You are here

Recent comments

Datesort ascending Author Article link, comment
Wed, 12/27/2006 - 03:19 Aileen Welcome!

Thank you for your thoughtful analysis.
However, the validity of your claims from start to finish has been met with much criticism and an overwhelming amount of counterarguments from women and men that render much what you say basically invalid.

As far as me looking nothing like a high fashion model, the fact of the matter is that I never asserted that I were a carbon copy of what a high fashion model looks like, but have more of the skeletal proportions that they do that the vast majority of women and for the record women and men in the fashion industry suggested to me on many occasions that I take up modelling, which I never had the courage or discipline to do so because it required more discipline than I had. However, I think since you observed that I took pride in my looks, you took an opportunity, as you always do sir, to devaluate and to belittle, which is alright. You offered your opinion and many others have offered me opinions, both men and women.

It is so easy to bring your claims down as almost every human being who has left comments on this site has done. I could write ten pages about how wrong you are, but that would just be a waste of my time. Actually, Im sorry I even left comments here after I read through all of the comments that people have sent to you and worse than that, was when I read your responses to all of them.

You may want to put up pictures of Winona Ryder, Scarlett Johansan (sorry cant spell her last name right), Rachel McAdamas, Kirsten Dunst, Kate Winslet and pictures of some older actresses such as Vivien Leigh, Elizabeth Taylor, Sophia Loren, etc. whose pictures were taken before photography was as advanced as it is today to make them look drastically different from how they really looked. These were some classy, elegant ladies who graced and charmed men and women alike and are still recognized as symbols of beauty all over the world in a wide array of attires that fully reveal their body contours, shapes, proportions, and facial features. Doing so would not indicate an affinity for chick flicks or love stories and such.

Anyways good luck in promoting feminine beauty among your menfolk, from the looks of it, you will be needing it, sir. For as long as this website has been existence and people have been visiting it, you have not done very well in promoting your noble cause.

Tue, 12/26/2006 - 16:09 Hans Nonheterosexual vs. heterosexual male preference for petite women: Alessandra Ambrosio vs. Camille

Erik: The people who choose the models/model scouts, may specifically look for people who are a bit adrogynous looking.

Tue, 12/26/2006 - 02:12 Erik Welcome!

Aileen: How have you come to the conclusion that I am hiding behind a pseudonym? I am not doing anything shameful and have no reason to use a fake name. I have no interest in getting women to go into porn; I will be working toward getting feminine and attractive women to pose in bikinis so that their pictures can be used to promote feminine beauty.

Getting pictures of “respectable” feminine and attractive actresses for the attractive women section is not a bad idea, but I am not into movies and cannot tolerate chick flicks/love stories where the feminine actresses are likely found. Suggest actresses that are comparable to the women in the attractive women section and I will take a look at them.

The attractive women section is about promoting feminine looks, not the actual women shown. As long as the fashion business remains dominated by homosexual men, feminine women are not going to become top fashion models.

Your accusation of bias on my part and thinking that there is anything about your looks that makes you resemble fashion models, apart from broad shoulders, shows your ignorance about what the it look is about in the fashion world and why it is so.

Having looked at your photos, it is clear that your skeletal frame is on the large side as far as the tastes of homosexual fashion designers go. You probably didn’t look like a boy in his early adolescence when you were in your mid-to-late teens, which, along with your lack of height, would rule you out as a high-fashion model. Kate Moss made up for her lack of height by looking like an adolescent boy when she first came to the limelight. At 5-foot-7.5 and 165 pounds around age 22, you qualified as grotesquely obese by gay fashion designer standards, and even your current weight of 135 pounds makes you obese by their standards, not to mention that at age 25, you are too old by fashion industry standards.

A C-cup qualifies as a deformity by gay fashion designer standards; AA breasts are more like it. You do not have high cheekbones but low ones instead. High cheekbones are placed high on the face; your cheekbones are large, placed low and are horizontally prominent, i.e., they are robust but not high. Anyway, I hope that you understand the reasons why fashion models look the way they do and not hold their looks as very desirable.

I was not under the impression that Iranians are heavily into cosmetic surgery, but it is unlikely that they beat Venezuelans.

