You are here

What is sexy?

This site has addressed the nature of feminine beauty at length and will continue to elaborate on it.  On the other hand, it is time to address sexiness in some detail, too.

Below, the reader will find pictures of some women that are not taken from the attractive women section, and there are no current plans to add these women to this section.  The reader should try to discern what, on average, distinguishes these women from the women shown in the attractive women section.  Those who are not lifetime-exclusive heterosexual men should attempt to estimate the sexiness ratings of the following women on the part of such men, on average, compared to the women shown in the attractive women section.

Click the thumbnails for large versions of the images.

Marketa Brymova

From Met Art, watch4beauty (w4b)

Marketa BrymovaMarketa BrymovaMarketa BrymovaMarketa BrymovaMarketa BrymovaMarketa BrymovaMarketa Brymova

Cassia Riley

From DDgirls, Penthouse, sexy Cassia, Chasin girls

Cassia RileyCassia RileyCassia RileyCassia RileyCassia RileyCassia RileyCassia Riley

Marketa Belonoha

From Domai and Marketa4you.  Note her pictures in a library.  Put women like her in a college library and even retarded frat guys would be found perusing books on nuclear physics.

Marketa BelonohaMarketa BelonohaMarketa BelonohaMarketa BelonohaMarketa BelonohaMarketa BelonohaMarketa BelonohaMarketa Belonoha

Cardinal Cyn/Austin Jorie

From myspace, Palomar agency; the woman is a Burlesque dancer.  She appears to be the classiest of the bunch on this page.  If anyone has clearer pictures of her, please email them to me.

Cardinal Cyn/Austin JorieCardinal Cyn/Austin JorieCardinal Cyn/Austin JorieCardinal Cyn/Austin Jorie

Cardinal Cyn/Austin JorieCardinal Cyn/Austin JorieCardinal Cyn/Austin JorieCardinal Cyn/Austin JorieCardinal Cyn/Austin Jorie

Brigitte Hunter

From Mya Diamond

Brigitte HunterBrigitte HunterBrigitte HunterBrigitte HunterBrigitte HunterBrigitte Hunter

Sheila Grant

From Twistys

Sheila GrantSheila GrantSheila GrantSheila GrantSheila GrantSheila Grant

Maria...

...from MPL studios

Maria from MPL studiosMaria from MPL studiosMaria from MPL studiosMaria from MPL studiosMaria from MPL studiosMaria from MPL studiosMaria from MPL studios

Király Katalin

From Twistys; Király was the May 2002 Playmate of the month for the Hungarian edition of Playboy.

Kiraly KatalinKiraly KatalinKiraly KatalinKiraly KatalinKiraly KatalinKiraly Katalin

Evelyn Lori

From Evelyn's world, watch4beauty (w4b)

Evelyn LoriEvelyn LoriEvelyn LoriEvelyn LoriEvelyn LoriEvelyn Lori

Ivette Blanche

From Twistys, Sexy babes

Ivette BlancheIvette BlancheIvette BlancheIvette BlancheIvette BlancheIvette Blanche

Categories: 
Model type: 

Comments

first marketa is just average in face and body. caasie has a good figure, cute face but the way she poses(ugh) brigette has a beautiful face her figure has some good pints(her legs). the second marketa looks a smidge boyish. she has a lot of pop(tall, blonde, thin)--but no fizzle(lacks what makes christie brinkley so cute). cardinal is a goodlooking woma--especially for her age. she has a great body, her face would be better if it wasn't so long. sheila is a lil manly cuz she is so bigboned.---makes her look like a bar wench. maria is not cute(icky body---looks like a lil boy. kiraly's brows are too deepset. evelyn's face is ok--but her body is so manly. ivette's face is too angular... erik--is part of the reason ur having a hard time finding femme mediterannean women because you don't factor in women from that gene pool tend to have stronger noses, more angular faces?

shows what bad taste you have, kristin. brigitte is far from having a "beautiful face". in fact, she's the ugliest one of them all.

if these women are sexy, then sexy means average.

i think the average cute girl can be considered sexy--not everyone needs to be exotic. key examples would be beyonce, scarlett johansson, jenn9ifer love hewitt--are are viewed as sexy---fir having a regular but pretty(girly) appearance

Kristin and Madeline: Both of you have neglected the two questions asked in the entry, namely, what, if anything, on average distinguishes these women from the women in the attractive women section and what is your estimate of heterosexual men’s sexiness ratings of these women, on average, compared to that of the women shown in the attractive women section? Your personal ratings are not relevant to understanding what is sexy as far as lifetime-exclusive heterosexual men are concerned.

I don't believe that they are much less masculine than VS models. They are tall (a genetically-mediated trait that is exclusively caused by high androgen levels during puberty!) Taller women invariably have stronger brow ridges and more masculine-patterned hairlines. Take a look for yourself above.

