i think he could be straight bu t he may think of fashion models as beautiful in a nonsexual way. i know of other artists--including my boyfriend who see them as great possers, and highly moldable o so many purposes since they appear asexual. the photographers usually won't date the real unnattractive ones, but they would take their picture.
Charly: The transsexual-looking models may be laughing all the way to the bank, but they will not be laughing after reading the analyses of their looks here. Besides, their popularity [in terms of looks] is going to go down in the long-term, not up.
Psychology is obviously not your forte, so you should quit amateur psychological profiling. Someone would come up with this site after being jilted by a masculinized woman!
I do not have a problem with accepting “other’s sexual genotypes and phenotypes” and neither am I judging “peoples’ genders and sexual expression of those genders.” This site has nothing directly to do with genotype, gender as in behavioral aspects, or sexuality; it addresses looks. I have pointed out previously that I do not have a problem with masculinized looks in women; the problem that I have is with the use of women with unfeminine looks when feminine-looking women are required.
Aileen: It is surprising that you came back and left a lengthy comment. Why do you plan on coming back to an uninteresting site every now and then? Beats me.
I do not dismiss comments as nonsensical and leave it that; I provide justification. I have not deemed myself an expert on the subject of feminine beauty; this is your characterization; after all, there is no subject of feminine beauty to start with. The contents of this site are obviously not taught as a package in school or college. One may come across some of the information cited here in the course of getting an education, but one will not encounter anything resembling the entire package. My background is in engineering and physiology, and most of my formal education has nothing to do with this site, but it has given me enough knowledge to pursue the scientific interests that I have, and this site is one example of the knowledge that I have sought and wish to share with others.
I have not conceptualized physical attractiveness in terms of sexual attraction. For instance, men and women rate female attractiveness similarly even though most women are not sexually attracted to women. I have provided much more extreme examples of body modification/adornment than yours (e.g., Japanese women keeping long hair, whitening themselves or painting their teeth black) here, but have still argued for a lot being objective about beauty. You need to consider common underlying principles. Many correlates of beauty that hold across human populations are abstract, not simplistic like your examples, and they are not undermined by superficial differences between populations. For instance, even if men didn’t cut their hair, women would have longer hair, on average. Therefore, to keep long hair on the part of women is to exaggerate an example of sexual dimorphism, and it is easy to find cross-cultural forms of body adornment/modification that exaggerate sexual dimorphism.
Your explanation of beauty pageants is off the mark. No matter how many non-looks factors are taken into account to decide the winners, beauty pageants are primarily about beauty, and pageants catering to the general public should chiefly emphasize beauty in accordance with the central tendency of public preferences. Given the size of the human population, it would be an easy matter to find hundreds of feminine and very attractive women who have notable talent, are smart and well-educated, have contributed to the community, have presence of mind, desire to better humanity, etc. Masculinized women simply wouldn’t make it among the contestants in a beauty-plus-personality pageant that catered to the beauty preferences of the general public.
Heather, a few comments above, left numerous cues that she is a feminist; anyone familiar with feminism will understand that this inference is not merely based on little information. Besides, Heather never said anything about “Aryan beauty”; she talked about what makes an Aryan.
What will be achieved if feminine beauty occupies the top rung among female models? I agree that the problems of hunger and warfare will not be solved. However, the end goal of feminine beauty promotion is to make feminine beauty occupy the top rung among female models; those who appreciate feminine beauty do not need to justify why, and others shouldn’t waste their time trying to understand. Of course, there will be benefits such as reduced frequency of unnecessary dieting on the part of a number of girls and women.
Feminine and attractive women are not accessible to most men; they are generally taken by upper class men. If feminine and attractive women occupied the highest status among female models, some of the best examples of feminine beauty would end up with the richest/most powerful men with a greater frequency, but this will make little difference to the common man since most men are not getting feminine and attractive women (there are just not that many of them).
I have not described Cindy Crawford and Kate Moss as ugly; ugliness refers to physical defects/abnormalities, which these women and other fashion models do not have. Additionally, If I were you, I would not be envious of Crawford and Moss for ending up with the likes of Richard Gere and Johnny Depp since rich men have a choice of women, and those among them who go after masculinized women are prime candidates for either being into the down-low lifestyle, experiencing same-sex attraction or of having narrowly escaped nonheterosexuality.
Why do I spend some of my time on this site and what do I have to gain? A site like this has long been needed; read the FAQ for clarification. I didn’t see anyone come up with it, and since I could come up with it, I did. In addition, if the Gods ask me after my death, “We gave you knowledge; what did you do with it?”...what am I supposed to tell them...that I sat on the knowledge? Answering yes would get me a ticket to Hell. Furthermore, all major problems in the world are in the process of being addressed/solved by many individuals, but the problem of a dearth of feminine and attractive women among models and beauty pageant contestants, trivial as it is, is not being seriously addressed by others. Why shouldn’t I attempt to solve a challenging problem concerning something that I have been interested in since childhood?
Honestly, I never thought Heidi had a pretty body despite being as thin as she is. I give you that, and the woman she's compared to, Maria, does indeed have a very nice body. Perhaps because I'm a woman, I don't particularly find big, big breasts and the super hourglass figures very desirable, only to a certain degree and Maria fits that perfectly.
Only problem is that Maria's face has is not pretty nor does she exude any charisma. Heidi, on the other hand, does have a pretty face (albeit not beautiful) regardless of the masculinization. She is also full of charisma, which is something that separates her from the rest of the models pack and puts her in a position where she was able to transcend from the modeling industry and become a celebrity in her own right. These are perhaps the so called x-factors that detracts from the obvious subject of feminity at hand.