Speaking of the likes of Pamela Anderson, in the absence of some prominent source(s) of feminine and attractive women, if fake-breasted nude models like Pamela Anderson are promoted by a major publication (Playboy) as very glamorous using posing tricks, then should it be surprising if she accumulates many heterosexual male fans? Something like this is unlikely to have happened if the masses knew enough to see through the fake femininity of women like Pamela Anderson. In other words, it is not “sociological,” i.e., people conditioned by the media, but more like lack of knowledge about fake femininity and the kind of feminine and attractive women out there. Fashion is a different matter; clothing in vogue is a media creation, but appreciation of the human physical form is less manipulable by the media, and only a minority is highly manipulable.

Whereas beauty does not come in a single form only, the range of the beautiful is lot narrower than the range of human forms, and there is a lot that is objective about beauty. It is an absurd notion that most people do not find high-fashion models attractive because most of them don’t look like them. Most people don’t look feminine and attractive either, but this doesn’t make the majority not appreciate feminine beauty.

As far as physical appearance implying some personality attributes goes, this is not what this site is concerned about. In other words, a physical appearance that suggests that a woman has a less/more desirable personality/character is not something that is taken into account by this site when it comes to addressing her beauty.

Mon, 12/25/2006 - 14:25 Kristin Lingerie modeling: Rebecca Romijn or Layla from W4B?

i agree this other girl would be a etter mystique

Thu, 12/21/2006 - 02:49 aileen Welcome!

hmmmm, Mr. Holland, I have been reading through some of your feedbacks and I see several personal biases on your part. Somehow, it seems that your site is somehow designed to degrade certain individuals such as homosexual fashion designers and those fashion models that they promote rather than to inform readers and that you do have a special liking for the teenage nude girls whose pictures you posted here from some websites.
Hmmm couldnt you use perhaps pictures of well known respected movie actresses who have those so called feminine traits that you speak of and who happen to be fully clothed in such a way that their body types can still discernable in order to make your point about what "feminine beauty" is??
well good thing you don't use your real name here because it is not good for your identity. however, there are at least a 100 ways to refute the things you say and perhaps you need to do some sole searching. maybe you are one of the people who lures young women into becoming porn stars and somehow think that putting their photos up here would somehow on the same ranks as Cindy Crawford and the rest, which unfortunately won't. Then again, its just a possibility I do not really know.
However, please consider your motives more carefully for making this website.

Thu, 12/21/2006 - 02:16 Erik Welcome!

Sarah: I am aware that there are some problems associated with the main goal of this site, which is the promotion of feminine beauty. The problem that you have identified is hurt feelings on the part of women who lack feminine beauty and especially those who are masculinized. This is an unfortunate outcome, and I wish that this weren’t the case. But let me explain the scope of this site, starting from the problem of underweight models.

Feminists and a number of eating disorder researchers have railed against the media/fashion industry for using underweight models, but what have they achieved? Hardly anything, but then what does one expect if they generally do not have a clue as to why high-fashion models are so skinny? To do something about this issue, the following steps are required:

Quote:

1. All interested parties need to understand that the typical skinniness of high-fashion models is part of a package that includes youth and masculinization, all of which make the central tendency of their looks lean toward those of adolescent boys, thanks to the gay domination of the fashion business.

2. It is necessary to document literature that the looks of high-fashion models cannot be understood in terms of some kind of public demand or the possibility that their looks increase sales given that the public strongly and overwhelmingly prefers above average femininity in the looks of women and finds the typical skinniness of high-fashion models socially unacceptable. This requires that one document correlates of beauty, and to do so is to act in the role of a messenger. It is inappropriate to direct animus toward the messenger when the problem that one has is with the way things are, which is what the messenger has merely documented.

3. It is necessary to provide examples of women that the general public finds attractive, i.e., feminine and attractive women, to reduce the odds of some women “internalizing” the skinny ideal promoted by the fashion industry. Educational attempts geared toward reducing the “internalization” of the skinny ideal and prompting healthful dietary practices are long-term failures because the crux of the issue is not addressed, namely that there are girls/young women out there looking for standards of perfection to emulate because they subscribe to the belief that if only they could be more perfect, their problems would go away. Convincing these women that perfect/ideal looks approach feminine beauty, as per the preferences of the vast majority of people, easily takes care of unhealthful practices such as unnecessary dieting or excessive exercise in order to achieve the “skinny ideal.” Pretending that beauty is a social construction achieves nothing; most people cannot be fooled into believing this.