This just goes to show that even many "glamour models" (let's call it what it is: girls who enter the porn industry) also seem to exhibit the aggressive nature that may have helped influence their decision of going into a "profession" that most females regard as grossly irresponsible to other women. Most of these so-called sexy women also have narrowed hips and small implants! The classic pose of thrusting one's hip to the side to compensate for a lack of a natural, rounded projection is evident here as well. You can dice it anyway you want, but much of the glamour ideal is less about masculinized supermodel aesthetics, and more about sexualizing underaged aesthetics. While some Asian cultures have surgeries to receive pubic hair transplants, women here emulate prepubescent aesthetics which have become popular. Tall glamour models don't necessarily appear tall in the photos without real-world indicators of scale, but in photos and on TV, it helps approximate the more gangly coltish appearance of a 12 year old going through an awkward phase. This ALSO hurts women. Your site is informative, but potentially painful for women, as it is misguided. Perhaps your defensive replies to women who vocalize how this hurts them will eventually morph into understanding what they are actually trying to communicate to you, but you just don't get it. Like the men who still e-mail you saying VS girls are hot, YOU also just don't get it. Your site has the potential to help women who often blame themselves rather than the media, but I feel like this site is absolutely more self-serving and ignorant than anything else. You know NOTHING of how the media harms women, for you are the worst objectifier of all! Promoting your "aesthetic standard"...oh, thank you soooo much. Although I can't prove it, believe me, I am not defending my own ego, as I have a more feminized figure than all of the women above (and that's not code for "I'm a Secret Fatty"), but your disregard of the points women try to make when they e-mail you is just marginalizing women further. I'm sure you could care less about truly understanding what I'm saying, and will continue defending your own position.

Sorry for not doing your condescending "homework," oh great educator of women and men!

I must again reiterate that there is a lot of good here, and you could really help women in particular with these illustrations of your contention, but something is still off. You could communicate differently if you really did put yourself in women's shoes to understand how they feel insidiously victimized by this sick, degrading culture. But your equally marginalizing attitude still shines through.

Kimberly: Controlling for ancestry, taller women tend to be less feminine, on average, but there are no problems finding plenty of feminine tall women. Many factors apart from androgens determine height. In addition, the proportion of tall women among glamour models is a lot less than among high-fashion models, almost all of whom are tall.

Your reference to the porn industry is uncalled for here. The women shown above, except for Cardinal Cyn, are nude models and some of them at most involve themselves in dildo insertions or simulated lesbian activity on camera. None of them appear to have breast implants. Hip width in these women is variable, ranging from somewhat narrow (Marketa Brymova) to normal (Marketa Belonoha) and wide (Evelyn Lori, Sheila Grant). Anyway, there are plenty of masculinized nude models around, but this is of little relevance here.

I am not aware of people in some Asian cultures sometimes opting for pubic hair transplants, but assuming that instances of pubic hair removal on the part of a number of Western nude models has anything to do with “sexualizing underaged aesthetics” is absurd. Heterosexual men with a preference for a hair-free pubic region prefer labia that suggest physical maturity rather than a pubic region where the labia are underdeveloped. In nude photography, a number of heterosexual men would not want the labia obscured by pubic hair, which would explain the trimming/shaving off of pubic hair in several cases. Some Western heterosexual men are also into hairy women.

Men don’t still email me about Victoria’s Secret models being hot. I got some such comments after describing the Victoria’s Secret lingerie show as a transsexual parade; this was before I started addressing Victoria’s Secret models, and no heterosexual man has since disputed my assessment of these models.

You have accused me of knowing nothing about how the media harm women. This is far from true. There is a prominent eating disorders page within this site, linked to at the top of each page, that addresses the harm caused to many women by high-fashion imagery. There are people behind the media, and I have identified who precisely are the culprits when it comes to the high status of very skinny high-fashion models, which is important knowledge in that a number of affected women who have come to associate the looks of high-fashion models with “perfection” need to know just whose idea of “perfection” is the skinny and masculine look. Blaming it on the media doesn’t help convince affected women that “perfection” does not lie in a skinny look.

You have accused me of objectifying women. If one had to examine women’s personality, one could have them take an MMPI-2 questionnaire and then examine the answers. I don’t think you would call it objectification. If one had to examine women’s intelligence, one could have them take a WAIS-R test. I don’t think you would call this objectification either. If one had to assess women’s physical attractiveness, then what option is there other than looking at the women? What makes this objectification? Don’t tell me that assessing attractiveness itself constitutes objectification. Attractiveness assessment is required in a number of scenarios, and is imperative if one is to combat the negative influence of skinny high-fashion models since the negatively affected women have come to believe that attractiveness lies in skinniness.