While I see your point in calling for true feminity in the mainstream media, looking through the attractive women section of your site, I don't particularly see any beautiful girls on there. Not to say that they're ugly, some are decent and cute, but overall they are of average looks. And none of them really have much photo appeal and charisma. But that may partially be due to the fact that they're also amateur shots.
This also isn't to say that models and that of Victoria's Secret in particular are beautiful. As a matter of fact, just looking at their faces, none can be considered beautiful. But they do possess nice bodies, especially those of Adriana Lima's, Marisa Miller, Alessandra Ambrosio etc. Maybe they are masculinized as you say, but for the many reasons that were brought forth to this website, these models market the products that appeal to women. And they are far curvier than most runway models.
Perhaps the only true way to bring forth more 'feminine' models into the limelight is if we can slap society's obsession with the super skinny. We live in a world of perfection, but to tell you the truth, I have never seen a woman who had such a beautiful body and face. It's always either they possess one and not the other or neither.
what i am implying is that to people used to seeing ethnic faces , the width of a nose has nothing to due w/ masculinity. therefore, beyonce to many, was feminine and pretty before her nose job. to many people, a long nose is masculine. i think the indicators of femininity yo look for in fces are pretty schewed towards whites, and i would suggest pulling aside someone who appreciates women of color to better understand/differentiate the 'robustness' of an ethinic face vs. a white masculine face---because ther IS a difference.
the concept of looking for fine features only applies to eurocentric communities. there are just ways that people in other societies measure beauty. i am not being judgemental, since i stumble in this respect sometimes--as i am most used to european faces. however, i have detected that weakness and made steps to fix it. i as offering you some help.
for the health and maximum impact of the site, i suggest you broaden your ability to appreciate the facial femininity of non-european women.
eric--both pf the pics you used display the power or a. padded bras, and the second one, of airbrushing. whenever there are deep shadows and obvious highlighting---that is photoshop. the first pictures was to show off a highly padded bra from victoria's secret. many of their bras add on 2 cup sizes for the wearer. so water is probably filling out that cup. most models wouldn't get implants simply because it ruins their chances at high fashion work.
its also tacky to quote the bible to push a very unbiblical action---posting pictures of women that you appreciate from lustful standpoint. evidently u are not christian or jewish. otherwise you would be offended.
and the one study you did include does not matter. one study, as any scientist will tell you about any subject, does not "prove" anything. it has to be shown over and over again that the same outcome comes out every time before a hypothesis, such as this or that in a woman makes her more "feminine," could be stated as a "truth."
in the end, what men (and/or women) want to see in fashion models specifically will not matter. fashion models are there to show off the clothes, not to be pleasing to the eye. w/e the fashion industry wants in a model, they're going to show off. personally, i think it would be in their better interest to show off a broad range of females in different types of clothes. people would be more interested in buying clothes if they thought they'd look in good in them.
So, by basically insulting these "masculinized" models, you're "doing something about it?" Making sarcastic comments like "Sexy physique, isn't it?" or "Backside, where hast thou gonst?" isn't going to make people who disagree with you listen to a word you say.
And you keep saying "most people think this" or "most people think that." Rather than make such assertions without proof, instead of basing this entire site on insulting women in the modeling industry, why don't you show statistics that prove your point? Unless, of course, your points can't be proven by what other people have to say because most disagree with you. Because from what I see here, it seems all your argument is a bunch of charts comparing facial and body structures and making fun of women unless they have a certain face shape, body shape, and weight.
Kristin: When praise is due, all you can think of is grammar! Worse, by what unholy creed have you labeled the above pornographic? Academics be damned; thou shalt revel in the glory of creation; God is not mocked (Galatians 6:7).
Dave: The analogy is reasonable. If a neighborhood industry is emitting pollutants, some people will be able to move to another neighborhood, but some will be stuck there and have to suffer regardless of how healthy their self-chosen lifestyle is. Similarly, teenage girls and young women do not have control over skinny women earning a lot of money as models and having their pictures splashed all over. Some individuals are more impressionable than others, and if skinny models are being glorified by the fashion industry, some (the equivalent of those that are stuck in the neighborhood in the analogy) are bound to associate skinniness with desirability and subsequently attempt to acquire the trait. If one is convinced that the characteristic sought is highly desirable and of value, then even though one could avoid acquiring it, why would one refrain?
There is simply no assumption here that people are way too stupid to make decisions for themselves. Like I said before, and something that you have completely ignored, without background information, i.e., the gay factor, it is not at all obvious why fashion models have to be skinny. People lacking knowledge about the gay factor are not necessarily stupid or lacking in critical thinking skills. When skinniness is being glorified, some females will not see it as undesirable if they are merely told that it is unhealthy, looks bad, represents media oppression, etc. because they see these skinny women in lofty imagery, portrayed as perfect or near-perfect. Nobody is saying that eating disorders are entirely the fault of the fashion industry, but the fashion industry is most certainly responsible for making skinniness desirable to some girls and women, and deserves blame on this count.
Gisele’s statement was condemned by numerous eating disorders researchers, which you should read about because her statement was vacuous. Your own reasoning is no less absurd. If parents fail to instill critical thinking skills in their offspring and raise children that do no feel secure in the word, why would the children be prompted to undereat?
When I said that there is a lot that is objective about beauty, I cited a link, and here it is again; the link leads to numerous pages within this site where empirical data from peer-reviewed journals is cited to show that most people agree about what constitutes beauty. Don’t tell me that my argument is subjective, merely reflecting my likes and dislikes, unless you can refute the evidence cited and prove your contention.