In other words, the desirable goal of reducing the negative impact of skinny fashion models is consistent with the promotion of feminine beauty even if the sole reason for this promotion is aesthetics, speaking of which I hope that you agree that heterosexual men have a right to appreciate feminine beauty in a mainstream setting. Heterosexual men should not have to turn to adult-oriented sites to appreciate feminine beauty; it is a long-term goal of this site to establish a mainstream outlet for feminine beauty appreciation.

I will not pretend that there are no problems associated with the promotion of feminine beauty, and I will take the necessary steps to minimize these. You have probably noted that there is an effort here to provide women with some information as to how they can improve their looks, which is completely unnecessary as far the purpose of his site goes, but this information is provided as a courtesy. I have also addressed issues related to discrimination against unattractive women and how they can be minimized. I will address body image issues later, including the hurt feelings bit, which is something that I dislike about the project, but will argue that the overall benefits related to feminine beauty promotion exceed the negatives by far. You should note that the fashion industry’s insistence on using a narrow looks range creates a “hurt feelings” scenario for some women, too. For instance, the fashion industry is telling you that at size 12, you are fat! One could ask whether there is any ideal with better overall consequences than the fashion industry ideal or whether we should be having any ideal in the first place. It is not difficult to show that feminine beauty standards are an overall better ideal in terms of consequences, and as to whether we should be having an ideal, most people already harbor an intrinsic feminine beauty ideal, i.e., this site is not working toward creating an ideal.

I hope you understand that this site is not about how women are supposed to look like; women should not have to be under any obligation to conform to the looks preferred by any individual or group. This site is about appropriate looks in beauty pageants and modeling, i.e., it does not concern itself with the looks of women in general. You will have noted that women other than models and beauty pageant contestants are not being addressed here, except in rare circumstances and in response to reader comments. Beauty pageants catering to the general public should cater to the central tendency of aesthetic preferences in the general population, but this is far from the case. Many modeling scenarios require the use of feminine women, but masculinized women are used instead. Attempting to do something about this situation is not the same as saying “this is how women are supposed to look like.”

An equivalent site addressing male attractiveness would be useful to have, and although I could easily come up with it, I have little interest in male attractiveness, and there is little need for such a site, unlike a sore need for this site. Besides, most men who don’t measure up in the looks department know about it.

Your statement that God has made you the way you are for a purpose indicates that you have accepted your looks, to some extent at least. Please don’t let anyone convince you that your looks are unacceptable. Based on your self description, I will only say that someone with your looks should not be a model in some scenarios and does not belong as a contestant in a beauty pageant, but I will never say that your looks are unacceptable, period. There are many scenarios where looks don’t matter or shouldn’t matter. The Gods couldn’t care less about how someone looks. If you have a good nature, then you would easily be a better long-term stable partner for heterosexual men than objectively physically attractive women with bad natures. You could be a far better human than the typical beautiful woman or I can ever hope to be, and that would make you a much more valuable person. Just remember to not let anyone convince you that your looks are unacceptable per se.

Thu, 12/21/2006 - 02:14 aileen Welcome!

Hello Mr. Holland.

I happened to have ran into your website when searching for "broad shoulders" in the yahoo image pages. All of that you have placed here is quite interesting and informative.

Since I was 12 until I was 16 my dream was to be a fashion model like the women whose pictures you put here like Cindy Crawfords and Kate Moss, for example. Of course that opportunity never came and so I just dreamt of looking like these women.

My skeletal frame had always been robust since I was a child, but I was overweight, which made me disproportionately larger than other girls, but not necessarily fatter. I kept dreaming of having bony cheekbones and and shoulders like that of the fashion models. I am about 5 feet and 7.5 inches right now without shoes and almost 6 feet with the high heels that I wear, which intimidates everyone around me sometimes, both men and women. During the last 3 years I dropped almost 30 pounds. I am now 135 pounds versus 165 pounds and it is actually a normal healthy weight for most women my height who don't have my high cheekbones and broad shoulders.