Am I promoting my own aesthetic standards? If the attractive women section were filled with obese women and all comparisons involving fashion models used obese women, would you have left the comment above? A specific aesthetic standard/look cannot be promoted by merely showcasing some women and contrasting them with women of a different physical type. One has to associate the specific aesthetic standard/look with high status in order to make it desirable, and gay fashion designers have achieved this by using skinny models to sell designer clothing to a public that has a strong interest in being well-dressed. What have I done that is comparable? Nothing other than just showing women, sometimes in the form of side-by-side comparisons. There is no way this would promote feminine beauty unless most people already harbored a feminine beauty ideal. This site will have a significant impact at some point, and it will be because most people intrinsically harbor a feminine beauty ideal.

You could easily prove that your physique is more feminine than those of the women above by emailing your pictures to me. I am always looking for women with feminine physiques, and I could use your pictures if you are willing. Besides, your comment suggests that you don’t like the feminine beauty promotion part of this site, which would be strange for a feminine woman unless she happened to harbor very high standards for herself and this site simply reinforced these very high standards. If this is the case, at least you cannot blame me for your own internal high standards.

Instead of asking me to communicate differently in order to better help women, it would be more useful to me if you specified how. Anyway, I will address the sexiness of the women above at a later date.

This page disappoints me. The rest of your site seems very well argued - but here you just throw in a few women and proclaim that they are sexier than others - on what basis? Your personal taste? Please tell me how you selected them. From what I can see it's mostly in attitude, expression, and poise - teasing the camera, maybe, and confident.

You suggest that the reader try to discern what makes these women sexy, by which my guess you mean sexually appealing to lifetime exclusive heterosexual men - but have you yourself actually come up with what that is? I find it very curious that you offer no basis, science, observations, or even theories. Is this a personal preference? It seems to me that since sexiness has to do with appeal, sexy can be something different to a whole lot of different guys - feminine, on the other hand, is well-defined here and I think you do a very good job discussing it. Some men may like more feminine women, and some may not - but in who's taste do you define sexiness? I'm not sure how you plan to qualify your discussion of sexiness, though.

Read the entry carefully. Nowhere is it said that the women shown above are “sexier than others.” You have been asked two questions, which you should attempt to answer.

Fair enough, but you do say "distinguishes these women from the women shown in the attractive women section," - which implies they are sexier, but this could be a misunderstanding.

I have already answered your question about what I see different about these women. I'm not obliged to do more. You have not, however, answered my questions. How are you defining sexy, and are you attempting to define a universal or sort of scientific basis for sexiness, as you have for femininity (well-argued and nonjudgmental, I believe). Isn't sexy different depending on personal taste? Is this page a sort of experiment and you want reader feedback before you say something, are you just musing, or do you have a point? You are of course not obliged to answer, but I'd like to know what you're getting at.

To talk about "what distinguishes..." is not to imply that these women are sexier. The question asked is "What is sexy?" and this is to say that the focus is on what constitutes sexiness. Therefore, "what distinguishes..." is in terms of physical features pertaining to sexiness.

The distinguishing elements you have pointed out, such as attitude expressed or posing are of little relevance because the women in the attractive women section could be made to pose similarly; the women there are shown in a bunch of poses, too. The relevant question is whether under similar posing the looks would on average be similar between the groups, and if not, then what are the distinguishing elements?

It is not the intent of the entry above to explicitly define sexiness, but to see what people think sexiness is from the perspective of lifetime-exclusive heterosexual men. I will have more to say later.

Many here are attacking the post and the photos displayed on this site. I am not one who condones nude photography however I will say this - These women are by no means masculine. There is such an assault on tall women by both sexes and I am glad a point was made that tall is beautiful. You can hurl insults about these women shown but really think about the crap they've more than likely endured by people such as yourself. They receive comments by men and women. How would you like it if people viewed you as being less feminine because you were "tall". (They can't help that they were born that way) You are basically saying that short is better. Frankly I have seen attractive tall and short women as well as ugly tall and short women. It shouldn't matter what height someone is. One is blind and idiotic to say these women on this site are ugly. I am a straight woman (older)who is sick of hearing tall women get bashed.

Leslie: What pictures are you referring to as being attacked? This site shows a variety of women ranging from masculine to feminine, and nobody is attacking them all. I generally ignore height in assessing attractiveness and have shown numerous pictures of feminine and attractive women who happen to be tall to dispel the belief that the masculine looks of high-fashion models are an artifact of their height.

Kimberly: I need to correct myself on one count. I found out that Marketa Brymova has done some porn work, and am not pleased to learn this.

