avoid imagery that disturbs a potential buyer, but the skinniness of high-fashion models disturbs many potential buyers. The reason the designers can get away with it is because of the lack of competition and the high desirability of designer clothing.
Zoe: There is no need to be skinny in order to show clothes. Normal weight women do an excellent job at displaying clothing; see Table 2 here. I am not saying that masculinization necessarily makes one unattractive. The degree of masculinization is an important variable. Slight masculinization in women is a correlate of their sexiness to heterosexual men. Additionally, there are numerous factor affecting how attractive one looks apart from the degree of masculinization/feminization.
Industrialization is a relatively recent phenomenon compared to millennia of mate selection based on fertility cues. Therefore, industrialization is not going to alter anytime soon preferences shaped over eons.
Lena: I mostly avoid women in porn. I haven’t said that prominent cheekbones are masculine. Feminization causes the cheekbones to become more prominent. However, masculinization makes the cheekbones sit higher on the face. I am not aware of any evidence that fashion models tend to have thinner noses, more widely spaced eyes, etc. than average women. The women that you named such as Laetitia Casta, Brigitte Bardot, etc. have not been proper high-fashion models, which is evident in their greater femininity and/or non-skinniness than what you would normally see among high-fashion models. I did previously address the masculine looks of Daniella Sarahyba in the context of her Sports Illustrated appearance.
When you see a masculine high-fashion model marry a rich man, the rich man is a candidate for either having/having had a homosexual component to his attractions or narrowly escaping nonheterosexuality.
Have you gotten my email with pics attached
Erik, In the link you provided even you admitted that it would be damn near impossible to establish an "alternative high fashion industry". The amount of funds, talent, and support that are required for such a task is astronomical. As i said before, the designers have all the talent, connections and funds they need to promote their ideals. So, for now, your feminine women will continue to be ignored and rejected in favor of stick-thin clothes horses. Maybe the ideals will eventually evolve. The supermodels of the eighties and early nineties were still thin but they were significantly heavier than the girls now. Fashion, in my opinion not yours, reflects the dreams and ideals of current western society. The decadence, boldness, wealth and extravagance of the industry have captivated many people. I don't see any options for you to promote "feminine beauty" in a mainstream arena.
erik: daniella sarahyba is more feminine and beauty than the girl compared. daniella has bigger eyes, less distance betveen eyes and mouth, bigger distance between yes, more prominent cheekbones, smaller nose in the longitudinal view...she's gorgeus. I appreciate your job on this site but you can be more objective...laetitia casta was judje very hot by a large number of men but she has high cheekbones and squared mandibular angles.what about this fact?probably there are some manly caracteristics that are also appreciate in women...how you can see gemma ward's face masculin? she seems a doll...here in Italy one of the most popular and hot television girl that is very appreciate by young men is elisabetta canalis.what about her? men loves not only their body but also their face!
...men love not only her body but also her face....sorry, sorry sorry.I hope to improve my English...
erik, it is totally creepy of you to promote women's beauty, but not give a shit about women in terms of their humanity, btw.
fucking. creepy. you are no better than the fashion industry. both of you just strip away a person down to its aesthetics, and ignore anything on the inside. only the fashion industry does it better.
good news is that your site will never catch on, at least not for a looooong time.
wait, jk, i take it back.
at least the fashion industry publicizes a model's biographical information and tries to make models seem somewhat human.
white power! the fine nordic nose rules all!
nose and light colour, combined with features described by lena: bigger eyes, less distance between eyes and mouth, bigger distance between yes, more prominent cheekbones, smaller nose in the longitudinal view. I would add : the profile with at lest 90° nasolabial angle (I hope it is correct expression), and corners of lips winding slightly downwards (the last two features I've read it was greek and rennaissaince ideal of beauty: and also I always found them irresistible) But everything in one package is rare even among nordics. Of course , appearance has nothing to do with quality of person an lovableness.
Mishelle: I did get your email. It usually takes me a while to respond.
Danielle: When you talk about fashion reflecting the dreams and ideals of current Western society, I hope you are referring to elements other than the looks of female high-fashion models because I have already cited plenty of literature showing how these looks are at odds with the preferences of the majority.