Regarding your suggestion that women should be told to ignore the fashion industry and that what models do don’t matter, do you believe that nobody has thought of this before and tried it? These elements have been part of educational measures to reduce unnecessary dieting among girls and young women for a long time, but guess what? These measures have been long-term failures; evidence:
Quote:
Paxton SJ. A prevention program for disturbed eating and body dissatisfaction in adolescent girls: a 1 year follow-up. Health Educ Res 1993;8:43-51.
Carter JC, Stewart DA, Dunn VJ, et al. Primary prevention of eating disorders: might it do more harm than good? Int J Eat Disord 1997;22(2):167-72.
Mann T, Nolen-Hoeksema S, Huang K, et al. Are two interventions worse than none? Joint primary and secondary prevention of eating disorders in college females. Health Psychol 1997;16(3):215-25.
Stewart DA, Carter JC, Drinkwater J, et al. Modification of eating attitudes and behavior in adolescent girls: a controlled study. Int J Eat Disord 2001;29(2):107-18.
Baranowski MJ, Hetherington MM. Testing the efficacy of an eating disorder prevention program. Int J Eat Disord 2001;29(2):119-24.
Should anyone be surprised? When high-fashion imagery is saying, “look, this is perfection, and women with such looks are making hundreds of thousands if not millions and are the envy of others and on top of the desirability rankings,” will all girls and young women be easily convinced to ignore fashion imagery? What has been lacking heretofore has been nailing the culprit in educational programs, i.e., the gay factor, and setting up a comparable standard of “perfection” that cannot be achieved via negative health behaviors, i.e., a feminine beauty standard. Whereas this site does a decent job of educating the public about the gay factor, there is no mainstream outlet for feminine beauty appreciation yet, but I will be working toward it, and then we shall see whether the frequency of medically unnecessary dieting on the part of girls and women remains the same.
Laurie: Your measurements do not sound like that of a masculine woman, but large breasts and a 36-inch bust imply a rib cage that should not be too broad assuming that you are somewhat above average height, i.e., a 27-inch waist may be because of excess abdominal fat. You could be a somewhat more feminine-looking version of Charlotte in Table 2, i.e., feminine but not with an hourglass figure. Kristin is right; absence of an hourglass look does not imply masculinity. Email me clear pictures of your physique and I will be able to properly answer your questions. If you are concerned about privacy, blur your face or cut it out of the pictures.
Marguerite: The term “transsexual parade” is not supposed to imply that actual male-to-female transsexuals are being used but that too many of Victoria’s Secret models have a transsexual look to them. Regarding AIS (androgen insensitivity syndrome) in genetic males, the complete form can be ruled out among models such as Gisele because their masculine appearance suggests that they are responsive to androgens, but the manifestation of the partial form varies greatly, and AIS is rare, i.e., very few -- at most -- of the apparently female fashion models are genetic males with partial AIS. If you are sexually attracted to feminine women, you will find a lot of interesting pictures here, and are probably receptive to some of the goals of this site. It would be cool to have lesbians like yourself working toward the promotion of feminine beauty as it would contrast sharply with the lesbian core of NOW that would flip upon encountering this site.
Kristin: I don’t know how recent your photo is, but her breasts do not look natural in the picture. Look at these three pictures, where padded bras/posing do not appear to be a factor: Pic1, Pic2, Pic3. Pictures 1 and 2 either represent recent breast implants or photoshop manipulation, but picture 3 seems to have been taken in an informal setting. I suspect that she has gotten breast implants, but you are right, I should not be stating my suspicion as if it is a fact; I wouldn’t bet my money on it.
Allwomenrock: I am not dictating what is required for a woman to be attractive; I am just pointing what most people, most women included, find physically attractive in women. Whereas it is true that people vary in their preferences, most individuals aesthetically prefer above average femininity in the looks of women; you should read this. This site is not arguing that women who do not look feminine are abnormal, and neither is it concerned with telling women how to dress/look. Addtionally, absence of femininity does not equate to manly looks; feminine- and masculine-looking women lean toward the opposite ends of the trait distribution curve, and there are plenty of women in between that are neither describable as feminine nor as masculine. This site cannot portray all types of bodies as equivalent since it is trying to promote feminine beauty, and even if it weren’t, this would still not be possible since it simply isn’t the case; it is not possible to make people find all body types equally acceptable. People have a basic aesthetic sense; read about a study from Iran here; people who fall short of their own aesthetic standards will not be pleased with their looks.
Since most people prefer feminine beauty in women, feminine beauty should naturally occupy an exalted position in the public, achieved by the elevation of women possessing feminine beauty rather than the derogation of women who do not possess it, but this is far from the case. There should be no need to put down women who lack feminine beauty. Contrasting masculinized fashion models/beauty pageant contestants with feminine women is necessary to bring aesthetics issues to pubic attention; the comparisons should not be seen as an attempt to put down masculinized women. Once again, if masculinized women are used when feminine ones are needed, it is time to do something about it.
Kristin: I am not able to understand what you are trying to say. Width implying Europeanness? What is this? Anyway, Beyonce Knowles’ photos shown reveal a more masculine-looking woman before the nose job.
shouldn't you put her in the attractive women section vs. a blog spot... i think everyone is silent, cuz you posting porn and trying to slide it off as academic
i don't think women who don't have hourglass figures are masculine. i think alot of that stuff depends on ethnicity, diet, lifestyle, etc. if you have broad shoulders--then you may be top heavy. sooo. inverted triangle. but i don't think hourglass---but just think.. angelina jolie has that sort of body. she isn't too shabby.