It seems that my dream came true. I do resemble those masculine fashion models who I always wanted to look like now that their look is gradually going out of style and people are aspiring to the Marylin Monroe body and face types again, actually with the exception of my narrow hips I do also resemble Sophia Loren facially, heightwise, and my bust is rather full...I am a C cup. actually, it would be interesting to note that even Sophia Loren had strikingly high cheekbones and a broad face but was still considered the most beautiful woman in the world some decades ago.

The most interesting experience that I had was when I was visiting my home country a year ago for 6 months which is Iran. Our country is the world's capital for plastic surgery, mostly facial alterations, not as much body work, mainly nose jobs, cheek implants, botox and so forth. Before going to Iran, I saw to it that I lose a lot of weight so as not to look less attractive than the other women. Well I looked less attractive on many grounds, but mostly on the grounds that they didn't appreciate my high cheekbones that many tell me are literally supermodel cheekbones and my bony shoulders. I had an affinity before for looking bony until my father told me that I needed to gain some weight because my thin face looked masculine, less kind and feminine. The women there often told me they wish they had my height and long legs, which most Iranian women don't, but insisted that my face was emaciated and sunken in. On average Iranian women are not more than 5 feet 4 inches although there are even Iranian women who are thin and as tall as 6 feet too just as there are among Chinese women, which is even less common.

Even my old boyfriend had often complained that my face was too thin before I visited Iran and that I needed to gain some weight and that a rounded, more plumpish face was prettier. It was amazing that he couldnt appreciate that I sort of resembled a girl who would be making those thousands of dollars that those models make and he wanted a more "normal looking girl," a girl that looked like the rest of the girls, not someone strikingly different.

I will email you a few pictures of myself for you to see how i looked this past year even at my thinnest which was 125 pounds, I never got be less than 120 in order to be as waiflike as Kate Moss because she and I are almost the same height, I would have literally been a Middle Eastern Kate Moss only without those tens of thousands of dollars that she made every for every fashion show, but I thought that just to look like someone who does would be a great honor.

But mind you, boys and men 10 to 15 years ago liked those high fashion models when I was in high school and it is not necessarily because they are prettier or more attractive than Marilyn Monroe types. By the way, I know you personally don't find Pamela Anderson an attractive woman, but she was highly adored when she was a famous actress by almost all men with little exception.

The fact of the matter is more sociological than you are choosing to acknowledge. At least this is my opinion. Whatever we, the masses, are told is beautiful, we take as beautiful through overexposure and advertising regardless of what it is even if we initially think that it is the most undesirable thing. For example, right now, 80s fashion is back in, and girls are literally wearing those boots and tight pants and spiking their hair again whereas when I was a teenager in the nineties if you wanted to tell someone their outfit was not cool, you would say "its so eighties."

Now sir, I know you did not want me to say anything about inner beauty not being mentioned in your website and I will not do so as you requested, but I will offer you my most honest opinion. I think that a more complete and thorough examination of what beauty is and what it means to different people would reveal that beauty comes in many forms and that it is simply a matter of taste or prespective which is shapened through exposure and culturization over time and it is certainly subject to change at any time, which is what my growing years have taught me firsthand as my own looks and those I knew changed, voluntarily and involuntarly, now that I am 25 years old. But you are right, most of the people in the world do not look like high fashion models and therefore most people throughout the world would not find them attractive personally because there simply aren't many 5'10 to 6 feet women on this planet with broad shoulder, protruding cheekbones, and a bony jaw line all on 120 to 130 pounds. This type of look is most certainly on the unusual side, but not necessariliy on the unattractive side.

What might make a high fashion model attractive more specifically such as Kate Moss or Cindy Crawford is not their full sexy hips or tiny waist and big bust along with a roundish girlish face. This so called masculinity which you speak of that combines the totality of their features is rather symbolic of pride, confidence, assertiveness, discipline, control, and detachedness from others, not characteristically feminine traits by even traditional European standards, which would be shyness and cuteness combined, softness combined with an innocent look that is naive and gentle. This look may be attractive to some in some way and yet not attractive to others.

Yours Truly,
Aileen

Thu, 12/21/2006 - 02:05 Erik Welcome!

