Please note: some images may not be work-safe.
The importance of femininity to beauty in women
One possible explanation of the typical heavy masculinization seen among the female models in mainstream fashion magazines -- such as Elle -- is that these magazines do not cater to men. The implication is that women -- at least the ones who patronize the magazines -- are apparently interested in masculinized models, and the publishers are simply using models with looks that appease magazine buyers and maximize sales. Is this the case?
This question is best answered in light of research on what constitutes attractiveness in women. As documented below, there is overwhelming evidence that in the absence of physical defects, somewhat above average feminine looks happen to be the most important correlate of beauty in women, as rated by both men and women. This has been shown regardless of whether facial femininity is actually measured, facial photographs are simply rated, people are allowed to construct a female face they find very attractive using a computer, people are allowed to manipulate the femininity of a face on a computer, or facial composites based on very attractive women and ordinary women are compared. It is also the case that in these studies inter-rater agreement is usually excellent, and men and women rate attractiveness similarly.
Therefore, it is certainly not the case that the typical heavy masculinization seen among the female models in mainstream fashion magazines is a response to public demand, especially that of women. If the female models were feminine and attractive, one would expect fashion magazine sales to increase because more men will browse/buy the magazines, just to look at the women. So why are feminine models uncommon in mainstream fashion magazines? Well, the editors of these magazines have to cater to the preferences of their unofficial bosses, i.e., the fashion designers who happen to be the major reason for the existence of these magazines, and the top-ranked fashion designers, who happen to be disproportionately gay, undoubtedly care more about what they find aesthetically appealing than magazine sales, and it is well known that what these gays find aesthetically appealing are looks approximating those of adolescent boys.
It could be pointed out that using feminine and attractive women to model fashion products will diminish sales among feminists, but feminists are not the women targeted by fashion magazines. Additionally, as in the case of the excessive skinniness of fashion models in general, something that most people, including women, find aesthetically unacceptable, the aesthetically unacceptable level of masculinization [for most people] in most high-fashion models does not diminish fashion merchandize sales among women because of the high desirability of designer clothing, which gives fashion designers a broad license as to what kind of models they can use.
Now, on to the studies.
Table 1 shows the effect of facial femininity on attractiveness ratings of women in individual studies used by Gillian Rhodes in a meta-analysis.(1, pdf) The effect of femininity on attractiveness is reported in terms of r, a correlation statistic. The interpretation of r is described below.
The correlation coefficient, r, can range from -1 (perfectly negative) to 0 (none) to 1 (perfectly positive).
Let there be a large sample of women that are rated as either attractive or plain on the one hand, and either feminine or normal on the other hand. If r = 0.65 (can also be described as r = 65%), then if n% of women rated as normal are also rated as attractive, then n+65% of women rated as feminine will also be rated as attractive. Similarly, if r = 0.71 and 20% of women rated as plain are also rated as feminine, then 20+71% = 91% of women rated as attractive will also be rated as feminine.
The average r value summed over these studies, and also including the effect of femininity on attractiveness ratings of men, was about 0.64 (Table 2; details for men shown here), which is a high value and shows that femininity is a strong correlate of attractiveness in women.
Table 1. Effect size estimates (r and Zr) for the association between sexual dimorphism and attractiveness in women. Positive values indicate positive associations between femininity and female attractiveness. N = number of faces. Where a single sex-continuum was used, N =1. Degrees of freedom are listed for effect sizes not based on number of faces.(1) |
||||||||||
Study |
Year |
Sexual Dimorphism |
Ethnicity |
Type of Face |
Sex of Attr Rater |
Independence |
r |
N |
df |
Zr |
Dunklecunn & Francis |
1990 |
rated |
|
normal |
comb |
y |
0.78 |
6 |
|
1.05 |
Johnston & Franklin |
1993 |
manipulated |
white |
manipulated |
comb |
y |
0.81 |
80 |
|
1.13 |
Bruce et al |
1994 |
rated |
|
normal |
|
n |
0.74 |
86 |
|
0.95 |
Bruce et al |
1994 |
rated |
|
normal profile |
|
n |
0.82 |
86 |
|
1.16 |
O'Toole et al |
1998 |
rated |
white |
normal |
comb |
n |
0.88 |
76 |
|
1.38 |
Perrett et al |
1998 |
manipulated |
white |
manipulated |
comb |
y |
0.74 |
1 |
49 |
0.95 |
Perrett et al |
1998 |
manipulated |
Japanese |
manipulated |
comb |
y |
0.31 |
1 |
49 |
0.32 |
Perrett et al |
1998 |
manipulated |
white |
manipulated |
comb |
y |
0.57 |
1 |
41 |
0.65 |
Perrett et al |
1998 |
manipulated |
Japanese |
manipulated |
comb |
y |
0.76 |
1 |
41 |
1.00 |
Rhodes et al |
2000 |
manipulated |
white |
manipulated |
comb |
y |
0.39 |
1 |
96 |
0.41 |
Rhodes et al |
2000 |
manipulated |
Chinese |
manipulated |
comb |
y |
0.76 |
1 |
96 |
1.00 |
Johnston et al |
2001 |
manipulated |
white |
manipulated |
same |
y |
0.79 |
1 |
29 |
1.07 |
Rhodes et al |
2003 |
rated |
various |
normal |
|
y |
0.53 |
156 |
|
0.59 |
Ishi et al |
2004 |
manipulated |
Japanese |
manipulated |
comb |
y |
0.25 |
21 |
|
0.26 |
Koehler et al |
2004 |
rated |
|
normal |
|
y |
0.78 |
100 |
|
1.05 |
Koehler et al |
2004 |
rated |
|
normal |
|
y |
0.37 |
100 |
|
0.39 |
Koehler et al |
2004 |
measured |
|
normal |
|
y |
0.30 |
100 |
|
0.31 |
Koehler et al |
2004 |
measured |
|
normal |
|
y |
0.78 |
100 |
|
-0.14 |
In Gillian Rhodes’ meta-analysis, femininity emerged as the most powerful correlate of beauty (Table 2). The r values in Table 2 are based on Zr values, as in the last column of Table 1; Zr values refer to the z-transformed effect size correlations, which are obtained using the following formula.
