You are here

Recent comments

Datesort ascending Author Article link, comment
Fri, 10/13/2006 - 23:38 gia Eva Herzigova

i agree that eva is less attractive facially--but i thin kher body is the same shape as nikki's excluding about twenty pounds---maybe more. i really don't see how her rib cage is big as i believe she had a 22-23 inch waist? hard to do with a big rib cage. also i think her hands/feet looked large partially cuz her body was so little and thin.

Wed, 10/11/2006 - 21:44 d'Artagnan Is it possible to objectively compare the attractiveness of women from different populations?

Hello, Mr. Holland. shows that European men rate Eurasian women (Mongolid-Europid)as more attractive than Europid ones on average.
presents pure Mongolid women as more feminine and attractive.The r-strategist-athleticism connection is from Jean Philippe Rushton (see wikipedia article on him). And the German biologist Max Hartmann proved that strong feminine attracts strong masculine and weak masculine (androgynous) attracts weak feminine (virago).Prof. Rainer Knußmann, former president of the German Scientific Society (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, t h e first-class scientific institution in Germany) and JFK murder investigator in his "Lehrbuch der vergleichenden Biologie und Humangenetik"confirmed Hartmann (1921) and the racial feminity of the Nesids and the racial masculinity of the Nordids in his world-famous manual in 1996(!)."relative+sexuality"+plants&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=5
These universal laws (with some exceptions as usual)first occurred in algae 1 billion years ago (!)You and I are even even today kind of pioneers in the tradition of Stratz's "Die Rassenschönheit des Weibes" of around 1900. Could you please have a look at it, it's wonderful.
Stratz had a faible for Charlize Theron-like women,too.I am looking forward to your reply, Mr. Holland and hope for a further entente cordiale. d'Artagnan

Wed, 10/11/2006 - 19:55 Erik Is it possible to objectively compare the attractiveness of women from different populations?

d’Artagnan: When I talk about masculinity-femininity, I am primarily talking about sexual dimorphism as shaped by sex hormones. As you have pointed out, it is not just sub-Saharan African women that have more protruding backsides, but their male counterparts do, too, compared to Europeans. As a first approximation, this greater protrusion is related to genetic differences unrelated to sex hormones rather than differences in sex hormone profiles, and this would be easily confirmed by an evaluation of sex hormone profiles, though this would not be necessary since a combination of narrower pelves and posteriorly more protrusive buttocks will not be resulting from greater feminization. It is for this reason that this anatomical difference between Europeans and sub-Saharan Africans cannot be assigned to the greater or lesser femininity of one group.

Your reference to the development of athleticism in sub-Saharan Africans, presumably in response to the need for physical fighting, as opposed to Eurasians, is curious. The majority of Olympic medals are won by people of European ancestry. White men also dominate weight lifting, martial arts and various fighting championships. In heavyweight boxing, all four titles are currently held by white men. The minority of sporting events dominated by people of predominantly sub-Saharan African ancestry do not justify assigning an “athletic character” to them.

I am interested in the study showing white men rating Asian women as more attractive than white women. This is highly unlikely.

Tue, 10/10/2006 - 19:36 Erik Attractive women that unfortunately have small breasts

Cece: On second thought, the statement about women in their late twenties having gone well past their beauty prime is an exaggeration, and I take it back. The correct statement is that women in their late twenties are generally past their beauty prime. Several women in their late twenties and early thirties look gorgeous; take a look at Luciana Vendramini at age 33 for instance.

Mon, 10/09/2006 - 15:28 d'Artagnan Is it possible to objectively compare the attractiveness of women from different populations?