Lena: When you compare the femininity of different women, it is necessary to assess to what extent shape variation is related to factors apart from sex hormones. In the two comparisons (Pic1, Pic2; Daniella Sarahyba on the left, Courtney on the right), whereas the shape transformations from Courtney to Daniella that you mentioned would result from greater feminization if other factors were constant, you should also note that Daniella has a longer and squarer chin, deeper-set eyes, more prominent forehead, lower-set eyebrows and a wider nose. Therefore, it does not follow that Daniella is more feminine. Also look at the physique. Daniella has broader shoulders, a wider rib cage, wider hips and smaller breasts. Overall, Daniella looks more masculine than Courtney.
Masculinity-femininity is judged by overall appearance. If a woman has high-placed cheekbones but an overall feminine face, then the high-placed cheekbones should not be called masculine because their high placement is due to factors apart from the influence of sex hormones. An overall feminine and attractive face shape can have one or two features such as a squared chin or high-placed cheekbones or sharp gonial angles. Slight masculinization of women is also a correlate of their sexiness to heterosexual men.
Gemma Ward looks doll faced in some of her pictures but there are others where a masculine element can be seen in her face (see here). If you also consider her physique, the appropriate conclusion is that she is not feminine and that there is a masculine element to her face that may not be obvious depending on pose/make-up because of her odd features.
I have no idea how popular the face is of Elisabetta Canalis among Italian men. In some pictures her face looks quite masculine, and I doubt that heterosexual men generally appreciate her face in these pictures. I can see that they would appreciate her body.
8D: What do you mean this site does not “give a shit about women in terms of their humanity”? This site is about physical appearance. Other aspects are not relevant to it, which is not to say that they don’t matter. Some issues related to looks such as self-esteem are discussed here, too. Unlike the fashion industry, I am not making models starve/undereat to maintain model-worthy looks.
no further comments :-)
erica: only cause u dont have enough money and power to. you would if u could, bb.
Eva: Your links are not about high-fashion models. They are also of limited value since the public gets to vote on pre-selected women in the limelight. Controlled laboratory studies reveal what people truly prefer since plenty of feminine examples are presented to contrast with the masculine examples. Wait till there is mainstream feminine beauty appreciation and then you will notice a clear change in the looks of women who make it to these top lists.
8D: Why would I attempt to make women undereat/starve if I could do it? I have no such desire. I have been contrasting fashion models with women who have normal weight.
dear Erik, I thinck that if you want compare two women to decide who is the much feminine and beauty, you could compared two pictures in the frontal view or profile and the two faces could be big at the same way. the distance of the eyes can be the same and then you cn compared the other elements like mounth, noses, distance of eyes,jaw ecc. scientific is something you can relevate with numbers and defined measurements...In this way if, for exemple, send you a picture of a girl you can see if she's feminine but if I send you the numbers of the same girl, you could also tell if she's feminine and beauty...the mask of marquandat (indipendent to the masculin elements that you desagree) is "scientific" because consider defined measurements that are mesurable...if I send you the measurement of a girl's face, you can tell me how is she feminine(low feminine,average or very hot)?
another question.what do you think about the caucasian face created by victor jonsthon. is she feminine in your opinion?
you say that high fashion models are masculin because many elements of their body and faces are not feminine. But they have also many elements very feminine:the majority of high fashion models have hot mouth, very big eyes,high checkbones and also more short face compared with average women, very small and thin nose, very short (eccept some cases) jaw.these elements are corralate with high levels of estrogens, really or not? they have some masculin elements, but others very feminine and these elements are much more feminine in comparisons with the same of average or preatty women.the face created by victor jonsthon (you can see it in google:caucasian female face, she's blonde with green eye) has exaggerate female caracteristics, she's an hyoerfemale but if you put the mask of marquandart on this face, you can see that the mask of marquandart is perfect on this face that has exaggerated female features.what about this? sorry but I can't send you the picture, I don't know how send it....rispondimi presto!
Hallo or Lena: If you have a clear and large picture of Victor Johnston's attractive woman, then please either send me a link, email it to me or host it at something like imageshack.us and post a link here. I will reply later.
Hi Erik, thank you for your site it's really fascinated me.
I think you make some good points (and some not so good...) on your site but I think one area you may have under estimated is how hetro-sexual women see fashion models.
Yes many designers are homosexual and definately choose masculinised women when decideing who wears their clothes. However, for hetrosexual women this works as well. Subconsciously hetrosexual women may be attracted to the masculine features of these women and I definately believe that masculine women are less threatening to the hetrosexual women who follow high fashion.