The Z-transformation is useful for computing the average effect over several studies (meta-analysis) because the more the r value of a population is away from zero, the more the distribution of r values sampled from that population becomes skewed; the Z-transformation helps normalize the distribution.
Table 2. Summary of effect size (r) statistics for the attractiveness of averageness, symmetry, and sexual dimorphism in the face. All calculations were conducted on Zr’s.(1) |
||||
|
Attractiveness and averageness |
Attractiveness and symmetry |
Attractiveness and femininity |
Attractiveness and masculinity |
All faces |
|
|
|
|
Mean effect size (ES) |
0.52 |
0.25 |
0.64 |
−0.12 |
Standard deviation |
0.41 |
0.34 |
0.39 |
0.55 |
95% Confidence interval |
0.42–0.61 |
0.16–0.33 |
0.51–0.74 |
−0.35–0.14 |
Number of studies |
20 |
23 |
10 |
15 |
Number of face samples |
45 |
63 |
18 |
22 |
Mean weighted ES (by N faces) |
0.54 |
0.23 |
0.61 |
0.16
|
Normal faces only |
|
|
|
|
Mean ES |
0.40 |
0.23 |
0.64 |
0.35 |
Standard deviation |
0.33 |
0.23 |
0.45 |
0.20 |
95% Confidence interval |
0.29–0.51 |
0.17–0.30 |
0.41–79 |
0.23–0.45 |
Number of distinct face samples |
27 |
42 |
9 |
10 |
Mean weighted ES (by N faces) |
0.40 |
0.24 |
0.58 |
0.27 |
Let us consider two studies where facial femininity was manipulated on a computer to see what effect it had on the attractiveness ratings.
In the following manipulation by Rhodes et al. (2000), the femininity of the average face on the left has been exaggerated by 50% on the right, but neither of these faces was rated as better looking.
Fig 1. From Rhodes et al. (2000).
Rhodes et al. (2000) then came up with the following series of manipulations of an average face, and in both cases, feminine exaggeration corresponded to highest attractiveness ratings (raters were 48 white males and 48 white females).
The highest attractiveness rating in the two series below was for 36% feminine exaggeration in women. Women assigned the highest attractiveness rating to a more feminine face than men (42% exaggeration vs. 29% exaggeration). The most attractive Chinese face corresponded to a greater feminine exaggeration (52% vs. 19%) than the most attractive white face. Higher attractiveness ratings were also assigned to somewhat more feminized male faces.
Click the two images below for larger views.
Fig 2. Manipulation of an average white female face. From Rhodes et al. (2000).
Fig 3. Manipulation of an average Chinese female face. From Rhodes et al. (2000).
Fig 4 shows average (composite) white and Japanese faces used by Perrett et al. (1998).
Fig 4. Composite white and Japanese faces. From Perrett et al. (1998).
Fig 5 shows average (composite) white and Japanese faces that were 50% feminized (left) and 50% masculinized (right) by Perrett et al. (1998). Raters were shown faces that continuously ranged between the two extremes and asked to pick the most attractive face.
Fig 5. Feminized and masculinized white and Japanese faces. From Perrett et al. (1998).
Fig 6 shows that more feminine faces were preferred for both men and women.
Fig 6. The effect of feminization of face shape on judgments of female and male attractiveness. a, Female stimuli; b, male stimuli. Overall, subjects preferred a feminine face shape to an average shape both within and between populations. The degree of feminization preferred was greater within than between populations for female faces. From Perrett et al. (1998).
There are newer studies that have also shown the importance of femininity to attractiveness in women, as assessed by both men and women. One of these studies showing a higher attractiveness rating of more feminine faces in women has been mentioned at this site previously. Another such study is briefly described below.