Sara: Fashion models are very tall from the perspective of women, but they are still in the average height range for men. In early adolescence one observes boys shoot up in height within a short amount of time and typically end up with a gangly appearance, which is what the central tendency among high-fashion models approximates. For teenage girls/adult women to approximate the gangly look, they have to be tall. Also consider that you will note the height of fashion models when you are standing next to them, but when they are walking on the runway, you will be looking at them from a distance, and at this distance, the absolute height of the models is not as important as it is for them to present the gangly appearance of boys in their early adolescence.

That there is an artistic aspect to fashion designing is obvious. I am willing to consider that artists will sometimes come up with art that only the connoisseurs will appreciate. But of all possible anomalous looks, why is the central tendency to approximate the looks of adolescent boys? What does the domination of the fashion business by homosexual men suggest? I have addressed five Victoria’s Secret models so far at this blog, all of whom are masculinized women with breast implants. What possible justification could there be for the latter other than the homosexuals involved being unwilling to tolerate anything beyond the minimum femininity that it takes to get the job done? If this minimum femininity can be achieved via breast implants and posing tricks then the homosexuals will gladly avoid feminine women. Why are you ignoring the most obvious explanation?

Tue, 12/19/2006 - 18:18 Chimp Welcome!

All I can say is that this is one of the worst websites I have *ever* seen!

Tue, 12/19/2006 - 03:40 Sarah Welcome!

And for any men that think women have a duty to fit these ideals stated in this website?
I take it the creators of this website will make a "brother" site?
You know, you could critisise men that look "feminine", applaud men that look "masculine" (including penis size)!

Have every inch of yourself scrutinized and be told that you are totally abhorant (or should be abhorent) to the opposite sex because your jaw isn't totally square etc (and because your you have "feminine" features your girlfriend must be a lesbian!!!).
And try and understand that its to make people "feel good about themselves". But you can't help the way you were born can you?
Go on, I dare you...you'll enjoy it.

Tue, 12/19/2006 - 02:50 Sarah Welcome!

I have very high cheek bones, low heavy eyebrows, a prominent hooked nose and heavy jaw line. I'm a healthy U.K. high size 12 (though you could say my body is quite androgynous in shape - I have polycystic ovaries).
I'm against the use of underweight models as much as the next person. But God made women different shapes and sizes (thankfully). If everybody looked the same life would be boring. God made me the way I am for a reason and I have the right to exist without people saying that I'm unnattrative(has it occured that people that aren't "feminine" have feelings?)
And actually, some men do find me attractive - there is that expression "there's someone for everyone...".
Who's face was more attractive? Marilyn Monroe's or Audrey Hepburn's? In my opinion they were both attractive in different ways and society was richer for it.
Women should just learn to love their own individuality. No amount of saying another woman is ugly will make an individual more attractive.
As long as women turn on each other I believe that genuine issues such as the use of underweight models will go untackled. Its not productive.

Mon, 12/18/2006 - 00:20 sara Welcome!

so why are female models so tall? I've never seen any adolescent males that are that tall. I can definitely buy the idea that high fashion models do not fall in line with heterosexual standards of beauty, but I'm not convinced that they're meant to look like adolescent males. Maybe they're just different looking...

High fashion design has a very artistic aspect to it, and a lot of the times, what artists create are not necessarily what we consider to be the most pleasing to the eye. Maybe using certain women as models is just designers conforming to the standards of art in the high fashion industry.

Thu, 12/14/2006 - 20:26 Erik Pamela Anderson: an example of fake femininity

Haruhi: You ignore obvious examples of deception in the pictures: fake breasts, not showing Pamela’s backside, hiding Pamela’s shoulder breadth, etc. Indeed, no one is being brainwashed; brainwashing is a non-phenomenon to start with. The issue is not being analytical/critical of a woman’s body shape, but addressing the looks of an international sex symbol who is not feminine.

The very fact that posing tricks and fake breasts are required to make Pamela Anderson palatable and appealing to heterosexual men prompts the question why not use a naturally large-breasted feminine and attractive woman? One could surely find some such women.

What is this nonsense about masculine women being in a lose-lose situation? I have nothing against them; they just don’t need to be modeling in scenarios where feminine women are required.

