You are here

Nonheterosexual vs. heterosexual male preference for petite women: Alessandra Ambrosio vs. Camille

Some heterosexual men prefer petite women over voluptuous women; voluptuous as used here is not an euphemism for obesity, but refers to a combination of large breasts, a tiny waist, small rib cage, rounded hips and a prominent backside, i.e., a very feminine appearance.  Petite women would, on average, be less feminine than voluptuous women.  However, as long as a self-identified lifetime-exclusive heterosexual man prefers the more feminine petite women, one would not reasonably doubt his professed sexual orientation.  A comparison of fashion model Alessandra Ambrosio, very sexy by the standards of the fashion world, with Camille from Teen Stars magazine will be instructive here.

Alessandra Ambrosio has a very masculine face; her face is that of an adolescent male transvestite rather than a woman’s.

Alessandra Ambrosio and Camille from teen stars magazine

Alessandra Ambrosio and Camille from teen stars magazine

The breasts of Alessandra cannot be properly addressed since she has breast implants, as apparent below, but it is obvious that she is naturally flat chested.

Alessandra Ambrosio

On the other hand, Alessandra’s boyish physique can easily be contrasted with a more feminine physique.

Alessandra Ambrosio and Camille from teen stars magazine

Alessandra Ambrosio and Camille from teen stars magazine

Alessandra Ambrosio and Camille from teen stars magazine

Faced between choosing a voluptuous woman that will probably become obese after marriage (only true of some), as most likely this woman will, and a petite though feminine woman that will probably never become obese, it is understandable that some heterosexual men will prefer a petite woman for a long-term stable partner, but if these men are lifetime-exclusive heterosexual with a choice of women, the selected women wouldn’t be anywhere close to Alessandra Ambrosio in looks.

Some people explain the typical skinniness of fashion models in terms of the need for them to function as clothes hangars, an obviously lame reason.  Well, Camille is petite enough to not have curves come in the way, but she is too feminine to look like an adolescent boy and therefore unacceptable to the homosexuals who dominate the fashion business.  The likes of Camille are also too feminine for the annual transsexual parade better known as the Victoria’s Secret lingerie show.

Some more pictures of Camille are shown below.

Camille from teen stars magazine

Camille from teen stars magazine

Camille from teen stars magazine



What's wrong with small chested women? They are just as attractive, I don't understand the fascination with womens large breasts, to be honest I find small ones even more attractive, and I even came up with a's called F.A.T. Face first, the ass, then tits. Set your priorities, boobs are just a handful whereas a face is something to look at, I can't stand having a girlfriend with an ugly face. Pillowcase face is what you call them, and you can't go out in public and have a nice cup of coffee with her because you can't stand to look at her face.

Alessandra Ambrosio looks masculine indeed, but the thing to conceal people eyes are the make up, solid breasts and butts that seem to be enough for any males to find she is pretty.
I suggest you erik, you should find a picture of glamour model that also make up the same like your componant model so people can see it more clearer. about Camille, I find she looks feminine, but she isn't pretty or attactive when compare with alassandra who is masculine but elegrant. I suppose, erik? if both of these women standing next to each other? I think people will look at alessandra more than Camille because alassandra is taller? bigger structure? and larger face?
larger lips? I accept that camille has refined beauty ( for delicate people) but when look for overall of body. alassandra is attractive than camile.

Once again,I do not think Camile is fit to hour-glass cristeria. I think her legs are abit too straight and her waist from the picture you posted also too straight. I think hour glass must be like natalie glebova ( miss russia universe), or Nadine Njeim ( miss lebanon).

Are you out of your mind? Alessandra is so much better looking than Camillia or whatever her name is. Take that from an exclusively heterosexual man.

Eric what do you have to say about list of 100 hottest women.

Allessandra Ambrosio is number 2 , Heidi Klum, Giselle and Adriana Lima are all up there above rank 25.

They are on Maxim and FHM and Askmen

So Askmen, FHM and Maxim all cater to gay men? According to you.

Your model is cute but she is the typical girl next door. She hasnt got breasts, she hasnt got a hip ( from the front). From the back she looks a bit curvier but it could be an illusion as she looks like a stick from the front. But she looks like a 14 year old with a pug nose, and freckles.