If you want to sell a hetrosexual woman an extremely exspensive product the last thing you want to do is threaten her. If Gemma Ward and Charlize Theron were in a bar I would automatically keep my boyfriend further away from Charlize anyday.
I have also noticed that actresses often have much more feminine features than high fashion models. I think this is because if you have to believe say in a romantic comedy that a man is in love with a woman. It is more believable that the leading man is in love with Charlize Theron than with Gemma Ward.
When women are shown porn their basic physical instincts respond in pretty much the same way as a man's would. But because the porn is designed for men, as you show, glamour/porn models are more 'estrogen heavy' than the women who are shown most often in the conventional media. These women are much more threatening to the hetrosexual woman than some of the women on the catwalk who are as you point out heavily masculinised.
Also the sexual conditioning females experience throughout childhood is so vastly different to that of a mans. Girls are taught to be less sexual by their parents and their community. In crude terms: a girl sleeps with six men in a week she's a bit of a slut, if a guy sleeps with six women he's jack the lad. So a women who has feminine features at first glance appears to be a more sexual creature and therefore 'bad' in the eyes of a women who has been subjected to a lot of social conditioning. Whereas a 'enuch' who walks the runway is not a sexual threat. Therefore the hetrosexual woman watching the 'eunich' can consentrate on what she's wearing and not on how intimidated she's feeling!
Do you agree??
Felicity: Let us say that you have the task of advertising a skin rejuvenation/care cream. Which would be a better choice, a woman with spotless and smooth skin or a woman with blemished skin? This should be easy to answer: the woman with better skin. The idea is obviously to convey the message that if you were to buy this product, you can acquire what this woman has. When you are selling high-end clothing, you need to convey a similar message. Therefore, trying to threaten women less by using women who would not attract heterosexual men does not appear to explain the typical looks of high-fashion models.
You also mentioned the need to focus on clothes. Why then are there so many ultra-thin high-fashion models? Their skinniness disturbs many women. Why not use models with a normal amount of body fat so that women are not distracted by their thinness?
Women with above average femininity attract more men, but they are also less likely to be promiscuous or sleep with men without demanding commitment. Therefore, feminine models should not be too threatening to women in general. Additionally, heterosexual women generally have the same looks preference in women that heterosexual men have.
Hallo: To compare face shape, why should the distance between the eyes be equalized? This distance isn’t the same across people even if you adjust for face size. Figuring out how feminine or attractive a woman is from facial measurements is not an easy task. Subtle changes here and there can make a big difference. Therefore, I would prefer to look at pictures than consider a set of measurements with no picture.
I have only seen a small version of Victor Johnson’s attractive female face, with the sides covered by hair, and she looks feminine.
Lena: You are mistaken about Marquardt’s face fitting Victor Johnston’s beautiful female face. I have begun addressing the problem of shape comparison in reference to Marquardt’s mask.
I haven’t gotten the impression that high-fashion models usually have a mixture of masculine and very feminine features. They generally tend to be masculinized. Whereas individual fashion models can have wider faces, thicker lips or a shorter lower face than average women, the general tendency among them is to be masculinized. Marquardt has used high-fashion models to come up with his mask, and it will become clear to you that the mask describes the shape of masculinized white women; just read the article on Marquardt’s mask application cited above and subsequent articles that I will post on this topic.
I'm European and the top models you have on this website are mostly eastern European or from the 'cold countries'. If u have ever traveled maybe you would see that the caucasian Scandinavian race tends to have women with very 'striking' features. That doesn't mean that they are masculine or androgenous.
Some people LOVE to say something is feminine and masculine because of the stupid hollywood 1940's ideal. Your idea of masculine and feminine is COMPLETELY subjective. You can't prove it. So what, these women have too much testostorone? Where are the beefy muscles then? Prove that they don't have enough estrogen. Show each model's estrogen levels compared to the average EASTERN EUROPEAN woman. Not to the american, not to the western european, not to the asian or the black. And compare it with a woman with these girl's age too. Otherwise it is biased.
Your website is biased. And your opinions are irrelevant and unsourceful. Based only in the fact that you are probably a fat 'curvy' woman yourself. If I was you, I would be embaressed to be talking about masculinity on runway models because it is PURE IGNORANCE. Just shows you how much you know about what people look like around the world.