People who are picking Elle as more feminine are seeing the polish and skill of posing and photography. They are missing the key features.
If you look at the photos of Elle in the black swimsuit, notice that the tops of her pelvis (hip bones) are nearly even with her navel. If you look at the 2nd to last picture of Monica and draw a mental line across the top of her pelvis, you will see that it is several inches below her navel. Also, Monica's rib cage tapers in towards the waist, unlike Elle's, which is clearly seen in the shot of her on the beach in white jeans. This is why Monica has a smaller waist and presents a more feminine appearance.
Also, Monica isn't underweight, the way that Elle is in these photos, so she actually has buttocks. The extreme dieting also has a lot of effect on the faces of models. Their cheeks become sunken, making their cheekbones and jawlines very angular. Elle is better than many in this regard, although her brow bone is a bit more prominent than normal towards the outsides of the eye sockets. It's difficult to see because models and makeup people get so skilled at using cosmetics to fool the eye, unless you know what to look for in the underlying bone structure.
Erik Holland:
Why are you dictating what is necessary for a woman to be "attractive?" different people find different types of body parts/bodies attractive. to some people, a large butt on a girl might be attractive; others prefer a smaller butt. some people might find women with more athletic bodies attractive, and others women with a little meat on them more so. i do agree that at times the modeling industry can promote only a few body types as being "ideal" or even so far as "normal," but this site has gone far beyond that. you're basically saying that pear-shaped and/or hour-glass shaped women alone have a "normal" body form. maybe in your opinion, that is the "ideal" body form. nice for you. other men might prefer a woman who is h-shaped or v-shaped or apple-shaped. these women are just as normal, and as long as they take care of their bodies by eating right and exercising, nobody should feel they have the right for putting them down or saying they're "manly" for what they cannot control. liking them does not make a man prone to homosexuality; it just makes his view different from yours. maybe you should do something the modeling industry has trouble doing: respect all women of all shapes and sizes, stop telling them how to look/dress, and for god's sakes, make them feel good about their bodies. ALL types of bodies.
terrible analogy. you cant avoid pollutants in your neighborhood. but you can easily look at something and not try to emulate it. you are continuing to operate under the assumption that people are way too stupid to make decisions for themselves and nothing is their fault.
if i watch a race on tv and then go out and drive like a maniac, you dont blame the racing industry. the most important lesson to learn here is individual responsibility, but that is the opposite of what you are claiming. you are continuing to place the responsibility to raise mentally healthy people on the fashion industry. that is a mistake.
you say "why in the world would family problems cause women to undereat?"
the answer is obvious, the family has not properly taught critical thinking skills, and has instilled enough insecurity in the children that they have screwy values. that is clearly a family, not a fashion industry issue. man-face giselle is absolutely right.
you say:Quote:
"there is a lot that is objective about beauty"
you do not understand what the word "objective" means. all statements about topics like beauty are purely subjective. your claims about "real" beauty are meaningless from an empirical standpoint. your statements only reflect your likes and dislikes.
i think if you care about women's health, a better attitude to take would be to ignore the fashion industry, and teach people that what models do doesnt really matter. they could all be deathly ill from malnutrition, and it should have no bearing on anyone else's life but theirs. they live their live, you live yours, that is a healthy plan.
Well, there are of course butch lesbians who wish to be masculine, and lesbians who are attracted to that, but many lesbians are in love with femininity, our own and that of our partners.
Women like Gisele don't do much for us, either. On a purely physical level I'd much rather dive into Grace than Gisele. :)
However, you should take out the phrase "transexual parade" unless you can actually establish that these women are ts. Heidi for example has a child, I believe, something no transexual woman will ever be able to do.
Is it psosible some of these women are AIS? It's been rumored for years.
My Bust is 36 (i have very prominent breasts) my waist is 27 and my hips are 36. My shoulder width is around 14 cm. What group does my body fall into and is this an ideal beauty? or is my build towards masculinity? Do i have an hourglass figure?
Subcutaneous fat is an organ, not a demon to be exorcised Hollywood-style (unlike visceral fat, which actively functions in a destructive manner, which should be exorcised with exercise).
I skimmed the science bits, so if this aspect of health was included, sorry--I may have missed it: subcutaneous fat produces estrogen in both men and women. Females are at higher risk for osteoporosis, however, so the suppression of normal-range hormone levels by being underweight for extended periods increases the risk of this degenerative disease manifold. The probability that women are prone to excessive weight consciousness during their most important years for increasing bone density means that this androgynous-model-idealization won't be merely a harmless phase for those women who manage to grow out of it.
Dave: Blaming the fashion industry for what it is responsible for does not absolve people of personal responsibility for their health. Even people with healthy lifestyles will suffer health problems if a neighborhood industrial facility is emitting a lot of pollutants. In other words, whereas people do have some control over their lifestyle, they are not responsible for non-lifestyle-associated factors that affect health.
As far as critical thinking goes, it is not obvious why fashion models look the way they do unless people have some background information. I don’t believe that I am lacking with respect to critical thinking, but when I was a kid, I wondered what is up with the looks of fashion models and what do people see in them to use them as models; I didn’t have a clue. I understood the above average masculinization among fashion models after I found out that the fashion business is dominated by homosexual men. I understood the typically skinniness of high-fashion models after I found out that sexual interest in underage children is notably higher among homosexuals than heterosexuals, and that there are undoubtedly a sufficient number of pederasts in powerful positions in the fashion industry so as to result in the central tendency among high-fashion models approximate the looks of adolescent boys. Critical thinking ability without background knowledge would not help one make the inferences above. If the negative effects of high-fashion imagery are to be undermined, then one should not assume that people have the requisite critical thinking ability and background knowledge; one should educate the masses; some people don’t need the education, but others do.