Erik, i like your site and your opinion does make a point.Why do you think that the fashion industry is so successful promoting these women as being beautiful and most of all, why in hell are they so popular among men, if according to science they are not what they would prefer and consider beautiful and sexually appealing. It is very contradictory that some models like Heidy Klum and Giselle are said to be beautiful and femenine when they really are not.

Eric what do you think of Angelina Jolie vs. Jennifer Anniston? And Jeri Ryan?

Elizabeth: I prefer Angelina Jolie to Jennifer Aniston (too masculine face). Neither of these women are classifiable as feminine, but the masculinization in a young adult Angelina Jolie made her look sexy in many of her pictures (only exceptions for me were some pictures where the gonial region of her jaw was prominently displayed).

I believe Jeri Ryan has a good physique but I don't like her face that much because of elements such as a broad nose.

I think actress Paz Vega looks like clearly like a man and don't understand how peopel think she is so hot. In this pic and so did all my firends, mom and other users on the internet thought she was a tranny. A very masculinized women imo

http://www.tccandler.com/IMAGES/actresses/PazVega/paz%20vega%20neckline.jpg

Erik: I think it is clear that you believe that these women are sexy, and are hoping that other people will affirm your point of view. If you say otherwise you are being disingenuous. They are however distiguishable from the women in the "attractive women" section. Whilst it cannot be argued scientifically that slightly masculinized women are sexy- from self-reflection and from social interaction I would tend to agree. The idea is sound psychologically. The average man simply could not see himself sleeping with a hyperfeminine woman, whose faces are somewhat neotenic, appearing innocent- as easily as he could a woman who appears more aggressive, and whose sex drive he would perceive to be more compatible with his own.

This notion does not degrade women who appear sexy . As physical appearance may not denote character. Also who is to say that sex with no strings attached ( minus diseases) is a bad thing, as long as it hurts no-one? I also believe that women who pose nude out of choice are not degrading themselves- it is other people that degrade them by suggesting that what they are doing is obscene(madeline). This is disrespectful to them. In addition ust because a man finds a woman sexy physically, does not mean that he is objectifying her, and discounting all of her other valuable attributes. That is nonsense. While some women may feel this I can say that is foolishness. To suggest that a man cannot respect a dominant woman is absurd.

Madeline, These women, are nowhere near as masculine as any top high- fashion models. Also it is contradictory that you would suggest that women who are tall, masculinized and aggressive in appearance, could be considered as sexualising under-age aesthetics due to a little bit of depilation, which could even be for the purpose of hygiene.

Erik might not know the myriad ways which the media affects women, and I'm sure you don't either, as simply one woman. Many of your gender might even disown you as a little bit, unrational(that's a euphemism). Besides the website is clearly called feminine beauty and it's purpose is clearly to promote femininity, to redress the imbalance in our culture where feminine appearing women are not idealised. Femininity can only be defined as a gender average. And this being so the promotion of feminine beauty would be much better for the average woman's self esteem than hypermasculinization. Whilst obviously nobody, male or female wants to be judged in terms of worth as a human being solely by their appearance, this website cannot focus on absolutely everything that concerns women. How could it? Erik doesn't claim to be a mind reader. If one wanted to suggest that beauty itself is not important a case could be made for it. If someone wants to do that, all power to them.

This is a site with information from the point of view of a heterosexual man, for people who want to know about what a heterosexual man on average finds attractive physically. It addresses the negative influence on young women of the fashion industry as a footnote. It doesn't suggest they aren't important it just isn't a website on eating disorders, women's health or psychological problems . It is aimed at removing the illusion perpetuated throughout society that women who are far removed from the norm of femininity are the ideal of beauty.

apologies Madeline. Replaced all Madelines, in my previous comment with Kimberlys. Hopefully Kimberly has returned to her home planet by now.

Kimberly:

"Taller women invariably have stronger brow ridges and more masculine-patterned hairlines."

I find this observation odd, given that most would argue that tall supermodels have biometrically hyperfeminine or underaged facial and cranial features, and no suggestion at all of masculine pattern hair in any form. I can only speculate that you are seeing what you want to see in those pictures to support your earlier statement; in which case I might be able to refer you to a pathology database which illustrates the relatively grisly consequences of even the slightest androgen excess in women.

"They are tall (a genetically-mediated trait that is exclusively caused by high androgen levels during puberty!)"

Height is extremely polyfactorial, that is to say, many genetic and environmental determinants influence human height. According to what data we have, androgenisation is by far the exception rather than the rule in tall women; the primary determinants for height being nutrition, and multiple hereditary factors affecting long bone development, which are nothing to do with androgen metabolism.