In a study investigating the relation between voice pitch, femininity of face and attractiveness rating, women with a more feminine voice (high pitch) also had a more feminine face and were rated as better looking (Fig 7).(2)
Fig 7. Facial prototypes constructed from women with high- and low-pitched voices. Top row: faces from Canadian sample; bottom row: faces from UK sample; left column: faces constructed from women with high-pitched voices; right column: faces constructed from women with low-pitched voices.(2)
And, one should not forget the body, too. Assume that the following 12 series of images were shown to a large number of people selected at random, and the people were asked to pick the most attractive woman (labeled 1 to 12, starting from top). Which one would it be?
All images shown below can be clicked for larger versions.
Most people would undoubtedly pick woman number 7 as the most attractive. Now, which of these 12 women also happens to be the most feminine?
More can be said about the importance of femininity to beauty in women, but this will be in future additions to this site.
References
- Rhodes, G., The evolutionary psychology of facial beauty, Annu Rev Psychol, 57, 199 (2006).
- Feinberg, D. R., Jones, B. C., DeBruine, L. M., Moore, F. R., Smith, M. J. L., Cornwell, R. E., Tiddeman, B. P., Boothroyd, L. G., and Perrett, D. I., The voice and face of woman: one ornament that signals quality?, Evol Hum Behav, 25, 398 (2005).
List of all studies used by Gillian Rhodes to examine the relationship between masculinity-femininity and facial attractiveness in men and women:
- Bruce V, Burton A, Dench N. 1994. What's distinctive about a distinctive face? Q. J. Exp. Psychol. A. 47A: 119 - 41
Cunningham MR, Barbee AP, Pike CL. 1990. - What do women want? Facialmetric assessment of multiple motives in the perception of male facial physical attractiveness. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 59: 61 - 72.
- Dunkle JH, Francis PL. 1990. The role of facial masculinity/femininity in the attribution of homosexuality. Sex Roles 23: 157 - 67.
- Ishi H, Gyoba J, Kamachi M, Mukaida S, Akamatsu S. 2004. Analyses of facial attractiveness on feminised and juvenilised faces. Perception 33: 135-45.
- Johnston VS, Franklin M. 1993. Is beauty in the eye of the beholder? Ethol. Sociobiol. 14: 183 - 99.
- Johnston VS, Hagel R, Franklin M, Fink B, Grammer K. 2001. Male facial attractiveness: evidence for hormone-mediated adaptive design. Evol. Hum. Behav. 22: 251 - 67.
- Koehler N, Simmons LW, Rhodes G, Peters M. 2004. The relationship between sexual dimorphism in human faces and fluctuating asymmetry. Proc. R. Soc. Ser. B - Bio. (Suppl.) 271: S233 - S6.
- Little AC, Burt DM, Penton-Voak IS, Perrett DI. 2001. Self-perceived attractiveness influences human female preferences for sexual dimorphism and symmetry in male faces. Proc. R. Soc. Ser. B - Bio. 268: 39-44.
- Little AC, Hancock PJB. 2002. The role of masculinity and distinctiveness in judgments of human male facial attractiveness. Br. J. Psychol. 93: 451-64.
- Neave N, Laing S, Fink B, Manning JT. 2003. Second to fourth digit ratio, testosterone and perceived male dominance. Proc. R. Soc. Ser. B - Bio. 270: 2167-72.
- O'Toole AJ, Deffenbacher KA, Valentin D, McKee K, Huff D, Abdi H. 1998. The perception of face gender: the role of stimulus structure in recognition and classification. Mem. Cognit. 26: 146-60.
- Penton-Voak IS, Jones BC, Little AC, Baker S, Tiddeman B, et al.2001. Symmetry, sexual dimorphism in facial proportions and male facial attractiveness. Proc. R. Soc. Ser. B - Bio. 268: 1617-23.
- Perrett DI, Lee KJ, Penton-Voak I, Rowland D, Yoshikawa S, et al. 1998. Effects of sexual dimorphism on facial attractiveness. Nature 394: 884-7.
- Rhodes G, Chan J, Zebrowitz LA, Simmons LW. 2003. Does sexual dimorphism in human faces signal health? Proc. R. Soc. Ser. B - Bio. 270: S93-S5.
- Rhodes G, Hickford C, Jeffery L. 2000. Sex-typicality and attractiveness: are supermale and superfemale faces super-attractive. Br. J. Psychol. 91: 125-40.
- Scheib JE, Gangestad SW, Thornhill R. 1999. Facial attractiveness, symmetry and cues of good genes. Proc. R. Soc. Ser. B - Bio. 266: 1913-7.
- Swaddle JP, Reierson GW. 2002. Testosterone increases perceived dominance but not attractiveness in human males. Proc. R. Soc. Ser. B - Bio. 269: 2285-9
Comments (52) | Notify others
Comments:
Page 1 of 1 pages
I think #8 and #4 are more feminine than #7, but that’s me.
Posted by Anonymous Visitor on March 19, 2006 at 02:41 PM | #
Anonymous Visitor: Compared to women 4 and 8, woman 7 has relatively larger buttocks and breasts, a relatively smaller rib cage and a more feminine face. Woman 7 also has more feminine feet than woman 8 and a more slender skeletal build than woman 4, which tends to go with greater femininity. Therefore, between these three women, woman 7 is the most feminine.
Posted by Erik Holland on March 21, 2006 at 01:06 AM | #
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.