Anyone who fancies her must be a little messed up in the head to drool over 14 year old minor girls.

Voluptuous is the feline equivilent of masculinity.

Petite is the wholly feminine incarnation of femininity.

Catch wreck. feminine V womanly.

peace to the east

hi eric,

i agree that more people that disagree with you are more inclined to post a comment. i m sure many girls read over this site and feel more comfortable with themselves and less - what s the word- pathetic compared to the idealized image that fashion industries have sold us. i think it is quite sad that big businesses have sacraficed the self esteem of most girls to make a quick buck.

i do agree with others that we should appreciate all women- shapes and sizes. But in general, i think that any woman that is sold to another woman as being more desirable based on her physical appearance is wrong. the beauty competition amongst woman is ugly- and also scarring. And i dont point my finger at you- but our image obsessed pop culture that picks apart women and there bodies. it s objectifying. the beauty of a woman is much deeper and much more complex- but these days the world is teaching woman only how to look rather then how to act and how to use our minds.

i think super models are over glamorized and only draw more attention to looking a certain way and degrade the female spirit. we re more then nice boobs or nice hair. but that is all anybody wants to talk about.

i also must applaude your manner of debate. you respond and state your opinion collectively and politely. it seems that many people want to resort to name calling, fowl language, and over all aggressive combative behavior with you. i think everyone should stop screaming their opinion at you, and instead maybe you can both understand the realities of eachothers opinions.

Alessandra looks smarter, prettier than camile or Delta Goodrem. indeed I find every women look good on their own way but for me alessandra is prettier than camile. I think erik has to watch the movie "the rise of evil" (Hitler biography movie. u will find a lot of women that look the way you like to promote is Hitler ideal. the women for him is only use the body for satisfy his lust. something rare and beauty. I really don't mind u'd call me lifetime exclustive homosexual or what ever? u'd like to call but I don't think the real male in this world would insult the women the way you doing now. indeed, I find that alessandra's face is prominent. she has a living eyes and makes me think of spring or summer awhile the woman like camile is just pretty as a porcelain DOLL. NOT a kind of woman u wanted to share your life with. thanks coco chanel she was the first woman in the old world who released all women out of the lusty bound of the men. every guys in old time impressed in her cute, smart, small body, dark hair and cleaver awhile all chubby blonde women are jealously tried to follow chanel character, clothing and her hair style. and now I feel sad that some male'd like to bound the women back into old world again.

okay so you are ugly and trying to make everyone else think that the most stunning women on this planet are disgusting? you must also be the most dumbest person on earth, these women would not get paid thousands to pose if they were ugly. haha, you're actually hilarious. hahahaha

I browsed the page for a while and, well, some of those supermodels lack curved waists or nice round bottoms, but still, the're much more attractive than all this women with disgustingly saggy breasts (big tits are more than okay, but not these looking like some old sacks), faces untouched with deeper thought, legs like massive pillars and pimples on their buttocks (what lack of hygiene do you need to achieve something like that?) Erik finds beautiful.
The Paleolithic era is over, and you're still after the Venus of Willendorf.

Please take the comments and link for Jessie Gilbert off the site. While
I respect the freedom as regards messages this is frankly loathsome and cannot be justified.

I dont really know how to say this in a friendly way, but PLEASE STOP TALKING THROUGH YOUR ARSE!!!!!

Adriana Lima, Jessica Alba and Alessandra Ambrosio are unbelievabley beautiful. why do you want to bring them down??? That Camille bird is not half as beautiful as Alessandra Ambrosio and shouldnt be printed on the same page as her.

I have watched elizabeth 2007 today. also marie antoinette 2006. I think erik find the creepy women with very super-white skin and chubby face are attactive. the only woman I like on the flim is cate blanchette, because she looks very elegrant and smart, eventhrought she is in that creepy make up. the other women like Elizabeth Throckmorton/abbie cornish is reminded me of this article, " Camille".

Erik : your tast are the same to the far east asian guys. I think in the medival time of europe, people were very pale and didn't have the facial's features like caucasian people in this century. from the portaits of all royal families in ancient time reminded me of the women in your site.