On the other hand, there is a lot that is objective about beauty and there is no market for man-faced female models among heterosexual women (see evidence).
i think he could be straight bu t he may think of fashion models as beautiful in a nonsexual way. i know of other artists--including my boyfriend who see them as great possers, and highly moldable o so many purposes since they appear asexual. the photographers usually won't date the real unnattractive ones, but they would take their picture.
Charly: The transsexual-looking models may be laughing all the way to the bank, but they will not be laughing after reading the analyses of their looks here. Besides, their popularity [in terms of looks] is going to go down in the long-term, not up.
Psychology is obviously not your forte, so you should quit amateur psychological profiling. Someone would come up with this site after being jilted by a masculinized woman!
I do not have a problem with accepting “other’s sexual genotypes and phenotypes” and neither am I judging “peoples’ genders and sexual expression of those genders.” This site has nothing directly to do with genotype, gender as in behavioral aspects, or sexuality; it addresses looks. I have pointed out previously that I do not have a problem with masculinized looks in women; the problem that I have is with the use of women with unfeminine looks when feminine-looking women are required.
Aileen: It is surprising that you came back and left a lengthy comment. Why do you plan on coming back to an uninteresting site every now and then? Beats me.
I do not dismiss comments as nonsensical and leave it that; I provide justification. I have not deemed myself an expert on the subject of feminine beauty; this is your characterization; after all, there is no subject of feminine beauty to start with. The contents of this site are obviously not taught as a package in school or college. One may come across some of the information cited here in the course of getting an education, but one will not encounter anything resembling the entire package. My background is in engineering and physiology, and most of my formal education has nothing to do with this site, but it has given me enough knowledge to pursue the scientific interests that I have, and this site is one example of the knowledge that I have sought and wish to share with others.
I have not conceptualized physical attractiveness in terms of sexual attraction. For instance, men and women rate female attractiveness similarly even though most women are not sexually attracted to women. I have provided much more extreme examples of body modification/adornment than yours (e.g., Japanese women keeping long hair, whitening themselves or painting their teeth black) here, but have still argued for a lot being objective about beauty. You need to consider common underlying principles. Many correlates of beauty that hold across human populations are abstract, not simplistic like your examples, and they are not undermined by superficial differences between populations. For instance, even if men didn’t cut their hair, women would have longer hair, on average. Therefore, to keep long hair on the part of women is to exaggerate an example of sexual dimorphism, and it is easy to find cross-cultural forms of body adornment/modification that exaggerate sexual dimorphism.
Your explanation of beauty pageants is off the mark. No matter how many non-looks factors are taken into account to decide the winners, beauty pageants are primarily about beauty, and pageants catering to the general public should chiefly emphasize beauty in accordance with the central tendency of public preferences. Given the size of the human population, it would be an easy matter to find hundreds of feminine and very attractive women who have notable talent, are smart and well-educated, have contributed to the community, have presence of mind, desire to better humanity, etc. Masculinized women simply wouldn’t make it among the contestants in a beauty-plus-personality pageant that catered to the beauty preferences of the general public.
Heather, a few comments above, left numerous cues that she is a feminist; anyone familiar with feminism will understand that this inference is not merely based on little information. Besides, Heather never said anything about “Aryan beauty”; she talked about what makes an Aryan.
What will be achieved if feminine beauty occupies the top rung among female models? I agree that the problems of hunger and warfare will not be solved. However, the end goal of feminine beauty promotion is to make feminine beauty occupy the top rung among female models; those who appreciate feminine beauty do not need to justify why, and others shouldn’t waste their time trying to understand. Of course, there will be benefits such as reduced frequency of unnecessary dieting on the part of a number of girls and women.
Feminine and attractive women are not accessible to most men; they are generally taken by upper class men. If feminine and attractive women occupied the highest status among female models, some of the best examples of feminine beauty would end up with the richest/most powerful men with a greater frequency, but this will make little difference to the common man since most men are not getting feminine and attractive women (there are just not that many of them).
I have not described Cindy Crawford and Kate Moss as ugly; ugliness refers to physical defects/abnormalities, which these women and other fashion models do not have. Additionally, If I were you, I would not be envious of Crawford and Moss for ending up with the likes of Richard Gere and Johnny Depp since rich men have a choice of women, and those among them who go after masculinized women are prime candidates for either being into the down-low lifestyle, experiencing same-sex attraction or of having narrowly escaped nonheterosexuality.
Why do I spend some of my time on this site and what do I have to gain? A site like this has long been needed; read the FAQ for clarification. I didn’t see anyone come up with it, and since I could come up with it, I did. In addition, if the Gods ask me after my death, “We gave you knowledge; what did you do with it?”...what am I supposed to tell them...that I sat on the knowledge? Answering yes would get me a ticket to Hell. Furthermore, all major problems in the world are in the process of being addressed/solved by many individuals, but the problem of a dearth of feminine and attractive women among models and beauty pageant contestants, trivial as it is, is not being seriously addressed by others. Why shouldn’t I attempt to solve a challenging problem concerning something that I have been interested in since childhood?
Honestly, I never thought Heidi had a pretty body despite being as thin as she is. I give you that, and the woman she's compared to, Maria, does indeed have a very nice body. Perhaps because I'm a woman, I don't particularly find big, big breasts and the super hourglass figures very desirable, only to a certain degree and Maria fits that perfectly.