Posted by poopsicle on September 29, 2006 at 04:02 PM | #
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.
Posted by Erik Holland on October 05, 2006 at 06:01 PM | #
Women #6 is the best looking.
Posted by tones on November 03, 2006 at 04:47 PM | #
Hello
Wouldn’t it be better or to compare individual body parts rather than the whole package? Woman 4 seems to have the largest (relative) hips compared to woman 7, yet as you mantioned, woman 7 has a more slender skeletal build.
Posted by Anon on December 05, 2006 at 01:53 AM | #
To compare women, one will have to compare individual parts, but it all needs to be seen in reference to whole body appearance since sex hormones only partly shape the physique and factors not contributing to sexual dimorphism could contribute to a masculine or feminine appearance of an individual body part.
Posted by Erik Holland on December 06, 2006 at 01:45 PM | #
I actually prefer number 1 also. She is just hot.
Posted by Jordan on December 13, 2006 at 02:23 AM | #
No, the author is right. #7 is the most attractive.
Posted by JBP on January 16, 2007 at 12:22 PM | #
hi,
I have a face that is if to be compared on the line up you provided would be most like the one with u exaggeration towards female features....what was that face rated? plain? how attractive is it...I am a Mediterranean, it seems females there are more feminine looking than preferred in the west...but I am living in USA.
Posted by Layla on February 16, 2007 at 08:44 AM | #
Layla: I am not sure what level of feminine exaggeration in Fig. 2 your face comes closest to, but it appears to be 75% in your comment. The most attractive ratings were for faces with 25-50% feminine exaggeration. 75% feminine exaggeration was still rated as reasonably attractive. I do not know what you mean by women in the Mediterranean region looking more feminine than what is preferred in the West.
Posted by Erik on February 18, 2007 at 12:26 AM | #
Personally speaking, I find woman # 1 to be the most sexually and aesthetically appealing with reference towards both her body and face alike.
Posted by -R on February 18, 2007 at 09:14 PM | #
Despite your (unsubstantiated but opiniated) claim, I personally feel #7 is “undoubtedly” the most attractive of the group.
Just curious, what is the overall motive of this site? To expose the gay fashionista? To make sure men understand what they should be attracted to ? Or to get some plus (I’m sorry, feminine) models jobs?
Posted by repugnantly_fascinated on March 26, 2007 at 08:02 PM | #
What do you mean despite my claim? I, too, find woman #7 to have the best-looking physique among the bunch. Read the FAQ to understand this site’s purpose. The site’s purpose is not to make sure men understand what they should be attracted to. Men already know what they are attracted to, but those misled by the use of airbrushing, breast implants and posing tricks into believing that some masculinized models and beauty pageant contestants are feminine women need an education. As far as getting feminine women proper fashion modeling jobs goes, this is not happening as long as the fashion business remains gay-dominated. One will have to set up an alternative fashion industry, but a mainstream outlet for feminine beauty appreciation (not this site) needs to be set up first.
Posted by Erik on March 28, 2007 at 02:28 AM | #
It’s interesting how beautiful the buttocks are on the women above, much better than any fashion model. This is the body part women seem to worry about most, but it’s generally more beautiful on the average woman than the supermodel.
Posted by Artist on April 07, 2007 at 12:44 AM | #
I think 1 and 8 are the over all best looking females. If I had to look like one of the 12 women, I’d pick one of those.
Posted by Valerie on April 07, 2007 at 01:01 AM | #
I’ll evaluate based on visual to emotional judgements. FYI, I’m young male from USA.
1) Nice from the back. Little flat breasts. Face looks like she has an attitude.
2) Droopy T&A. Wide shoulders. Face looks like a “nice person”
3) Uneven small breasts. Lower face is not attractive.
4) Same breasts as #1, but hips are too wide. Face looks average
5) Nipples don’t line up. Face is not attractive.Masculine?
6) Nice breasts. Ok bottom. Feminine attractive face.
7) Nice breasts. Bottom little wide compared to shoulders. Ok face.
8) Long body. The space near the top of the butt looks weird. Face looks above average. unfair smiling.
9) Nice breasts. Weight shows on body. Face looks “rural”
10) Too skinny. Face not attractive. eyebrows too high in the middle
11) Average overall. Face looks “angry”
12) Nice breasts. Hips little wide near bottom. Face looks above average.
Conclusion: no one is highly attractive.
In my experience, here is the breakdown of female attractiveness:
Face - 70% (eyes are the focal point)
Breasts - 30%
Butt - 20%
If someone has a beautiful face, then that person can be considered attractive despite lack of feminine body.
Face is what generates deep emotions from guys. Body is only for sexual attraction.
Breasts: “perky” and “fullness” over size.
Butt: “roundness” over pyramid shape or flatness.
Tan helps a lot.
Most guys are NOT attractive to super skinny supermodels. Guys only date supermodels for status not for looks.
Guys like HOT females in the sack. But the most ideal for relationship would be glamour/beauty females.