As Knußmann outlines in his manual, all 36 human are on a continuum between strongly masculine and strongly feminine on average. Consequently ,most of the races do not represent an extreme masculinity or femininity.In your reply you emphasized the masculine traits of sub-Saharan women correctly.If we take Serena Willimas e.g., being a Kafrid mulatto, we can see both those masculine and feminine traits, and your, mine and Knußmann's statements fit together well.Your website just deals implicitly with this spectrum and its manifold nuances.
Then you said that there is no immediate connection between a shorter height and feminization. Yet you you seem to have adopted the Hartmann-Bolk-Weiniger-Knußmann concept of feminity just as I do in general as paedomorphosis, stated by you e.g. concerning some cranial features on your website.In this concept smaller height can be classified as more feminine-paedomorphous.But maybe you just wanted to point at the undeniable fact that some traits cannot be clasified as msculine or feminine/paedomorphous traits exactly as they are not clearly attributed to men or women.Interestingly, the races containing the women with the biggest breasts and behinds are the relatively most masculine in general, except these very traits (Sudanids, Kafrids,Alpinids, Arabids e.g. in comparison to the small-breasted Asian Nesid women).And this is the only big exception to the rule where we have to distinguish feminity and paedomorphosis. -- Just as I wrote before , evolution created some masculine and feminine traits in both sexes of e.g.the Negrids because of social and environmental adaptions. Athleticism developped (or stayed)due to a specializing in physical fighting, whereas this was not so important for the Eurasian hunters in general.In contrast to that, big female breasts and behinds in Negrid women are due to their r-strategy in general .And you will find many Sudanid and Kafrid men with big behinds as that trait is not restricted to women and the hormonal masculinity is not restricted to men. Your remarks on the hormones are correct.And your mentioning the preponderance of the hour-glass figure in Europeans shows that the waist-to-hip ratio is one very feminine trait of the European women in general. But I would like to remark two differentiations at this point. First, as Knußmann
and there is a racial beauty scheme,an old ,but well-established concept in physical anthropology, i.e. an innate scheme making members of a special race especially attractive to members of the same race. This scheme has again one big exception:the feminine-masculine continuum . So , there is a study on the net , where it is shown that Europids rate Asians and especially Asian women more attractive than their racial fellows.
This is what Ashley Montagu named the "delicacy" of the Mongolid women's beauty which basically can appeal to members of all other 35 races and can become much stronger than the racial scheme.
You correctly point at snigle traits and exception from the rules. I acknowledge very much in you that you have a strong wish to differentiate , in contrast to Jean Philippe Rushton who over-simplifies these matters too much and finally gets it wrong.In the end , after the long path of differentiation, detailed anylsis and conceptualizing, we can come to general conclusions that may have many exception , but are strong tendencies. So, you are totally right to point at the exceptions from the paedomorphosis of the Sanids.I think we basically have a very similar views and intentions. I hope that we stay in contact on this blog and I look forward to your reply. Thank you very much, Mr. Holland. d'Artagnan

Sun, 10/08/2006 - 22:28 Erik Is it possible to objectively compare the attractiveness of women from different populations?

d’Artagnan: There are some problems with your comment, specifically related to the conceptualization of femininity. If one assumes that the more protruding backside of sub-Saharan African women is indicative of greater femininity, then how does one explain their thicker waists and narrower pelves compared to European women? Similarly, a shorter-height or smaller-nosed population cannot be designated as more feminine unless it is shown that the reduced height or smaller nose, respectively, is due to greater feminization. There are also masculinized women with large breasts, i.e., one has to take serum levels of both androgens and estrogens into account. The androgens-to-estrogens ratio is more feminine in European women compared to sub-Saharan African and East Asian women. Europeans also have, on average, more CAG repeats in the androgen receptor gene compared to sub-Saharan Africans, i.e., a given amount of testosterone or dihydrotestosterone exerts a more powerful effect in sub-Saharan Africans, on average.

Regarding the allegedly more pedomorphic face and thereby greater femininity of East Asians, the mid-facial flattening of East Asian faces, and also several sub-Saharan African populations such as the Khoi-San people, is similar to that of anatomically modern humans in the late Pleistocene, and if one assumes that this flattening reflects differential retention of an ancestral feature, then it cannot be called pedomorphic, especially since it has been shown that neoteny applies to human craniofacial size but not craniofacial shape. It is true that the faces of women are closer to those of children, but it has not been shown that the mid-facial flattening of East Asians is a consequence of greater feminization. You also have to consider that close approximations of an hourglass figure are most extensively found in Europe.

Sat, 10/07/2006 - 09:47 d'Artagnan Is it possible to objectively compare the attractiveness of women from different populations?