Only problem is that Maria's face has is not pretty nor does she exude any charisma. Heidi, on the other hand, does have a pretty face (albeit not beautiful) regardless of the masculinization. She is also full of charisma, which is something that separates her from the rest of the models pack and puts her in a position where she was able to transcend from the modeling industry and become a celebrity in her own right. These are perhaps the so called x-factors that detracts from the obvious subject of feminity at hand.
While I see your point in calling for true feminity in the mainstream media, looking through the attractive women section of your site, I don't particularly see any beautiful girls on there. Not to say that they're ugly, some are decent and cute, but overall they are of average looks. And none of them really have much photo appeal and charisma. But that may partially be due to the fact that they're also amateur shots.
This also isn't to say that models and that of Victoria's Secret in particular are beautiful. As a matter of fact, just looking at their faces, none can be considered beautiful. But they do possess nice bodies, especially those of Adriana Lima's, Marisa Miller, Alessandra Ambrosio etc. Maybe they are masculinized as you say, but for the many reasons that were brought forth to this website, these models market the products that appeal to women. And they are far curvier than most runway models.
Perhaps the only true way to bring forth more 'feminine' models into the limelight is if we can slap society's obsession with the super skinny. We live in a world of perfection, but to tell you the truth, I have never seen a woman who had such a beautiful body and face. It's always either they possess one and not the other or neither.
what i am implying is that to people used to seeing ethnic faces , the width of a nose has nothing to due w/ masculinity. therefore, beyonce to many, was feminine and pretty before her nose job. to many people, a long nose is masculine. i think the indicators of femininity yo look for in fces are pretty schewed towards whites, and i would suggest pulling aside someone who appreciates women of color to better understand/differentiate the 'robustness' of an ethinic face vs. a white masculine face---because ther IS a difference.
the concept of looking for fine features only applies to eurocentric communities. there are just ways that people in other societies measure beauty. i am not being judgemental, since i stumble in this respect sometimes--as i am most used to european faces. however, i have detected that weakness and made steps to fix it. i as offering you some help.
for the health and maximum impact of the site, i suggest you broaden your ability to appreciate the facial femininity of non-european women.
eric--both pf the pics you used display the power or a. padded bras, and the second one, of airbrushing. whenever there are deep shadows and obvious highlighting---that is photoshop. the first pictures was to show off a highly padded bra from victoria's secret. many of their bras add on 2 cup sizes for the wearer. so water is probably filling out that cup. most models wouldn't get implants simply because it ruins their chances at high fashion work.
its also tacky to quote the bible to push a very unbiblical action---posting pictures of women that you appreciate from lustful standpoint. evidently u are not christian or jewish. otherwise you would be offended.
and the one study you did include does not matter. one study, as any scientist will tell you about any subject, does not "prove" anything. it has to be shown over and over again that the same outcome comes out every time before a hypothesis, such as this or that in a woman makes her more "feminine," could be stated as a "truth."
in the end, what men (and/or women) want to see in fashion models specifically will not matter. fashion models are there to show off the clothes, not to be pleasing to the eye. w/e the fashion industry wants in a model, they're going to show off. personally, i think it would be in their better interest to show off a broad range of females in different types of clothes. people would be more interested in buying clothes if they thought they'd look in good in them.
So, by basically insulting these "masculinized" models, you're "doing something about it?" Making sarcastic comments like "Sexy physique, isn't it?" or "Backside, where hast thou gonst?" isn't going to make people who disagree with you listen to a word you say.
And you keep saying "most people think this" or "most people think that." Rather than make such assertions without proof, instead of basing this entire site on insulting women in the modeling industry, why don't you show statistics that prove your point? Unless, of course, your points can't be proven by what other people have to say because most disagree with you. Because from what I see here, it seems all your argument is a bunch of charts comparing facial and body structures and making fun of women unless they have a certain face shape, body shape, and weight.
Kristin: When praise is due, all you can think of is grammar! Worse, by what unholy creed have you labeled the above pornographic? Academics be damned; thou shalt revel in the glory of creation; God is not mocked (Galatians 6:7).
Dave: The analogy is reasonable. If a neighborhood industry is emitting pollutants, some people will be able to move to another neighborhood, but some will be stuck there and have to suffer regardless of how healthy their self-chosen lifestyle is. Similarly, teenage girls and young women do not have control over skinny women earning a lot of money as models and having their pictures splashed all over. Some individuals are more impressionable than others, and if skinny models are being glorified by the fashion industry, some (the equivalent of those that are stuck in the neighborhood in the analogy) are bound to associate skinniness with desirability and subsequently attempt to acquire the trait. If one is convinced that the characteristic sought is highly desirable and of value, then even though one could avoid acquiring it, why would one refrain?
There is simply no assumption here that people are way too stupid to make decisions for themselves. Like I said before, and something that you have completely ignored, without background information, i.e., the gay factor, it is not at all obvious why fashion models have to be skinny. People lacking knowledge about the gay factor are not necessarily stupid or lacking in critical thinking skills. When skinniness is being glorified, some females will not see it as undesirable if they are merely told that it is unhealthy, looks bad, represents media oppression, etc. because they see these skinny women in lofty imagery, portrayed as perfect or near-perfect. Nobody is saying that eating disorders are entirely the fault of the fashion industry, but the fashion industry is most certainly responsible for making skinniness desirable to some girls and women, and deserves blame on this count.
Gisele’s statement was condemned by numerous eating disorders researchers, which you should read about because her statement was vacuous. Your own reasoning is no less absurd. If parents fail to instill critical thinking skills in their offspring and raise children that do no feel secure in the word, why would the children be prompted to undereat?