Posted by random viewer on April 11, 2007 at 02:18 AM | #
There needs to be a better control. If we want to discern on body type, then Face should be covered, everyone should have same color of skin. Photos should be calibrated for color. It looks like the background in the photograph varies a lot so some women above are given “redish” skin tones which is not attractive as a more ideal skin tone for some photos due to light exposure.
Posted by random viewer again on April 11, 2007 at 02:33 AM | #
The leading fashion industry has always tried to be different than the norm. They do not signify society’s ideal. They signify what is unusual hoping that it is uncommon in a positive way. Just like the ridiculous stuff displayed on runways by models doesn’t symbolize what people really want to wear.
This is all part of being “trendy”. Masculine face worn by models will go away soon replace by something else, just like whatever that was fasionable in the 1970s is defnitely NOT fashionable today just because it once was.
I don’t think the fashion industry is influencing the girls to look more masculine. That is against human nature. In fact, the opposite is happening with teenagers nowadays look more slutty than ever before. In high school, the popular girls are still the most femine girls not lesbian female jocks.
Fashionistas like Versace stands to fame by being unusual. But people buy Versace for quality and fit....most of Versace’s customers get custom made clothes. People in fame business do anything to get attention and they certainly play the extreme characters just like atheletes play certain parts, actors play certain parts. But in private lives as human, you can’t ignore the natural wiring which has chosen attractive people as mates more so than unattractive people over thousands of years.
I predict that in 20-30 years in time, due to rising power of East Asia, Asian beauty (younger, slimer, cuter) will dominate over current gay fashion ideals. Then the masculine looks will be out of style.
Posted by random viewer 2 on April 11, 2007 at 02:53 AM | #
Random viewer: With respect to the nude women, judgments based on assumed personality characteristics are not relevant here, and neither is the face, which you assign the greatest value. The women’s faces are not shown clearly enough to be rated. In a scientific study of the attractiveness of physiques, the faces would be covered, the backgrounds would be the same, etc., but displaying the pictures above is not part of a scientific study.
Gay fashion designers do not chose their models to “signify what is unusual hoping that it is uncommon in a positive way,” but because they find them aesthetically appealing. Nobody is arguing that “the fashion industry is influencing the girls to look more masculine;” its influence is in the form of increasing the desirability of skinniness in a number of girls and women. It is unlikely that the fashion norm will shift toward East Asians eventually; there are only two East Asian women among the top-50 high-fashion models (total sample size of 60 because some women tied with the same ranking) currently ranked at models.com. Norms are not a straightforward result of cultural domination. There was a time when Roman soldiers brought in Northern European slave women, and notwithstanding their slave status, the men lusted after them, and the women were envious and tried to make themselves more Nordic-looking. The skinny and masculine norm among high-fashion models is not changing as long as the fashion business is dominated by homosexual men, which is not to say that one couldn’t come up with an alternative fashion industry.
Posted by Erik on April 13, 2007 at 04:33 AM | #
I would go with 8 & 1. 76531 are ok.
I don’t think this shows anything except that I prefer younger, fitter women, being 20 myself.
It makes sense to me that femininity would be tied to beauty though, but as simply true by definition. Hell, why would I want my woman to look like a man?
The thing that I’m a bit confused on is this sense of being more feminine. Having, say, larger breasts means you have more of a feminine characteristic, but I’m don’t think I’m comfortable saying that just because they have more of x that they are then more feminine. Recognize the slight twist?
For demonstration sake, an example of a nude model I find very attractive (albeit a bit skinny): <http://img24.imagevenue.com/aAfkjfp01fo1i-22858/loc111/76216_photo031.jpg>
<http://img20.imagevenue.com/aAfkjfp01fo1i-12668/loc31/79546_photo008.jpg>
Posted by Loki on April 17, 2007 at 10:02 PM | #
Erik,
I prefer #8, and nothing you say about her body or face type will change that. #1 would be my second choice.
I do not understand why you’re all “up in arms” about what women look like in magazines. It really sounds like you’ve got an agenda that you’re trying to enforce on others. Oh, and I just love how you equate people’s sexual preferences to their selection of female shapes!
I prefer the athletic, slightly hourglass female form. So does a lesbian friend of mine. What does that tell you?
Everyone has their own likes and dislikes in the body shapes and facial features of others.
If you want a true measure of whether people prefer “your” ideal female body shape, why don’t you publish your own magazine or web site with “your” choice of female body types, and then we’ll see how many people go to your site or buy your publication over others that contain “masculine” women…
I go to websites (MET-ART, Karups, etc.) based on the types of women I LIKE TO LOOK AT—you seem to prefer the playboy body type with a very soft face. Those are simply our individual preferences.
It sounds like you want there to be JUST ONE model in every magazine—YOUR favorite body and face type. Boy, that would be boring. “Variety is the spice of life”.
The bottom line is that people buy magazines and go to web sites that present the style of women that they prefer. If the type of women shown at Victoria’s Secret was “wrong” as you seem to think, then why are they selling so much lingerie?
PS—I don’t care how many references you site, or how many studies you cite. You’re still simply pushing your own agenda. Perhaps you should see a psychologist.