Congratulations to your fantastic and unique site, Mr. Holland !As a biologist doing a lot of research in this field I would just like to add that mankind can be divided into ca. 36 human races. E.g. in Africa, there are the Sudanid, Kafrid, Nilotid , Ethiopid ,Khoiid, Sanid and Bambutid races. Khoiids, Sanids ,Bambutids and Sudanids are rarely seen in the media, but many US mulattoes show Kafrid , Nilotid and Ethiopid resemblance. If we now compare the feminization of Mongolids , Europids and Negrids , we should compare only the most typical, extreme races concerning feminity-masculinity ,i.e. the Nesids (Malakka,Philippines, Indonesia), the Nordids (Northern Europe) and the Sudanids (Western Africa) ( cf. Prof. Rainer Knußmann's world's leading anthropological manual "Lehrbuch der vergleichenden Biologie und Humangenetik", Gustav-Fischer-Verlag, 2.rev.ed. 1996, being the only one of its kind at the moment and probably the last due to the science-destroying "political correctness"). Then ,in strong contrast (!)to Jean Philippe Rushton and his followers, we will see that Sudanid women are more feminine on average than Nordid ones. There are only some Sudanid women's traits that are more masculine (jaws, skull, statistically more athleticism), but in general they are more feminine (statistically smaller height, more cyclothymous character (gestures e.g.,cf. Prof. John Randal Baker, Race, Oxford University Press,1974) , rounder noses and faces and a tendency to much more bigger breasts and behinds than in Nordid women).So, Joseph Arthur Comte de Gobineau was right in this very point stating the higher feminity of Negrids compared with the Europids (taking into account the smaller sexual dimorphism of Negrids compared to Europids, more feminine races have a smaller sexual dimorphism in general, cf. Knußamnn).In the history of anthropology Gobineau was the first important scholar to see the Negrids as more feminine than the Europids. But if look at the Sanid bushwomen of the Kalahari which are not seen as part of the Negrid races by many authorities, then they would be much more feminine and paedomorphous (paedomorphosis being the basis of feminity, cf. Knußmann) than women from a n y Negrid or Europid race on average.Finally ,the Nesid women (Mallakka, Phillipines, Indonesia) have the highest degree of feminity of a l l 36 human races on average (cf. Knußmann).

I hereby declare my total support of your ideas, Mr. Holland.

Unfortunately , there is a lot of hostilities towards you and people like you in other forums where you try to discuss this topic seriously with feminist viragos and the leftist mob.

Fri, 10/06/2006 - 14:00 d'Artagnan Masculinization in the 2005 Miss World beauty pageant contestants

Dear Mr. Holland, congratulations to your unique site ! As a biologist I would just like to add that some feminist viragos have been crucial
in the destruction of the West mainly because they have encouraged the more feminine women not to get children any more. And I would like to recall three exceptional scientists , Egon Freiherr v. Eickstedt, Max Hartmann and Prof. Rainer Knußmann who clearly confirm your statements, Mr. Holland, that masculinized viragos are much more lesbian, less heterosexual, less capable to enjoy male penetration, more aggressive and less attractive to the male consensus.I wish you and your project all the best !!!

Thu, 10/05/2006 - 18:01 Erik The importance of femininity to beauty in women

Poopsicle: There is broad but not universal agreement in the general population as to what constitutes attractiveness. Your preference for the physiques of #1 and #8 over the physique of #7 is unlikely to be that of the general public, especially heterosexual males, since #7 is more feminine and also adequately feminine. Pubic hair is not an issue. Face details are not relevant since the pictures are small and not clear enough to assess the extent of freckles and how droopy the face is, though it appears that #7 does not have a very attractive face. #7 does not have the physique of a woman that has given birth. Your comment about the face being most important suggests that you have placed a strong emphasis on the faces of these women, whereas faces are discussed prior to the image series, and it is the bodies of these women that need to be evaluated.

Thu, 10/05/2006 - 17:32 Erik Nonheterosexual vs. heterosexual male preference for petite women: Alessandra Ambrosio vs. Camille

Mike: Camille has a horribly shaped body? It appears that you are a homosexual.