Next thing I know they will say "Oh Asian men are feminine" because they have smaller jaws and longer hair than Caucasian men... it's ridiculous. The idea of what is masculine and what is feminine is different all over the world. Some Scottish men wear skirts, some African women shave their heads. Who says they are masculine or feminine? THEIR OWN DAMN CULTURE.
These fashion models are feminine in their own FASHION business. PERIOD.
Ivanos: Ethnicity is not an issue. Masculine and feminine women are found in all parts of Europe. There are numerous feminine Eastern European women shown within this website for contrast purposes. I am not confounding angular features with masculinization.
Masculine vs. feminine as described within this site isn’t subjective: you are looking at evidence from physical anthropology and hormonal evidence related to facial features, bust-waist proportions, etc. Shaving one’s head, wearing skirts or equivalent are non-issues.
“Beefy muscles” are not required for a woman to be designated as masculine or having high testosterone levels. There are numerous skinny men who have much higher testosterone levels than the most naturally masculine women.
I am neither fat/curvy nor a woman. Judge an argument on its own merits rather than the assumed characteristics of the person making the arguments.
the website could have served some good purpose, like correcting young women's unhealthy eating habits, but then your homophobia got in the way and your opinions became unbearably disgusting. did you vote for bush?
Di: Women who diet unnecessarily because of the influence of thin fashion models need to know why the fashion industry finds very thin women hot. Answering the why requires revealing some unflattering correlates of the dominant designers. Don't call it homophobic. And no, I didn't vote for Bush and have never held a favorable opinion of him.
You're seriously deluded.
First off I must say I find it strikingly odd that a heterosexual man such as yourself Erik would be teaming up with feminists to combat such a controversial issue. I would have thought a feminist woman made this website.
In this comment section people such as Felicity have praised your ideas of feminine beauty yet in turn you chose to think of it as an attack and made several irrelevant statements in your defense. I find this odd also because you seem to think everyone is attacking your ideas.
Your website is quite interesting and yes I do agree with some of the points here such as educating young girls about their body image and overall self-esteem. But however, I must state that everyone's idea of beauty is different thus the quote "Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder." By making this website you are presenting your subjective views of women which in my honest opinion is displayed as prostitutes and is quite vulgar. Girls with feminine features can feel beautiful too even though images of super models are plastered everywhere, hey look at the actresses, they have feminine features and they are very beautiful even though they don't meet the standard conventions of the fashion world.
The fashion industry likes masculine women, let them it does not affect you in any way or form considering you are in fact a man and you have no business in the fashion industry.
Lastly I would like to say that your website comes off very homophobic just as Di stated and that trying to achieve such a revolution in the fashion industry with such status as yourself will get you nowhere.
Hahaha! What an earth am I reading? So what if someone looks masculine or feminine? Many men look "feminine" and many women look "masculine", especially if you "want" them too. Most people don't actually go around analysing the degree of masculinity vs femininity of every person they happen to look at!! lol What is this fixation with masculine women about actually? Who cares? There is not one universally attractive type of man or woman otherwise we would all be attracted to the same type of people, but we are not thank goodness! As long as an individual is healthy, that should be all that matters. Its damaging to label people as if they are merely objects! Human beings are more than that, or should be. There are so many different types of beauty in this world. Many people are beautiful in their own ways. Alot of your examples of so called "feminine" women on here have waists so tiny they look like they might snap! (due to their ridiculously barbie doll-esque waist to hip ratio) Many would argue that this does not look healthy or attractive in the slightest and i don't know many women who want to look like that. At all. Women want to look healthy and athletic, not super, super feminine with a teeny tiny waist and a big squidgy arse!! lol Also, if this is so healthy and "feminine", then why do none of the women i know look like that? Womens physiques and heights etc are changing all the time due to changes in dietary habits and lifestyle. Not many women these days would have the same measurements as a typical woman in the 50s for example. Women are therefore becoming in your words more "masculine", so therefore this will soon no longer be considered to be masculine, but rather to be the norm! Shock, horror! lol Thats life! What is this feminine/masculine nonsense?! So silly!! lol Just leave women alone for once! If you are going to present an interesting, valid, reliable study, then fair enough. But it seems that you are just slagging off women for absolutely no reason, saying they are "masculine" or "too skinny" etc etc just because they are not what you personally consider to be attractive! lol Every woman and man on this earth is different and unique and this uniqueness should be embraced. Society should really be encouraged to refrain from criticising people for the way they look, not encouraged to do it further. Oh dear! lol Thanks. xox
I think Men with more feminine features (not making them any less of a man!) would find the Sports Illustrated model with masculine features more attractive. I fit this feminine ideal you're talking about(just so happen to be european, .69 waist to hip ratio, and just a generaly very feminine face). I know I only get turned on without stimulation by men with very masculine features. I am told alot of the time I have "bad taste" but I just don't find men with femine features like Leonardo DiCaprio or even Brad Pitt sexualy attractive. Maybe you can look into that?