Posted by Kyle Morgan on May 14, 2007 at 04:51 PM | #
Also look at the 95% confidence limits. people DO have a range of what they prefer, even just in face types!
The standard deviation is half or more per rating, too, which says that the data has a lot of scatter.
Posted by Kyle Morgan on May 15, 2007 at 04:24 PM | #
Gee… I’d be willing to bet that you are the same Erik Holland that wrote these homophobic pieces:
http://www.alligator.org/edit/issues/00-fall/000921/c02column21.htm
and
http://alligator.org/edit/issues/00-fall/000926/c01column26.htm
Am I right?
Posted by Kyle Morgan on May 16, 2007 at 12:15 PM | #
Kyle-
Wow, you just pwned him.
It’s kind of funny how he feels justified in promoting a beauty standard which is even more impossible to achieve than the current beauty standard in fashion modelling. Way to go! Corsets are so passe, Erik, so passe.
Posted by 8D on May 16, 2007 at 11:38 PM | #
Kyle Morgan: This site does not exist to change people’s preferences, including yours. This entry is pointing out the central tendency of the masculinity-femininity of face shape preferred by people, and regardless of your preferences, the fact remains that people strongly and overwhelmingly prefer above average femininity in the face shape of women, as the data cited above show, notwithstanding individual variation in likes and dislikes. The physique pictures are just an addendum/trivial addition, not the meat of this entry.
Of course, I have an agendum as far as this website is concerned, and I have explicitly stated it on the home page, namely the promotion of feminine beauty among models and beauty pageant contestants. This agendum is not being forced on others. You are under no obligation to browse this site and agree with it. I have never argued that I would like to see feminine and attractive women replace all other types of models and beauty pageant contestants. I believe that there should be a competing feminine beauty standard in the limelight. Setting up this competing standard will not be an easy task and will take a while; this site is merely an educational resource that will go toward bringing more feminine and attractive women in the limelight in mainstream settings, not nude modeling. An educational resource is poorly described as an “up in arms” approach. When there is a feminine beauty alternative in the limelight, it will become clear what most people prefer.
Sexual orientation is obviously related to preferred shape. For instance, “-R” above elsewhere identified herself as a lesbian with a preference for masculinized women and shares her preference with your lesbian friend. The person posting as “Jordan” left a comment under a different [male name] alias where he described his preference for skinny women but did not describe his sexual orientation in spite of my asking him. Lifetime-exclusive heterosexual individuals are the least likely to prefer masculinization in the looks of women, but this does not imply that the subtlety of sexual preferences can be precisely assessed by preferred shape.
No, I don’t prefer Playboy centerfold types.
I have already explained why homosexual fashion designers can get away with using masculinized models to sell clothing items notwithstanding discordant preferences on the part of most buyers, namely their domination of the fashion business. There are hardly any comparable alternatives, and the public will surely not reduce its consumption of designer clothing or other clothing items because the models used to market them are typically unattractive from the perspective of most people.
Your comment about a range of preferences is uncalled for since I prepared the entry above and am obviously aware of the variability of preferences in the population, but it is clear that with respect to a preference pertaining to masculinity-femininity, the scatter is overwhelmingly on the feminine side of average.
Citing two articles written by me as a student seven years ago does nothing to undermine the arguments on this page or this site. The first article expressed opposition to hate crimes legislation and there is nothing “homophobic” about it. The allegedly “homophobic” reference in it is the sexual abuse and murder of a 13-year-old boy, Jesse Dirkhising, by a male homosexual couple, which was ignored by the mainstream media, in contrast to the drug-fueled robbery-cum-beating of Matthew Shepard by petty criminals, one a bisexual, which eventually led to Shepard’s death, making “martyr Shepard” a victim of a horrendous “hate crime.” I stand by what I wrote. On the other hand, the second article was an angry piece defending the Boy Scouts, which I wrote at a time when I knew little about homosexuality. I am embarrassed that I wrote this article; there are things in it that are incorrect. I do not stand by this article, but I will say this, namely that there was a passage in the original submission that the editors did not publish, which, to my chagrin, made the article look like a conspiracy, and I could not subsequently clarify it because I was banned from the paper. The omitted passage argued against a conspiracy. Anyway, the only part of the second article that has anything to do with this site is the domination of the fashion business by homosexual men, which is a fact. If you still hold either article against me as far as this site is concerned, all I have to say is get lost!
8D: Corsets will not render your physique normally feminine. They make the waist look cartoonishly small, and do nothing about a large rib cage, even if the lower ribs are surgically removed. I am not promoting a feminine beauty standard because of the impossibility of achieving it but because of its aesthetic appeal to myself and many others and also its utility in counteracting the negative impact of the high status of high-fashion models. Besides, if you wanted a standard for high-fashion modeling that would convey both exclusivity and would also be something that cannot be acquired by negative health behaviors, then feminine beauty would be the way to go.
Posted by Erik on May 17, 2007 at 08:12 AM | #
Erik, I appreciate the candor of your reply.
By the way, I am heterosexual, if it matters… and while I don’t prefer the appearance of most fashion models, I do prefer the athletic-build on women, in person and in pictures. I wonder how much of that is learned and how much of the preferences are “genetic”, if you will.