I give you the name of the girl who played " lady elizabeth throckmorton" abbie cornnish, perhape you could add her into your attactive feminine women section?

Alessandra is the hottest thing on this planet- i'm saying that as a woman who is straight. She is gorgeous- everyone has their own opinion of what beauty is. usually- it has to do with survival. Alessandra for example, has a fit body, she is healthy looking. Men would want a woman who is healthy and be able to bare a child. Some like skinny, some like heavy- it depends from man to man and culture to culture. (assuming a straight relationship here). There were some studies that have shown a correlation between men being hungry more attracted to women who had some meat on them. (by showing pictures). So there you go- be beautiful and love life.

I can definately see what the author's talking about here. Opinions ARE information guys, it's not as if he's misrepresenting it as actual data, it is an observation which he backs up with pictures to demonstrate what he's talking about. You can see the difference between hard and soft features here.

Nobody really cares what the 'majority' of men jack off to. If you think about it, women with more testosterone want to have sex more, and guys nowadays are very desperate and submissive so they may go for that, but that is still pretty homosexual in nature. That's not a bad thing, while I'm mostly heterosexual I've got some homosexual tendencies myself, it's not a bad form of interaction at all.

Even so, I think you're missing out on appreciation a feminine woman's soft and subtle beauty too. We're all in a rush to embrace the forgotten girls, which is great, but we can't forget the traditional type of girl either in the rush to be openminded.

uh, I don't like the reference here used about transexuals in general. That's just not cool, and I think Alessandra is beautiful by the way, and alessandra is taller, so she looks more card-board-ish, the two girls very very similar bust/waist/hip ratio from their pictures.

"There is no way 25-33% of people in India have greenish eyes;"
Oh really ... wanna bet?

You are silly, using fancy words to try and sound factual when you are speaking of opinion. This bashing of attractive (masculine? What?) models to make the attractive girl next door look better is all based on opinion, and you are allowed to that opinion and to express it, but your style of doing so is going to annoy us. I came here for artistic inspiration, but I can't stand looking at the girl you are trying to make look good anymore. The approach is yucky.

I think I understand why Erik's views come across as so off-base to people who find Victoria's Secret models highly attractive. The facial and body features that Erik labels "masculine" are what most people would call "androgynous". When he complains that high-fashion models often resemble (lean) adolescent boys, he has simply noticed that they share many androgynous features in common. Males and females come in a wide variety of body types, and there is a broad range of overlapping features both sexes share.

Erik appears to assume that masculine and feminine attributes develop in opposition, and that any degree of masculinity in a female detracts from her feminine qualities. This leads him to react negatively to models who exhibit elegantly androgynous features in an unmistakably feminine context. Highly defined cheekbones and a sharp, delicate jawline do not make a petite, feminine face look masculine, they give the woman who possesses them strikingly androgynous looks which most people find more attractive than a typically bland female face.

In short, Erik is a "heterosexual-exclusive" man who finds anything other than completely feminine women to be unattractive. He thinks that any woman with androgynous features looks transsexual, and that any man who'd finds her attractive is potentially "gay".

Actually, I know that a lot of people on here have said that the poster here is insane/gay/whatever, but what is said actually makes a lot of sense. Alessandra has a more masculine facial structure than Camille (I'm talking ADULT masculine, because young girls and boys have similar facial structures as well as body structures because the sex-defining hormones are only present in minute consentrations compared to adolescents or adults), therefore making her a more androgynous model. High fashion models are not classical beauties - they're different, striking. Many models have abnormally large eyes, a wide mouth, an unusually high forehead, or any number of other, odd, features. It makes them stand out. It makes them memorable. And the one constant in today's modeling industry that's a strange trait in women: they're extremely tall.

Outside of the modeling world and those men with outside-the-norm preferences, a tall, oddly-featured woman can have a very hard time finding a dance partner, much less a mate. As a general rule, men dislike their female partners to be taller than them. (Point one for petite girls.) Men also like women to be distinctly feminine (rounder jawline, softer features, high but soft cheekbones, etc.) and fit with a more classic sort of beauty. Petite women tend to fit these features more often than tall, voluptuous women. (point two.) Men tend to want their partner's physical beauty to last, which means they will select a woman with a thinner frame and lower body fat (signs of a healthy metabolism), smaller breasts and average hips (these would grow and widen after childbirth to a more voluptuous form as she became a mother), and perhaps a less extreme difference of either bustline or hips to waist. This way (at least with the current standard of beauty), the woman's physical beauty would be more likely to sustain itself, and the man will be less likely to become unsatisfied with his partner and stray.