For androgen excess to influence height significantly enough, there would be other marked signs of virilisation which would probably render the individual less viable for modeling. On a related point, I would strongly disagree with the author's assertion (in his other article) that high fashion models' skeletal proportions are intrinsically masculine. The low pelvic/shoulder width ratio observed in such individuals is not due to androgen excess (which would result in broader, heavier shoulders, expanded upper thoracic dimensions and distinctive craniofacial changes, among other visible changes) but due to skeletal underdevelopment in puberty resulting in narrow hips and other prepubertal skeletal proportions. The latter may be related to a delayed/diminished pubertal spike, or some other height-related idiosyncracy of their biophysiology.

My last paragraph was a little unclear on read-through and I can't seem to edit it, so I thought I'd clarify it here in the context of the broader article on "feminine vs masculine".

Chest, backside, physique: The general trend among these women is that they are prepubertal in proportion rather than virilised/masculine. I think this is an important distinction to make given the primarily heterosexual pedomorphic appeal of said fashion models to heterosexual men, rather than the homosexual connotations which arise when such features are described as masculine. I would also argue that these features may be comfortably distinguished from those of normal prepubertal males, though this is a discussion beyond the scope of a comments section.

Shoulders: The models here seem to have shoulder girdle parameters appropriate for their height, but which appear slightly disporportionate due to their relatively narrow hips and low BMI.

Face: I think your picture and model selection is an issue here. Many of the models have distinctly atypical makeup and hairstyling which accentuate their features disproportinately. Some have intrinsically quirky features which can still be considered feminine. Some do appear visibly virilised, though I do not think these specific appearances are prevalent among high fashion models.

Cheekbones: I think it's a generalisation to say that macroanatomic cheekbone position can be used as an indicator of masculinity or femininity, given that there is great variance between and within populations. Moreover, the study models here do not have the thicker, broader, protruding zygomatic arches characteristic of men, but fine, high elevated cheekbones which are a discernibly hyperfeminine archetype.

Jaw structure: This was interesting, but heavily confounded by the fact that the glamour models (having higher BMIs) had more facial padding in the area to round off their features. I would contend that most of the study models you've chosen fall comfortably within feminine parameters if compared to women of similar BMI.

Nasoglabellar region: I would agree that some of the quirkier fashion models definitely have a slightly masculinised configuration (most notably that of Stella Tennant), but that the majority fall within feminine parameters if racial idiosyncracies are factored in. I think your selection of comparison glamour models is also slightly atypical in that they have notably undefined features in this department, but that may just be me.

i think that most all the women on the attractive women page are fugly skanks with yellow teeth. they aren't pretty enough to be models, and aren't smart enough to be an actress. fashion models are gorgeous, and statuesque. there is no science of beautiful women,anyone can look at a beautiful woman and say wow! we shouldn't have to take her picture and break it down to a science, that is just stupid.angelina jolie is what you call "masculine", but i have never seen a more beautiful woman. women have many shapes and varieties, because not everyone has the same taste. examples of truly beautiful women: natalie portman, jessica alba, audrey tatou, mila jovovich,jessica simpson, angelina jolie,doutzen kroes,keira knightley,adriana lima, and alessandra ambrosio to name a few. the reason these women don't do porn is because they are way above average looking. you shouldn't have trouble finding a woman you think is beautiful, because you have horrible taste.

The professional make up and dental bleaching that celebrities use can make pretty models look fugly and yellow toothed by comparison; it makes celebs look fugly without it - http://teamsugar.com/group/273571/polls/273575. The most "truly beautiful woman" would look like a skank to other women in these poses. Think your stars could look better?

They don't look too sexy because they have imbalanced and/or unsymmetrical faces and/or bodies; there is something 'off ' about them.

Not having gone through all the pages of the "attractive women section" my immediate thought was that the difference is that the women in the "attractive women section" generally has a very innocent and young look to them, where the women on this page looks more "adult" so to speak... the women in then "attractive women section" almost looks too young compared to the women on this page.

I think all of the women on this page is at least 7 or above on a scale of 10.

I personally think that the maturity or adultness of the women on this page makes them a lot more interesting.

To me Maria is a little out of place here, although perhaps it's her best feature (long thick hair) making her look more feminine.

Cyn has a good body but is too pale to look sexy, copper coloured hair (shows ignorance of bleaching procedures) does her no favours.

These girls seem as if they are comfortable in a sexual situation, none of the "deer caught in the headlights" impression that more feminine women can sometimes make.