Thu, 10/05/2006 - 08:01 mike Nonheterosexual vs. heterosexual male preference for petite women: Alessandra Ambrosio vs. Camille

camille is ugly she has bad teeth a pockmarked backside and horribly shaped body

Sun, 10/01/2006 - 23:26 Erik Is she the next hot Calvin Klein model?

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

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

Sun, 10/01/2006 - 22:58 Erik The 2006 Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue

Bree: Most men and women share the same idea about what looks good in women, namely feminine beauty. Therefore, this site is not about establishing a new feminine beauty ideal, but about the reasonable expectation that there should be at least one mainstream outlet for the appreciation of feminine beauty since this is the what most people hold as the ideal for women.

No one here is talking about mainstreaming pornography; pornography cannot be mainstreamed; to talk about a mainstream outlet for feminine beauty appreciation is to talk about the establishment of a big publication along the lines of the annual SportsIllustrated swimsuit issue or a prominent beauty pageant where the women are feminine and attractive. In order to be mainstream, this outlet has to avoid nudity.

Sun, 10/01/2006 - 22:31 Erik Are these girls high-fashion model material?

Samuel: There is nothing mid-teenish about the bodies of these two women, especially the blonde. Men interested in girls in their mid-teens are into bodies that look like they belong to women in their mid-teens; the face alone won't do.

I didn't say that I need to resort to porn sites for the models but that I mostly need to resort to adult-oriented sites for the time being. Not all adult-oriented sites are pornographic. For instance, both women above are taken from sites featuring artistic nudity but no pornography.

As far as the censorship is concerned, as long as the labia and nipples are obscure or not visible, I don't see a problem if the areolas and part of the pubic region are visible. There are a few instances where women are shown in an anthropological context, i.e., no erotic poses, and it is hardly necessary to censor even their nipples, which I didn't. Some would disagree with even the small amount of censorship since they believe that there is nothing wrong with the human body as it is and nudity should be acceptable in public.

Sun, 10/01/2006 - 22:06 Erik Is she the next hot Calvin Klein model?

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

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

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

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

Sun, 10/01/2006 - 20:18 Bree The 2006 Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue

Replacing one beauty ideal with another won't help selfconcious girls. I don't think heterosexual men have any more right to dictate what the perfect woman should look like than gay men. Action against eating disorders promoted by a prevalence of very skinny women in the media would be to allow women of very different (healthy) shapes model clothes (reflecting the actual bandwidth of bodyshape in the female population). I would appreciate that.
The other problem... you just can't make me believe any man is unhappy because the naked chick in playboy has a somewhat broader ribcage. I also don't think porn needs to be "mainstream". There are lots of magazines and webpages out there catering to specific prefernces. Heterosexual men liking masculinized women "because they don't know any better" is not a problem. It's not like they'd shun a feminine woman when they have a chance with one. Nobody gets hurt.

Sun, 10/01/2006 - 20:07 Erik Nonheterosexual vs. heterosexual male preference for petite women: Alessandra Ambrosio vs. Camille

Hans: The perception of attractiveness is a separate issue. It involves a comparison of the people that one sees with a reference mental template. The reference template is partly shaped by biological inheritance, honed by exposure to better looking people in accordance with latent preferences and also influenced by the social environment. Some people are more manipulable by the social environment than others.

Some correlates of beauty reflect the biological quality of the organism, but others just appeal to aesthetic biases without reflecting on the organism's biological quality. This terse statement is probably not very helpful to you, but elaborating upon this will require an extensive literature review, and if I do it, it will be in a new section.

You are right that make-up, photo-editing and airbrushing confound an assessment of attractiveness, but these techniques best camouflage skin blemishes and are not very successful with respect to overall face shape. To assess masculinity-femininity, skin details are not necessary, and if the model in question is famous, there will be plenty of multi-angle photographs of her available that easily allow one to judge how masculine-feminine she is, and some of these pictures will be sourced from the paparazzi and other low profile sources where airbrushing is not an issue.

Sun, 10/01/2006 - 19:39 Erik Attractive women that unfortunately have small breasts

Cece: There is nothing in this site that justifies labeling me a borderline pedo freak. I have talked about young adulthood being the beauty prime for women, i.e., the 18-25 range, which should be common observation, and this age range is not remotely close to pubescence. There are some late bloomers who may attain their peak attractiveness in their late twenties, but these women are uncommon.