Posted by Kyle Morgan on May 17, 2007 at 04:15 PM | #
Erik,
I think you should do a “study” of hetero vs homosexual porn sites.
Also - inquiring minds want to know: How many times did you snap a root while “researching”?
Best,
D. Gray
Posted by DorianGray on May 17, 2007 at 09:22 PM | #
Erik,
I’ve got to hand it to you!
The guy puts his spank bank online & calls it research. F’ing genius, man.
You’ve inspired me to do a study of what I believe is a general decline in labia tautness amongst the modern female population...and since my schlong’s diameter has remained remarkably constant throughout the years, I think it is the perfect vehicle with which to measure the labial elasticity.
Is it me or do more & more chicks out there have cooches like mayonnaise jars? I’m going to find out!
Best,
Ron
Posted by The HedgeHog on May 17, 2007 at 10:18 PM | #
Kyle Morgan: The social environment obviously plays a role in shaping what appeals to people, but its impact varies across individuals. The example of a number of girls and women ending up believing that attractiveness lies in the typical skinniness of high-fashion models is a prominent example of the influence of the social environment within this site. For additional examples, see this entry addressing “cultural differences and beauty” and the issue of obesity that follows it.
Dorian Gray / Ron / The Hedgehog: Do not leave silly comments, let alone comments completely unrelated to an entry.
Posted by Erik on May 20, 2007 at 08:15 AM | #
Erik, you are doing nothing but taking women backwards. Did you ever think that maybe a man LOVES his woman and doesn’t care if her fucking ribs are small enough? or does it make him gay to be attracted to her based on her large ribs?
this is the most arbitrary conclusion ever.
Kyle Morgan is right. Beauty is opinion and personal preference. Just because a man likes athletic women does not make him gay or anything near it.
On top of that, ‘feminine and attractive” is not definable. And just because women don’t fit your specific type doesn’t make them unnattractive. It sure as hell doesn’t make them un-feminine either, cuz they’re WOMEN. That’s what women look like.
Posted by pisham on May 23, 2007 at 12:03 AM | #
Would it be possible to post the entire series of female line-up photos? I have been searching for a photo study like this for an animation database. I found this on an image hunt.
Interesting site.
Posted by DAGraphix on May 26, 2007 at 02:41 AM | #
Pisham: What do you mean I am “taking women backwards”? I agree that a man in love with a woman doesn’t give a rat’s about her rib cage, and being attracted to a woman with a large rib cage doesn’t imply anything about the sexual orientation of a man. Yes, people do have their opinions and personal preferences regarding beauty, but in most cases these are similar. I also agree that being attracted to an athletic-looking woman does not imply that a man is gay or close. I disagree that “feminine and attractive” is not definable. Femininity can be assessed in detail (see the feminine vs. masculine page), and the numerical data above tell us about various correlates of beauty; more here. The latter does not imply that one could define feminine beauty with high precision, but it is not undefinable. Of course, women that I am not attracted to are not necessarily unattractive to others, and I have not implied that these women must be un-feminine.
DAGraphix: More of the line-up photos can be obtained here.
Posted by Erik on May 26, 2007 at 08:44 PM | #
femininity may exist but to imply from that that iut is a correlate of beauty and so beauty exists is an assumption because one may agree someone looks or is feminine but it doesnt necesserily follow tjhat they believe that person looks beautifull, Beauty doesnt exist its merely an illusion.
Posted by joe on May 28, 2007 at 10:30 AM | #
Joe: Are most humans under an illusion that beauty exists? What a remarkable illusion in that most see the same illusion (e.g., Table 2 above) and this illusion can be quantified to some extent and described anatomically in some detail! Anyway, this site does not delve into philosophy.
Posted by Erik on May 28, 2007 at 07:19 PM | #
I’d fuck all those chicks!
Posted by James Clay Jensen on June 10, 2007 at 03:04 AM | #
The first one is feintley the most attractive by far outof all of them.
Posted by Chris on June 10, 2007 at 07:44 PM | #
Most atracttive girls are 1 and 8.
Posted by Deki on August 03, 2007 at 06:52 PM | #
I think #1 is the most attractive and #7 could be second easily. Another thing that would make adifference would be which one has the most soothing voice.
Posted by Alpha male on September 07, 2007 at 10:35 PM | #
I feel that many feel the most attractive would be 1 and 8 based not on how feminine but on how physically fit. A woman that looks physically fit will automatically look the most attractive. Different ethnic groups feel that there are different indications of health and so different variations of attractiveness.
Also, the woman deemed as “feminine” were evaluated at my local high school and college as “unattractive” in general while some “masculine” woman were ranked higher. I think the “masculine” woman are more attractive because they are healthier and not for being masculine.
Posted by Liz on September 20, 2007 at 02:03 AM | #
#7 No competition.
Here’s a trick for FireFox users:
Open two enlarged images for comparison on different Tabs (Mouse Wheel Click)
and switch rapidly between them with Control + (Page UP & DOWN)
It’s amusing. For instance:
Try that with #1 & #7
Her boobs seem to grow! LOL =)
And you can tell apart very subtle differences, like the position of the shoulders (#1 is more “martial") etc.