I am a woman, 34 years old, and quite sexy, so I've been told. I recently lost 60 pounds and I have been wondering why men of all races are suddenly finding me so sexy thus my reason for visiting this site. Although I am not in agreement with everything I have read I wanted to thank the author for having the courage to address this topic. I think this site could use a more thorough analysis of what is considered beautiful, feminine and sexy across all ethnic groups because I think, by today's standards, a face that would be considered beautiful would be slightly more ethnic (or exotic) than the examples presented.
Based on my own experience and my own research I would have to say what makes a woman sexy are the following:
1. A feminine yet slightly masculine face- When I was 60 pounds heavier, my face was much more feminine (babyish) and I attracted more blue collar types. My guess is these types of men tend to have more testosterone than average. I wouldn't necessarily consider them the most "masculine" of men because these men tend to be insecure and lack the type of ambition I desire in a mate. These shortcomings are signs of weakness and are not very attractive to me. Now that I have lost the weight my face is more masculine with a more defined jaw line and defined high cheekbones. Now I am attracting men of a certain caliber: self made millionaires, executives, and well paid professionals. I am a professional working woman and this works to my advantage in many situations when I deal with male coworkers and clients. I still have feminine facial features like big almond shaped eyes, full pouty lips, a good upper and lower facial proportion and attractive nose projection. I also have facial symmetry. I find men like to stare at my face, like a baby would, and my belief is that I look like the "average" pretty girl which is the most preferred type of face based on other research I have read. If I look directly at one of these men, I can literally see them start to breathe faster. Some look away quickly but the alpha males always stand erect, squint, and stare in my eyes.
2. Low body fat with a good muscular skeletal base - In my opinion, having a little body fat is a good thing but a woman must have a toned look (created by a strong muscular base) to be considered sexy. Well developed (not overly muscular) calves and thighs are especially sexy to men.
3. Good body proportion with firm breasts of medium to large size- I have literally seen men stare at my face, then my breasts, down to my waist and thighs and then my feet. A lot of men linger on the breasts and start to drool. Ankles are a big turn on for some men for some reason. There is something about where the ankle meets the calf that men like. When I wear pumps, this is an area that men tend to stare at for some reason.
4. Small/average features and bone structure- Men tend to have large heads, hands and feet. I don't think most men find large features especially sexy.
5. Well proportioned hips and rear- A sexy bottom must be perky and full with a good "happy" crease along the bottom of the buttocks. I personally have a hip to waist ratio of about .72 from the front and .65 from the back. I come from a family of woman who have lower ratios than this (small breasts, small ribcages, small waists and big hips) and they look at me incredulously when I tell them that men are literally staring at my bottom these days. Why would men choose to stare at my rear when these much more bottom curvaceous women are standing next to me? I don't know the answer but I am guessing because my bottom is perky and well formed and looks much more youthful because I do not have saddlebags and cellulite.

In my opinion, not having one or more of the criteria on my list is not a deal breaker for most men. Masculine and feminine balance can be achieved with the right make-up and clothing. I suspect as I get older my face will look more masculine and I will be more inclined to play up my feminine features. When I was younger (teens and 20s) I looked more like the feminine ideal as described on this site. I would say almost hyper feminine. To look sexy, I wore make-up to accentuate my cheekbones and wore clothes that gave me an edgier look. Today, I really play up my curves and highlight toned areas like my shoulders, legs, and small waist.
I should note that the type of men who flirts with me now would have never looked my way when I was more feminine looking. Maybe I have lower estrogen these days (due to lower body fat) and that has made me look a little more masculine and sexy. There is something about a woman who is confident, intelligent and knows how to use her womanly charms. My new look adds to my arsenol and I prefer my face and body the way it looks now that I'm older. My features don't scream, "breed me". They scream, "I know what I want and you must please me to keep me". The more confident man finds this incredibly sexy. The less confident man still finds this sexy but would be too intimidated to even approach me. I am ok with this because it makes it easy to weed out men with small penises.

....obviously some of this was written with tongue in cheek so please don't crucify me...lol. I am really not that arrogant or self absorbed but I couldn't resist posting. A good sense of humor is sexy and that is something you can't tell about a woman from looking at a picture.

These are what you call sexy. On the other page (attractive women section) is what you call ordinary. I guess; it all depends on who is looking at these pictures. People have their own definition of “sexy”. This is my opinion though!

Erik,

I don't understand what you are saying with this. Are you saying that these women are sexier than the ones in your attractive women section?

If so, why are they more attractive? Or are they supposed to be less attractive?

What is more important to attractiveness femininity or sexiness? Can feminine women be sexy too? I am assuming the difference between the women above than the one's in the attractive women section is that the one's above are more mascunilized but still look good. Right?

I'm kind of impressed Erik, this is probably the most attractive group of women that you've posted. All pretty, and feminine. They look great. Maria is more "cute", though, than sexy. The rest are definitely pretty sexy. Props for posting the burlesque dancer, she is pretty classy, I think.