When I said that there is a lot that is objective about beauty, I cited a link, and here it is again; the link leads to numerous pages within this site where empirical data from peer-reviewed journals is cited to show that most people agree about what constitutes beauty. Don’t tell me that my argument is subjective, merely reflecting my likes and dislikes, unless you can refute the evidence cited and prove your contention.
Regarding your suggestion that women should be told to ignore the fashion industry and that what models do don’t matter, do you believe that nobody has thought of this before and tried it? These elements have been part of educational measures to reduce unnecessary dieting among girls and young women for a long time, but guess what? These measures have been long-term failures; evidence:
Quote:
Should anyone be surprised? When high-fashion imagery is saying, “look, this is perfection, and women with such looks are making hundreds of thousands if not millions and are the envy of others and on top of the desirability rankings,” will all girls and young women be easily convinced to ignore fashion imagery? What has been lacking heretofore has been nailing the culprit in educational programs, i.e., the gay factor, and setting up a comparable standard of “perfection” that cannot be achieved via negative health behaviors, i.e., a feminine beauty standard. Whereas this site does a decent job of educating the public about the gay factor, there is no mainstream outlet for feminine beauty appreciation yet, but I will be working toward it, and then we shall see whether the frequency of medically unnecessary dieting on the part of girls and women remains the same.
Laurie: Your measurements do not sound like that of a masculine woman, but large breasts and a 36-inch bust imply a rib cage that should not be too broad assuming that you are somewhat above average height, i.e., a 27-inch waist may be because of excess abdominal fat. You could be a somewhat more feminine-looking version of Charlotte in Table 2, i.e., feminine but not with an hourglass figure. Kristin is right; absence of an hourglass look does not imply masculinity. Email me clear pictures of your physique and I will be able to properly answer your questions. If you are concerned about privacy, blur your face or cut it out of the pictures.
Marguerite: The term “transsexual parade” is not supposed to imply that actual male-to-female transsexuals are being used but that too many of Victoria’s Secret models have a transsexual look to them. Regarding AIS (androgen insensitivity syndrome) in genetic males, the complete form can be ruled out among models such as Gisele because their masculine appearance suggests that they are responsive to androgens, but the manifestation of the partial form varies greatly, and AIS is rare, i.e., very few -- at most -- of the apparently female fashion models are genetic males with partial AIS. If you are sexually attracted to feminine women, you will find a lot of interesting pictures here, and are probably receptive to some of the goals of this site. It would be cool to have lesbians like yourself working toward the promotion of feminine beauty as it would contrast sharply with the lesbian core of NOW that would flip upon encountering this site.
Kristin: I don’t know how recent your photo is, but her breasts do not look natural in the picture. Look at these three pictures, where padded bras/posing do not appear to be a factor: Pic1, Pic2, Pic3. Pictures 1 and 2 either represent recent breast implants or photoshop manipulation, but picture 3 seems to have been taken in an informal setting. I suspect that she has gotten breast implants, but you are right, I should not be stating my suspicion as if it is a fact; I wouldn’t bet my money on it.
Allwomenrock: I am not dictating what is required for a woman to be attractive; I am just pointing what most people, most women included, find physically attractive in women. Whereas it is true that people vary in their preferences, most individuals aesthetically prefer above average femininity in the looks of women; you should read this. This site is not arguing that women who do not look feminine are abnormal, and neither is it concerned with telling women how to dress/look. Addtionally, absence of femininity does not equate to manly looks; feminine- and masculine-looking women lean toward the opposite ends of the trait distribution curve, and there are plenty of women in between that are neither describable as feminine nor as masculine. This site cannot portray all types of bodies as equivalent since it is trying to promote feminine beauty, and even if it weren’t, this would still not be possible since it simply isn’t the case; it is not possible to make people find all body types equally acceptable. People have a basic aesthetic sense; read about a study from Iran here; people who fall short of their own aesthetic standards will not be pleased with their looks.
Since most people prefer feminine beauty in women, feminine beauty should naturally occupy an exalted position in the public, achieved by the elevation of women possessing feminine beauty rather than the derogation of women who do not possess it, but this is far from the case. There should be no need to put down women who lack feminine beauty. Contrasting masculinized fashion models/beauty pageant contestants with feminine women is necessary to bring aesthetics issues to pubic attention; the comparisons should not be seen as an attempt to put down masculinized women. Once again, if masculinized women are used when feminine ones are needed, it is time to do something about it.
Kristin: I am not able to understand what you are trying to say. Width implying Europeanness? What is this? Anyway, Beyonce Knowles’ photos shown reveal a more masculine-looking woman before the nose job.
akso God is only capitalized when it is a monotheistic God. the plural version is lowercase.
shouldn't you put her in the attractive women section vs. a blog spot... i think everyone is silent, cuz you posting porn and trying to slide it off as academic
i don't think women who don't have hourglass figures are masculine. i think alot of that stuff depends on ethnicity, diet, lifestyle, etc. if you have broad shoulders--then you may be top heavy. sooo. inverted triangle. but i don't think hourglass---but just think.. angelina jolie has that sort of body. she isn't too shabby.
People who are picking Elle as more feminine are seeing the polish and skill of posing and photography. They are missing the key features.
If you look at the photos of Elle in the black swimsuit, notice that the tops of her pelvis (hip bones) are nearly even with her navel. If you look at the 2nd to last picture of Monica and draw a mental line across the top of her pelvis, you will see that it is several inches below her navel. Also, Monica's rib cage tapers in towards the waist, unlike Elle's, which is clearly seen in the shot of her on the beach in white jeans. This is why Monica has a smaller waist and presents a more feminine appearance.