Now, before someone starts calling me an idiot, remember - the topic is looking for a LIFE partner, not a SEXUAL partner alone. Yes, voluptuous, striking women are alluring, enticing, exciting sexual partners, but the extremity of their features and figure actually signal a less-fitting biological match, which affects the way a man will see her. Plenty of men (and women) easily imagine themselves having sex with a high-fashion model, but it's harder and much less common for a long-lasting marriage or partnership to be imagined with the same woman.

Of course, there's a balance: a petite, more voluptuous woman. Like me! (Sorry, guys, I'm engaged.)

lol No i agree 100% Teresa. I don't think you are an idiot you have a point, and Erik too has countless good points on this website. However, one thing that bothers me is that people say "curvy" women tend to get fat. Having chunks in the right area is not the definition of "curvy". I am a curvy woman and it doesn't matter how much weight I lose I will have an hourglass shape. Yes, I get my hourglass figures from the area my fat gets placed (hips,but,bust), but my skeletal structure itself is actually shaped like that. I have been pretty skinny before, too skinny and I still maintain an extremely curvy figure, and the little fat I will have will still be placed on my hips etc.

I agree though that petite women seem most desirable as a lifelong mate. However, the whole super model thing has itsb catches too. We all want to have 1 feature that stands out and makes us who we are. Super models just represent this desire to the extreme. However, no one wants to be bland. If my body and face and everything is perfect that would get boring. So why wouldn't I want big eyes or thicker than normal lips? These are attractive features that ADD to my beauty by changing my looks from bland to WOW she has it all and those signature lips! You know?

But Erik doesn't have a problem with exotic features. I think Erik's whole deal is: Super models are too masculine to be considered attractive by the average male.

I agree. They are super masculine, and I agree that femininity is a factor in attractiveness towards heterosexual males. However, the reason why super models are so masculine is debatable, and the extent to which masculinity and femininity deter or add to attractiveness in a woman is debatable as well.

This is unbelievable! How can anybody say something like this?

"Adriana’s physique does not approach a feminine, hourglass figure"

What "feminine, hourglass figure"? Ever heard that people come in all shapes and sizes?
A woman with an hourglass figure is no more womanly than a woman who is straight up and down. She isn't necessarily prettier either, nor more feminine for that matter. If that were true and considering a study performed by the North Carolina State University, which revealed that only 8% of American and British women have hourglass figures, the majority of American and British women wouldn't be feminine.

There's a thing called diversity and that's a good thing. Women with different body types can be equally beautiful and feminine.

Your site is a real find, it gladens me to see someone make an effort at putting a light on the nature of todays feminine ideal bodies (which is obiously problematic, in regards to anoriexa etc, all western diseases). I however do not think that homosexual men in the fashion industry is the cause of androgynous/ masculine ideals.
Photos of females that sell well to other females usually communicate other psychological qualities than how femininity has been portraid before the womens movement grew strong. Fashion pictures today show of tall imposing women excuding self confidence, coolness and a somewhat aggressive pose towards the viewer, far from the coy shy woman who looks to the man in classical paintings for instance. It could be that women today themselves are drawn away from the hyperfeminine in that they long for a bigger life, more then the traditional life of a caring for family and home.Freedom in identifying with the androgynous.

I believe there are findings on females being more depressed when the bodily femininization appears during puberty then when boys are masculinised for instance.

Come to think of it slightly masculine female faces in themselves has appeared in western culture many times and has been seen as beutiful, Virginia woolf was considered very beutiful by many, Art around early 1900s, like August Klimt for instance featured masculine qualities in paintings of female faces.