If one had to examine women’s intelligence, one could have them take a WAIS-R test. I don’t think you would call this objectification either. If one had to assess women’s physical attractiveness, then what option is there other than looking at the women? What makes this objectification? Don’t tell me that assessing attractiveness itself constitutes objectification. Attractiveness assessment is required in a number of scenarios, and is imperative if one is to combat the negative influence of skinny high-fashion models since the negatively affected women have come to believe that attractiveness lies in skinniness.

People generally dislike any test they feel sure they would fail.

Women who feel they don't live up to the standard will object. It's human nature. I think there is objectification of women, but not in this context.

There is a sick, unhealthy female ideal now, that aggressively promotes masculinity and androgyny in women, and this is something that Erik tries to make us see and object to.

He couldn't demonstate the homosexual female ideal in all its twistedness unless he also gives us good examples of what femininity is, for comparison.

The glaring differences between "old-fashioned", normal female bodies, and the masculine and anorexic model and beauty queen become obvious, and men and women will realize that they are being fooled into accepting a sick, unnatural female ideal that only people who have no intention of ever breeding with these women could be so blind as to promote.

Heterosexual people have nothing to gain from a warped, twisted female ideal. The beauty in femininity should be valued more, I think, and the admiration for what is feminine, as opposed to what is androgynous, should be encouraged.

The differences between the sexes should be seen, understood and cherished, instead of being obliterated.

I'm sorry, I forgot again to sign my name again.

Erik;

"If one had to examine women’s intelligence, one could have them take a WAIS-R test. I don’t think you would call this objectification either. If one had to assess women’s physical attractiveness, then what option is there other than looking at the women? What makes this objectification? Don’t tell me that assessing attractiveness itself constitutes objectification. Attractiveness assessment is required in a number of scenarios, and is imperative if one is to combat the negative influence of skinny high-fashion models since the negatively affected women have come to believe that attractiveness lies in skinniness."

People generally dislike any test they feel sure they would fail.

Women who feel they don't live up to the standard will object. It's human nature. I think there is objectification of women, but not at all in this context.

There is a sick, unhealthy female ideal now, that aggressively promotes masculinity and androgyny in women, and this is something that Erik tries to make us see and object to.

He couldn't demonstate the homosexual female ideal in all its twistedness unless he also gives us examples of what femininity is, for comparison.

The glaring differences between "old-fashioned", normal female bodies, and the masculine and anorexic model and beauty queen become obvious, and men and women will realize that they are being fooled into accepting a sick, unnatural female ideal that only people who have no intention of ever breeding with these women could be so blind as to promote.

Heterosexual people have nothing to gain from a warped, twisted female ideal. The beauty in femininity should be valued more, I think, and the admiration for what is feminine, as opposed to what is androgynous, should be encouraged.

The differences between the sexes should be seen, understood and cherished - instead of being obliterated.

Swedish girl;

Sara Moihan, a model of mixed race put forward as a physical ideal.
"Saira Mohan is one of the top models in the world. Half Indian and Half Irish-French, Saira has been incredibly successful in the world of modeling and fashion.

Newsweek magazine recently called her the "new global standard of beauty"." ;

Is it just me or...?

Saira Mohan, the new "global standard of beauty" for women, and Bruno seem awfully alike.

Astute observation, I couldn't agree more! That was actually hysterical.

Saira mohan Pictures, Images and Photos

If this is the new "global standard of beauty", than we have greatly lowered our standards....

Most normal men, at least the one I date, and those I've dated in the past, would not give Saira a second look.

Political Correctness rules, so of course a multi-ethnic model will be proclaimed the "beauty standard", when in reality, a red-blooded heterosexual man would pass her up in favor of the feminine blond that Emily showed as an example. When supermodels begin to look like Borat, we seriously need to re-examine our values.

Someone previously posted on this page, that the difference between "sexy" and "attractive" is perhaps not just the models themselves, but the overall assessment that the "sexy" women seem more mature, not mature as in older, but in the percieved attitude that they exude. "Attractive" is a more general assessment, whereas, "sexy", "beautiful", "pretty/lovely" and "cute" are a more specific description. Someone who is attractive, overall, can often also be described with the above mentioned adjectives, depending on whatever image it is that they want to project, or, in the context of modeling, what they are trying to sell.

If one were trying to sell lingerie, as you've previously discussed, "sexy" is obviously the image that one would hope to exude. Unfortunately, the over-masculinized women chosen by gay men( people who will never have any desire to see a sexy woman, let alone know how to ascertain who is sexy in the first place) are poor representations of the entire concept of what is sexy. Sexiness is, as mentioned here also, is the distinct traits of a woman: breasts, hips and buttocks, that are the core traits of femininity. As a woman, what I find sexy in a male are the masculine, distinctive differences: broad shoulders, muscular definition, facial definition, things that are opposite of femininity.