Thu, 12/14/2006 - 20:03 Erik Pamela Anderson: an example of fake femininity

Tamry: The intent of this site is not to make some women feel inadequate to others, but to promote feminine beauty, among other things. There are scenarios where feminine beauty is required, in accordance with the preferences of most people, but masculinized women are used instead. Pointing out the inappropriateness of such occurrences requires that the masculinization in the looks of masculinized women being portrayed as sexy be pointed out and contrasted with examples of feminine beauty.

On a personal level, if a woman likes how she looks, then she should consider herself to be good looking regardless of what this site or anyone else says. If a woman doesn’t like her looks, she can attempt to change a few things and hopefully accept what she cannot change.

A strong aesthetic preference for above average femininity in the looks of women is not just my preference, but also that of most men and women.

Sandy: Playboy’s centerfolds in recent years have also struck me as strange. A brief background is relevant here. The magazine started in the 1950s in the U.S., i.e., it had a head start, and went on to becoming internationally famous. I will be talking about the U.S. edition. The magazine features artistic nudity; there is nothing pornographic about it, which makes it socially acceptable to many people. Playboy’s circulation today is around 10-11 million, and the company has diversified, selling fashion merchandize, videos and operating a TV network. Playboy Inc. is obviously in a position to attract a large number of women willing to pose nude and then select fine examples of feminine beauty among them, but in recent years its centerfolds have often been masculinized women with fake breasts. Playboy models were often feminine in its early years, but from somewhere during the 1960s, the centerfolds started becoming increasing masculinized. Strange, isn’t it? I will be adding some 1960s Playboy centerfolds such as Maria McBane and Gloria Root to the attractive women section shortly, but, with rare exceptions, cannot bring myself to put 1990s-onward centerfolds in this section.

This issue came up in a comments thread in the first blog entry, and I addressed it as follows. Increasing masculinization from the 1960s onward is observable among both Playboy centerfolds and Miss America pageant contestants; data in terms of waist-to-hip ratios has been presented on the “eating disorders” page. The most obvious explanation is that this masculinization coincides with and appears to be a trickle-down effect of the increasing masculinization and slenderness of the highest status models, i.e., high-fashion models, courtesy of the increased freedom available to gay fashion designers.

However, whereas the increased masculinization of Miss America contestants is readily explicable, it is not so clear why a corresponding increase in masculinization should be seen in a publication targeting heterosexual men. One can assume that partly influenced by increasingly masculinized and slender high-fashion models, and its own gravitation toward selling fashion merchandize, Playboy Inc. brought its centerfolds closer to fashion models to be more compliant with fashion industry norms, but not to an extent that heterosexual men start losing interest, and has made up for the masculinization with posing tricks and using women with breast implants. Since there is no mainstream appreciation of feminine beauty, Playboy Inc. could easily get away with fake femininity. Indeed, a woman like Pamela Anderson became the 1990s sex symbol!

The above is what I posted earlier, but I came across some interesting information later. An ex-Playmate-wanabee, Jill Ann Spaulding, wrote a damning exposé of Hugh Hefner, Playboy’s founder, after living at his mansion, and I will mention some of the allegations. According to Spaulding, Hugh Hefner exercises ultimate control over who gets to be a centerfold. A number of women have ended up as Playmates only after sleeping with Hefner, and although the votes of the readership are supposed to largely determine who becomes Playmate of the year (PMOY), a Playmate who hasn’t slept with Hefner has little chance of becoming a PMOY. Jill Ann Spaulding has also alleged that Hefner indulges in unprotected sex, including anal sex, with his girlfriends and likes to watch gay porn while having sex with his girlfriends.

Let us assume that all of Spaulding’s allegations are true and then see how well they explain the looks of Playboy’s centerfolds. One would expect not-so-attractive women with few options for using their looks for success to be willing to sleep with an old man, thereby effectively prostituting themselves. Not-so-attractive women indeed abound among the centerfolds over the past couple of decades during which Hefner has been so old that young women would only be willing to sleep with him in exchange for money/becoming centerfolds. If there is a homosexual component to Hefner’s attractions, then this would partly explain the excessive masculinization -- from a discerning heterosexual male perspective -- among many centerfolds; part of the explanation will also include the lower willingness of feminine women to prostitute themselves and hence their paucity among Hefner’s girlfriends. One could then ask if indeed Hefner’s preferences are shifted toward the masculine, then how come the earlier Playmates were more feminine? Here, one could assume that in the earlier years, when Playboy magazine was establishing itself, it would have been more appropriate to comply with the more feminine model norms then. Alternatively, some people experience erotic target shifts during their lifetimes, and it is possible for Hefner to have shifted toward more masculinized norms as he aged.