What a pile of pseudoscientific drivel.
The range of perceptions of human beauty is fascinating, isn't it?
Models Gemma Ward, Elyse Sewell, Lily Cole, Jessica Stam and Monica Jagaciak have long had probably the five most attractive faces I've ever seen. I must be gayer than a pink Christmas tree covered in dildos and Elton John-shaped rainbows.
But seriously: for attractive bodies, I look especially to nude models from the likes of Met-Art and Hegre-Art (though definitely not the particular models chosen here), yet I've scarcely seen prettier, sexier faces than those that walk the catwalks, I'm afraid.
On the occasions that the two ideals meet—oh, my....
I'm surprised that you'd consider Pitt feminine. I'm always expecting him to bash someone with a club and drag them back to his cave for dinner.
Some heated discussion going on here. I think it is fine to have any type of body or look in any magazine or book or poster or anything if it is sold to a market who appreciates that sort of thing. No one would successfully market anything if they did not give the people what they wanted.
However. Having young women on the point of anorexia and death for fashion is shallow, crass, immoral, a debasement and abuse of women and their desire to be appreciated and looked at and most importantly it teaches a wave of young women that those are ideals to seek after so that no one then needs to push a woman to starve she will do it willingly with warped desires and ideals in her head.
i want a woman to be healthy and exercise. lets see skinny and healthy toned women if we must but for Christ sake only a fucked in the head sicko would find a famished girl in poor health attractive. back to the issue at hand, none of the top models were anywhere near attractive to me but they are not there to cater to men.
Women do not dress up and put on makeup for men. women do not take hours shopping to please men in general. they might selectively set out to please THEIR man but men in general do not suffer when a woman walks around without $1000 outfits and a tray of makeup.
These "top models" do not exist for the entertainment of men. Women more than the average honest man will read these mags that illustrate models. I find the underwear models in the Kmart catalogs more appealing than models any day of the week because they are real, they always look natural, they aren't bathed in makeup and they aren't wearing clown suits dreamed up by some guy or woman trying to make a difference and diversify in a market where trends get old quicker than red meat in the sun.
but this is subjective up the wazoo. because you are not me. ladies you are not men, and normal honest men are not that shallow. and when it comes to it ladies most or you are forced to be not that shallow because your bodies like those of models are not perfect. perfect is not attainable unless you look only through one person's eyes.
Agree with most of what you say here. This site actually made me feel a lot better about my own physique. I was recently discussing this topic with my friend who works in the fashion industry. I was wondering why most male fashions these days are feminine looking. I mean not every male has a perfect body to fit into the tight pants and shirts that seem to be in style these days and I personally don't find them appealing anyway. She enlightened me saying that most designers are homosexual males and that is the look they prefer. So, then it occurred to me that female fashion styles these days are meant for a masculine body, the fabrics, silhouettes, etc. It's hard to find anything that would complement a more curvaceous softer feminine body types. It was a revelation that was staring in my face for years. The male models are not sexually appealing to heterosexual women and female models are not sexually appealing to heterosexual males. And what it worse, a lot of the "fashionable" clothes don't help regular men and women look better. It is a really sad state of a affairs. I see so many women killing themselves in the gym trying to look more masculine. So, thank you for this site. I don't agree with some racial connotations here, I believe there are sexy women of all races, you can't assume males of other races are not sexually attracted to women from their own country. That is in response to your argument that the only truly attractive women are Northern European. In fact, a lot of those masculine looking models are from Northern Europe, Scandinavia, Germany, etc. So, yes, I did find your site biased and somewhat prejudiced but still it is courageous of you to address this topic.