The androgynous VS models can be "manipulated", looks wise, to suit a variety of images. Maybe that's another reason that those looks are sought out? The "sexy" models on this page are all extremely attractive, in my opinion. Sexy yes, but it is their overall femininity that makes them so. The main difference that I see here, in contrast to the "attractive women", is that there is a percieved slight masculization in their faces. I personally think that women, with, for example, elegant contoured cheekbones, or a fine, but defined jaw is more "attractive", but I still think that when it comes to looks below the neck, the small waist and ribcage, and the noticable swell of feminine hips and buttocks is still the most attractive, and sexy overall.

Sexy......? I say Kate Beckinsale, because of her more than the average typical femininity, maturity (as opposed to "girliness"), and overall class, I think classiness is another precusor of sexiness, it diferentiates it from cheapness...

Photobucket

Photobucket

Photobucket

Photobucket

Of course, I did not mean to post the bathing suit pic three times, my apologies, I meant to post the following 2 pics ....

Photobucket

Photobucket

Sorry for the mistake, I might add that there are also some photos of Dita Von Teese, where she appears more glamorous and sexy, than the Bettie Page wannabe that she usually looks like.

Photobucket

Photobucket

Photobucket

Once again, sorry for the previous post's errors

-Barberella (Veronicka)

I love Kate Beckinsale in the film Pearl Harbor. She was very feminine, sweet and lovely in it, I think. She is sexy in a classy way, just like Amy Adams, for example, or Nicole Kidman.

This is Amy Adams. She is feminine and sexy in a cute and sweet way, I think;


hihihi...

I especially like women who can be sexy in an "old-fashioned" way, with style, sweetness and allure, like the stars in old film noir movies, for example. I don't like vulgarity. Today sexy often seems to mean vulgar, when in fact the opposite is true.

Suggesting something is often much more sexy than flaunting it. At least I think so. Since I'm not a man I'm not an expert, hehe.

I forgot to sign again. The comment about Amy Adams is mine..sigh.

Amy Adams is a perfect example!! She can be elegant....

Amy Adams in Disney's "Enchanted"

girl next door cute,,,

http://www.flickr.com/photos/10653706@N03/2068189896/

and very classily sexy as well!

OUT19752975

I meant to grab the html and not the link, but you can see what I mean...

Michelle Pfieffer, who, despite "others" claims about N. Europeans aging badly, lets just see...

Michelle Pfeiffer colorize

Young British actress Rachel Hurd Wood...

Rachel Hurd-Wood Tim Jenkins shoot (2).jpg

Firma Rachel Hurd-Wood

Naomi Watts.....aging quite beautifully I might add, she's over 40!

naomi_watts_01

Nicole Kidman...

Nicole Kidman

Meg Ryan...

The Women

My, don't Nordic women age terribly? LOL, all sexy,

Sorry, I'm on a roll!! Ava Gardner...

Ava Gardner

Audrey Hepburn...

Audrey Hepburn with 'Ip

Rita Hayworth...

Rita

Veroncia Lake....

Veronica Lake 1941

Greta Garbo...

Greta Garbo

Sexiness is often what is left to the imagination, than the vulgarity that is the norm right now. All of these icons were no doubt sexy, but there was mystery about them, which is much more alluring.

Wow, barberella..those photos are simply wonderful. They are incredibly gorgeous all of them.

Crown Jewels in the Crown of Beauty they are. :)

I especially think that British women need more appreciation because they can be so extremely beautiful.

Thank you, Emily :)

I thought it was great that you posted pictures of Amy Adams, most see her as just "cute", but she is quite sexy, and not at all vulgar.

And true, British actresses don't get the credit, for their beauty, that they deserve.

I posted the photos of the Hollywood "golden age" sex symbols, because despite the very little skin being shown, it was the attitude, and the confidence, that more than just suggested they were sexy, it MADE us believe...

I can't imagine thinking these types of post are okay. Seriously. To post pics of women and torture them with insults is an awful thing to do - whether it's 'cause they are fat or skinny. They look manly because they are skinny - society pushes it on them.

Emily the women you mention are major Hollywood stars who've all had botox and plastic surgery. Nicole Kidman's face looks permanently frozen these days but as a redhead growing up in sunbaked Australian she surely accumulated a lot of sun damage before adolescence. The thing to do is to compare a nordic actress, likely to have had cosmetic procedures, to an actress of another background.

Image

This picture is of Claudia Schiffer, Andie MacDowell and Gong Li. Although Claudia Schiffer looks older than the other two she was born in 1970 and is the youngest. Gong Li is 5 years older and looks better. Andie MacDowell was born in 1958 and looks incredible for her age but Gong Li is definitely the most youthful and attractive woman in this photo.

Click here to post a new comment