Of course, it is difficult to assess how many of Jill Ann Spaulding’s allegations are true. The allegation that Hefner has continued to have sex with multiple young girlfriends is almost certainly true. The allegation that some women have become Playmates or PMOY only after sleeping with Hefner is likely true. I do not know whether the gay porn allegation is true.

Anyway, to sum, there are numerous potential reasons that explain the fake femininity and otherwise unimpressive looks that are too common among Playboy models in recent years: 1) a trickle-down effect of the high status of skinny and masculine fashion models over the years, 2) Playboy’s gravitation toward selling fashion merchandize and a corresponding change in its models to be more compliant with fashion industry norms, 3) a homosexual component to Hefner’s attractions, and 4) Hefner obliged to let his not-so-impressive girlfriends end up as centerfolds in exchange for their sexual services.

Whatever combination of these reasons holds true, the more important point is that Hefner is able to get away with his choice of centerfold models because there is no mainstream appreciation of feminine beauty; there are no alternatives; many people don’t know any better. Time for things to change.

Update; posted May 5, 2005: For the ultimate on Hefner, see this entry, which clarifies the explanation offered here.

Thu, 12/14/2006 - 19:59 Haruhi Pamela Anderson: an example of fake femininity

I honestly don't think that "deceptive tricks" or a "lack of education" are being used to make men think Pam is sexy; no one's being brainwashed here. Perhaps others just aren't so critical or analytical of a woman's body shape. Not every chick can have huge natural breasts or an hourglass figure or whatever. But then again, if a girl doesn't get implants, then she is totally ignored by a business that she could otherwise be successful in. I'm not promoting surgery or anything, but it seems that you are implying that "masculine" women are in a lose-lose situation. They aren't. "Masculine" women will still find loving partners, thankfully ones that aren't as critical as you.

Thu, 12/14/2006 - 16:27 Erik Holland Nonheterosexual vs. heterosexual male preference for petite women: Alessandra Ambrosio vs. Camille

Parnzz: I have pointed out masculinization in Alessandra Ambrosio, which is not mere opinion; it is obvious from her pictures. For further clarification about her masculinization, see her being addressed in the context of being a lingerie model for Victoria’s Secret.

This entry is not about nitpicking on flaws in Alessandra’s looks; it is about how masculine-feminine she is, which is relevant given that she is one of the big “sexy” fashion models out there. My looks are irrelevant to addressing this topic. I suppose that you would be pleased if I turned out to be effeminate, but my looks would disappoint you in this regard.

If you wish to see pictures of feminine women that most people would consider better looking then Alessandra, go though the attractive women section of this site (see navigation column toward the top left part of the page).

Thu, 12/14/2006 - 16:00 Erik Masculinization in the 2005 Miss World beauty pageant contestants

Mauriccio: You have described your physical appearance in part, which is irrelevant. What is relevant is your sexual orientation since you call a lot of the flagged women absolutely gorgeous. You have not told us whether you are a lifetime-exclusive heterosexual. If you are one, then even if you don’t like feminine curves, you would still be expected to prefer a feminine body shape and feminine face, not the masculine faces of the women shown, especially the ones looking like transsexuals/transvestites. You have not specified what is misinterpreted and used incorrectly. As far as this entry is concerned, the above average masculinization in the women shown is obvious. I shouldn’t have to cite any literature to make this point. Besides, the general public strongly and overwhelmingly prefers above average femininity in the looks of women.

Thu, 12/14/2006 - 15:46 Erik The transsexual parade otherwise known as the Victoria’s Secret lingerie show: part 5

Marta: No one here is arguing that femininity is a synonym of beauty. This site addresses numerous correlates of beauty other than femininity, some examples of which include averageness, overall fluctuating asymmetry and placement of face shape along the overall ancestral-to-derived discriminant. There are correlates of beauty that this site has so far avoided addressing because they are of little to no relevance when it comes to comparing different kinds of models, e.g., skin blemishes.