BTW, #8 has manly shaped buttocks (rounded)
It’s like the buttocks of a man hanging from a woman’s hips.
EW… xp
Posted by Der Wanderer on October 03, 2007 at 07:56 AM | #
BEAUTIFUL AND SEXY ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS TO WOMEN.
MOST WOMEN FIND MORE FEMININE WOMEN MORE BEAUTIFUL.
MOST WOMEN FIND MORE ANDROGYNOUS WOMEN SEXIER.
Straight men do not understand this because to straight men, beautiful = sexy.
Posted by Whipped Honey on October 15, 2007 at 05:01 AM | #
WHAT KIND OF WOMAN FIND OTHER WOMAN SEXY AT ALL?
Even if I would it would be in terms of wanting some sexy traits for myself,and those would never be androgynous.
Posted by bron on October 15, 2007 at 08:50 AM | #
"WHAT KIND OF WOMAN FIND OTHER WOMAN SEXY AT ALL?”
Arousal and attraction are two different things. Most women are attracted primarily or exclusively to men, yet even women who who have no desire for actual sexual contact with other women can still be aroused, either consciously or unconsciously, by looking at women.
Most women are primarily or exclusively attracted to masculinity, so most women feel subconscious, subliminal arousal when they look at attractive androgynous women, but not when they look at attractive feminine women.
Posted by Whipped Honey on October 15, 2007 at 05:11 PM | #
Whipped Honey :
I have something to say about that, I posted my comment in
Karl “models have skinny bones” Lagerfeld rejects three models for being too skinny! entry, if you are interested.
Posted by bron on October 16, 2007 at 05:00 AM | #
You say most will “undoubtedly” pick #7. I think #1 and #8 have (by far) the most attractive bodies, and most agree that #7 isn’t the best. Yet instead of realizing that few of *your* readers prefer her, you’re using excuses and reasons as to why someone is biased or incorrect.
It makes me wonder what research you’ve used when even your readers/commenters aren’t agreeing with it.
Posted by BoredSurfer on October 22, 2007 at 07:54 AM | #
Bored surfer: Several thousand people have read this article and the vast majority of them have not left a comment. Hence it doesn’t follow that most disagree that #7 has the best looking physique. As noted above, a reader who disagreed, “-R”, elsewhere identified herself as a lesbian with a preference for masculinized women and the person posting as “Jordan” left a comment under a different [male name] alias where he described his preference for skinny women but did not describe his sexual orientation in spite of my asking him. People who disagree may be more likely to leave a comment.
Whipped honey: Slight masculinization is a correlate of the sexiness of women to men. Hetersoexual men do not necessarily confound beauty with sexiness. The assertion that “most women feel subconscious, subliminal arousal when they look at attractive androgynous women” has not been proven. I will respond to your detailed argument in this regard where it appears.
Posted by Erik on October 23, 2007 at 05:18 AM | #
Long time reader, first time poster… No one thinks #12 is a hottie? It could be her enhanced sense of fashion and sense of buying clothes that fit her. Or it could be her ever slightly so sly smirk. Every one else looks like their mothers just died. She has the best all around.
Posted by Matthew on December 10, 2007 at 07:45 PM | #
Number 8 IMO has the better body, at least from the front, mainly ‘cause I don’t like saggy bosums (I prefer “perky” to “large and saggy"), slender waist and rounded hips. I also prefer dark hair, so that biases me some, since hair isn’t really part of the analysis I guess (I don’t like women to have exceptionally short hair). But, yes, her face is manly, her bum isn’t very rounded but I also don’t like saggy butts so I don’t mind that much.
Number 7 has a much nicer face, better bum, and a decent figure thuogh her waist is, IMO, somewhat robust despite being (good) noticably narrower than her rounded hips. She has the best face of the bunch and seems from appearance (poor judge I know) that she’d be nice to talk to.
From the front, #8 has the better figure, though. Not as much from the sides or back, admittedly.
Number 1 is ok and I can see why people like her, but her face seems somewhat stern, plus her figure isn’t as good as #7 & #8. Perhaps it’s because gentlemen prefer golden blondes. It would have been interesting to see people’s responses if her hair was a different colour (impossible now ‘cause they’ve made their choice and may claim hair colour has nothing to do with it).
Posted by Dingleberry the Third on December 30, 2007 at 05:45 PM | #
"Several thousand people have read this article and the vast majority of them have not left a comment. Hence it doesn’t follow that most disagree that #7 has the best looking physique.”
This is such flawed logic. I disagree and was not going to comment until this was said.
Posted by LlamaGuy on February 14, 2008 at 06:08 AM | #
They all look great! You just have to get the peel off ...
Posted by a on February 16, 2008 at 06:33 PM | #
I agree Number 1 and 8 are most attractive. How’s that for statistics!
Posted by rooper on April 07, 2008 at 10:56 PM | #
Page 1 of 1 pages
Next article: Fashion models like this woman can obviate the need for this site
Previous article: Elkie from Simonscans