Also, Monica isn't underweight, the way that Elle is in these photos, so she actually has buttocks. The extreme dieting also has a lot of effect on the faces of models. Their cheeks become sunken, making their cheekbones and jawlines very angular. Elle is better than many in this regard, although her brow bone is a bit more prominent than normal towards the outsides of the eye sockets. It's difficult to see because models and makeup people get so skilled at using cosmetics to fool the eye, unless you know what to look for in the underlying bone structure.
I do confess I like Elle's slim thighs though :)
Erik Holland:
Why are you dictating what is necessary for a woman to be "attractive?" different people find different types of body parts/bodies attractive. to some people, a large butt on a girl might be attractive; others prefer a smaller butt. some people might find women with more athletic bodies attractive, and others women with a little meat on them more so. i do agree that at times the modeling industry can promote only a few body types as being "ideal" or even so far as "normal," but this site has gone far beyond that. you're basically saying that pear-shaped and/or hour-glass shaped women alone have a "normal" body form. maybe in your opinion, that is the "ideal" body form. nice for you. other men might prefer a woman who is h-shaped or v-shaped or apple-shaped. these women are just as normal, and as long as they take care of their bodies by eating right and exercising, nobody should feel they have the right for putting them down or saying they're "manly" for what they cannot control. liking them does not make a man prone to homosexuality; it just makes his view different from yours. maybe you should do something the modeling industry has trouble doing: respect all women of all shapes and sizes, stop telling them how to look/dress, and for god's sakes, make them feel good about their bodies. ALL types of bodies.
terrible analogy. you cant avoid pollutants in your neighborhood. but you can easily look at something and not try to emulate it. you are continuing to operate under the assumption that people are way too stupid to make decisions for themselves and nothing is their fault.
if i watch a race on tv and then go out and drive like a maniac, you dont blame the racing industry. the most important lesson to learn here is individual responsibility, but that is the opposite of what you are claiming. you are continuing to place the responsibility to raise mentally healthy people on the fashion industry. that is a mistake.
you say "why in the world would family problems cause women to undereat?"
the answer is obvious, the family has not properly taught critical thinking skills, and has instilled enough insecurity in the children that they have screwy values. that is clearly a family, not a fashion industry issue. man-face giselle is absolutely right.
you say:Quote:
you do not understand what the word "objective" means. all statements about topics like beauty are purely subjective. your claims about "real" beauty are meaningless from an empirical standpoint. your statements only reflect your likes and dislikes.
i think if you care about women's health, a better attitude to take would be to ignore the fashion industry, and teach people that what models do doesnt really matter. they could all be deathly ill from malnutrition, and it should have no bearing on anyone else's life but theirs. they live their live, you live yours, that is a healthy plan.
Well, there are of course butch lesbians who wish to be masculine, and lesbians who are attracted to that, but many lesbians are in love with femininity, our own and that of our partners.
Women like Gisele don't do much for us, either. On a purely physical level I'd much rather dive into Grace than Gisele. :)
However, you should take out the phrase "transexual parade" unless you can actually establish that these women are ts. Heidi for example has a child, I believe, something no transexual woman will ever be able to do.
Is it psosible some of these women are AIS? It's been rumored for years.
Erik,
My Bust is 36 (i have very prominent breasts) my waist is 27 and my hips are 36. My shoulder width is around 14 cm. What group does my body fall into and is this an ideal beauty? or is my build towards masculinity? Do i have an hourglass figure?
Subcutaneous fat is an organ, not a demon to be exorcised Hollywood-style (unlike visceral fat, which actively functions in a destructive manner, which should be exorcised with exercise).
I skimmed the science bits, so if this aspect of health was included, sorry--I may have missed it: subcutaneous fat produces estrogen in both men and women. Females are at higher risk for osteoporosis, however, so the suppression of normal-range hormone levels by being underweight for extended periods increases the risk of this degenerative disease manifold. The probability that women are prone to excessive weight consciousness during their most important years for increasing bone density means that this androgynous-model-idealization won't be merely a harmless phase for those women who manage to grow out of it.
i think its cuz she is a master poser and dresses to enhance. here is a recent victoria secret shoot pre photoshop
http://img3.exs.cx/img3/1673/istoegente090414.jpg
Dave: Blaming the fashion industry for what it is responsible for does not absolve people of personal responsibility for their health. Even people with healthy lifestyles will suffer health problems if a neighborhood industrial facility is emitting a lot of pollutants. In other words, whereas people do have some control over their lifestyle, they are not responsible for non-lifestyle-associated factors that affect health.
As far as critical thinking goes, it is not obvious why fashion models look the way they do unless people have some background information. I don’t believe that I am lacking with respect to critical thinking, but when I was a kid, I wondered what is up with the looks of fashion models and what do people see in them to use them as models; I didn’t have a clue. I understood the above average masculinization among fashion models after I found out that the fashion business is dominated by homosexual men. I understood the typically skinniness of high-fashion models after I found out that sexual interest in underage children is notably higher among homosexuals than heterosexuals, and that there are undoubtedly a sufficient number of pederasts in powerful positions in the fashion industry so as to result in the central tendency among high-fashion models approximate the looks of adolescent boys. Critical thinking ability without background knowledge would not help one make the inferences above. If the negative effects of high-fashion imagery are to be undermined, then one should not assume that people have the requisite critical thinking ability and background knowledge; one should educate the masses; some people don’t need the education, but others do.
On the other hand, there is a lot that is objective about beauty and there is no market for man-faced female models among heterosexual women (see evidence).
Pages