On the other hand, femininity is a very powerful correlate of beauty in women. Heidi Klum and other manly fashion models do not have any physical defects, skin blemishes or other miscellanous conditions that detract from beauty; what these women lack is femininity, the most important correlate of beauty in women in the absence of physical defects. Therefore, the comparisons such as above almost exclusively focus on femininity, but this should not be construed as femininity being portrayed as synonymous with beauty.

Thu, 12/14/2006 - 11:12 Name Pamela Anderson: an example of fake femininity

I never thought Pamela was attractive I couldn't pin point why.

Breast implants are ugly and don't jiggle. Natural breast are much more attractive.

Tamry this website is reality, concerning feminine beauty. Not all women will be perfectly feminine like all men will not be 6'2 tall and look like Brad Pitt. I'm short so I'm screwed when it comes to love but life goes on. Women will more readily show me their true character so it's not all bad. Most men have to wait till the new of marriage wears off to see what I see upon first meeting.

Thu, 12/14/2006 - 10:37 Parnz Nonheterosexual vs. heterosexual male preference for petite women: Alessandra Ambrosio vs. Camille

HI, i have viewed many fashion & beauty sites but this is the first time ive ever felt compeled to email a site,
i think your opinions especially regarding Alessandra Ambrosio are completly retarded.
i am not going to go into specifics of what you said as i disagree with it all.
I think the fact that the models you are slating are making millions each year while you are sitting at home bitching about whats wrong with them speaks volumes about you.
I also notice you havent posted a section on yourself so if you would like to add one, i would be happy tear that to pieces for you, as im quite confident it will be far from perfect.

I truely believe that Alessandra Ambrosio is the closest thing to perfection that there ever has been or ever likely to be.

Could you also please post a picture of someone who you think is beautiful (if there is anyone good enough for you) as i would like to see what your idea of beauty is NOT what it isnt

i also believe you should change the name from "beauty.info" which it ISNT to "some.twats.beauty.opinion" which IT IS

However if it was Stevie wonder who wrote this article i retract my comments, have a nice day

Parnzz

Wed, 12/13/2006 - 21:29 Sandy Pamela Anderson: an example of fake femininity

Pamela Anderson has always been a caricature to me, overblown to an appalling extent but obviously appealing to men on some level (chest level perhaps?). I know that Playboy is supposed to be representing the "fantasy" but can bolted-on fake breasts that don't fit with the rest of someone's body be that fantasy?

I guess I wonder why Playboy, which is supposed to be a high-class publication with the ability to pick and chose among the best looking women in the world, doesn't ONLY feature women who are naturally large breasted (since large breasts are obviously crucial to their formula). A naturally large breasted women would no doubt also have a curvier build overall than Pamela Anderson or many of the models they feature. I have nothing against breast implants per se, I just don't think they represent the best in female attractiveness or beauty, which Playboy purports to represent.

Wed, 12/13/2006 - 16:58 tamry Pamela Anderson: an example of fake femininity

-Should women with the facial and body features you describe in this website as masculine feel inadequate to the women you that you characterize as feminine?

-This website is just your point of view right?

Wed, 12/13/2006 - 15:21 Erik Pamela Anderson: an example of fake femininity

A comparison should have been included above, but here it is.

The woman shown is Sheila Grant from Twistys.

Sheila Grant is not particularly feminine, but contrast her waist-hip proportions with Pamela Anderson’s and also note Sheila’s feminine backside; Sheila also has natural breasts.

Sheila Grant from Twistys

Sheila Grant from Twistys

Wed, 12/13/2006 - 01:23 Jordan The importance of femininity to beauty in women

I actually prefer number 1 also. She is just hot.

Wed, 12/13/2006 - 01:09 Mauriccio Masculinization in the 2005 Miss World beauty pageant contestants

I think a lot of these women are absolutely gorgeous! I am a normal male. 24 yrs old and I am very handsome. I am 6'1, play a lot of sports, blue eyes and dark hair. I consider myself a normal male that could represent a lot of other males. You are just wrong, I could also grab a bunch of quotes from the bible and "prove" that Jesus was gay and had a bunch of lovers, but it's not true. Your sources are correct but they are misinterpreted and used incorrectly. This is merely your opinion and it is very obvious no matter what you say. A lot of the women you consider beautiful are just too plump for me, I would never date one like that. Just an opinion.

Pages