Alexander: Which of the women in the attractive women section are ugly and why? There is no way that half of the women that I have featured have breast implants. Besides, most of these women are not porn stars. I am interested in learning who are the better looking women that I refuse to post.

I have already pointed out that large breasts are not needed in order for a woman to be feminine as there are small-breasted feminine women and large-breasted masculine women. A similar statement can be written for the backside, too.

Your opinion that small breasts/petite buttocks always look great is not held by the majority of heterosexual men. And, aging is not relevant here; the focus is on young adults.

Sat, 09/30/2006 - 13:33 Alexander Attractive women that unfortunately have small breasts I saw this website, I've been wondering what kind of an idiot can put such crap together. Either it's a girl with self-esteem issues or a man who got rejected by every single good looking girl he's ever asked out.

You are not promoting natural feminin beauty here. Half of the girls you post are really ugly, and the other half are porn stars with fake boobs. You're living in a dream. NATURAL Femininity does NOT equal huge boobs and does NOT equal a big fat ass. These girls you refuse to post look much better than the ones you actually do post.

And yes, small breasts always do look great, even when the girl ages. Wheras big ones sag and become extremely ugly. Same for ass. Not a non exitant one, but a perky round, yet small one is the best. God, you seriously don't know nothing about women.

Sat, 09/30/2006 - 09:04 Hans Nonheterosexual vs. heterosexual male preference for petite women: Alessandra Ambrosio vs. Camille

Erik: As an A-level student taking biology, I am interested to know how a human's perception of looks actually works, could you enlighten me?

I expect that is a natural sub-contious way of measuring 'how good' someone else's genotype is.

Also why has no one mentioned photography? Professionaly applied make-up, expert photographers and photo editing + airbrushing can drastically increase the looks of a model. Like those pictures comparing Alessandra Ambrosio

The only REAL way to judge attractiveness is by seeing a front view and profile view of a face with no makeup or editing.

Sat, 09/30/2006 - 04:13 cece Attractive women that unfortunately have small breasts


by the time the woman is in her late twenties, but by this age, the woman would be well past her beauty prime

I HAD previously thought your website was interesting but now I see you're a total nutcase boderline pedo freak.

Pulling you off my bookmark list.

Fri, 09/29/2006 - 16:02 poopsicle The importance of femininity to beauty in women

I would say that no. 1 is the most attractive, followed by number 8. Number 7 has oblong wall-eyed boobs and a tired, droopy face (she looks like someone's mother) and is also freckly. I chose 1 and 8 because they have T and A but their Ts aren't sprawly or out of control. Both have nicely shaped breasts, though 8's are nicer. They also have a decent (1) to good (8)waist-to-hip ratio. They also have smooth, clear skin, which cannot be said of 7. Both have fine facial features, but 1's are a bit softer, but 8 has very nice shiny hair. Both also groom their pubes. I'm not a fan of the thundermuff. I think 8 has the best body but I prefer 1's face, and I feel the face is the most important thing. I've agreed with everything you've said on your site up to this point; I do not think 7 is obviously the most attractive woman of this line-up. I am a woman and I would not want to trade places with her.

Thu, 09/28/2006 - 19:54 Samuel Is she the next hot Calvin Klein model?

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

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

Thu, 09/28/2006 - 19:41 Samuel Are these girls high-fashion model material?

Hm, these poore girls don't stand a chance at becoming high fashion models. But thank God for their mid-teen looks they can still pose nude for perverts who get aroused by the whole "barely legal" thing. "Teen Stars" indeed!

I don't understand why your self-made censoring is so sloppy and revealing (you often just forget those 4X4 pixel spots). To evaluate their bodies one doesn't have to see areolas or the whole pubic area. You really lose credibility with this. You say you need to resort to porn sites for your models, but there's really no need for us as readers of this site to see that much skin.

The second girl has beautiful eyes, by the way.

Mon, 09/25/2006 - 19:47 Erik Is she the next hot Calvin Klein model?

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

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

Valentina Zelyaeva

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

Valentina Zelyaeva

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

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

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