I am a man. I agree with the admin on this one. I would take Camille over Alessandra. Alessandra is beautiful no doubt but Camille has more of an innocent feminine charm. Perhaps also, something else that I can't quite explain. Agreed that Society has heavily skewed the male interpretation of what femininity is. Eastern and Northern European woman are far more diverse in appearance. I find them the most beautiful. I have met a great number of South American women who were beautiful but the Eastern Euros are something else. I am North Ameriacan by the way. Another bizarre thing is how my male friends find me strange for not fantasizing over lesbians going at it. I tell them that they dont really want it but its been imposed on them via mass media indoctrination methods. There is a good book on this called " Media Sexploitation - The Hidden Implants in America's Media." The celebrity thing is as overated as the lesbian fantasy thing. It's stale and generic. Nice website by the way. Very interesting material here.

why do you insist on saying that all these models have naturally small breasts when you have no concrete evidence. are you implying that all women with big breasts have breast implants?
just how narrow minded can you be?

Alessandra is beautiful no doubt but Camille has more of an innocent feminine charm. Perhaps also, something else that I can't quite explain.


Erik, I don't understand the vehemence from the idiots you let post here. By idiots, I mean those who can't or won't use a spellchecker, proper grammar, and logic to communicate. But it takes all kinds, I suppose.

In regards to Alessandra, I can completely see what you're talking about. With the exception of the magazine cover (thank you, airbrushing) she looks like a very successful transsexual, particularly in her face. From the neck up, she really does have strong masculine features that aren't attractive to me at all.

On the flip side, while Camile is not anywhere near a 10 in face or body attractiveness, there is one undeniable fact about her; NO ONE can mistake her for a man. Her femininity is very appealing, especially her face.

Bodywise, both women are closer to similar (and neither is fully feminine in my opinion) but Camile is more feminine than Alessandra.

That, I take it, is your entire point, is it not, Erik?

In any case, as a red-blooded heterosexual male, I DO find Camile more attractive. Further, when I think back to women I've dated in the past, and specifically the 'skinny' ones, they still had more feminine features. Just looking at Alessandra and Camile, two things pop into my head: 1) that I wouldn't want to date Alessandra (not my type), and 2) Camile looks like she'd smell (and feel) good. Maybe that's a throwback to personal experience, or an instinctive male inclination, I don't know. But Camile is most definately my choice, given these two ladies.

Oh, and thank you for all your work on this website. Since I recently discovered it, it has helped me to understand why I prefer the women that I do (though it hasn't changed my perceptions, just my awareness of them). Keep up the good work.

Alessandra and Camille are both attractive and but equally average or as I like to say bleh.

Camille looks like a child, it's pretty creepy. I prefer an actress like Mary Elizabeth Winstead over these two, she's quite feminine and has that innocent look but clearly looks like a woman and has a body that Alessandra would kill for.

Alessa vs Camile | Submitted by Mr. Krishan on Wed, 07/15/2009 - 13:36.

"Erik, I don't understand the vehemence from the idiots you let post here. By idiots, I mean those who can't or won't use a spellchecker, proper grammar, and logic to communicate. But it takes all kinds, I suppose."

Poor grammer does not qualify or define one as being an idiot but trying to understand something that does not exist and then not understanding why one cant understand it not understanding one cant understand it because it doesnt exist or else one may have understood and if one may still not have understood it it may just be that they may come to your conclusion not understanding they have not understood it because of there lack of ability to understand.If you re-read your sentence you will find it doesnt make sense its nonsensical there is no logic to it.

It is natural spelling mistakes/grammatical errors will occur. There are different types of english e.g American english and Standard UK english in which words are spelt differently etc...

Alessa vs Camile | Submitted by Mr. Krishan on Wed, 07/15/2009 - 13:36.

"Erik, I don't understand the vehemence from the idiots you let post here. By idiots, I mean those who can't or won't use a spellchecker, proper grammar, and logic to communicate. But it takes all kinds, I suppose."

Poor grammer does not qualify or define one as being an idiot but trying to understand something that does not exist and then not understanding why one cant understand it not understanding one cant understand it because it doesnt exist or else one may have understood and if one may still not have understood it it may just be that they may come to your conclusion not understanding they have not understood it because of there lack of ability to understand does.If you re-read your sentence you will find it doesnt make sense its nonsensical there is no logic to it.

It is natural spelling mistakes/grammatical errors will occur. There are different types of english e.g American english and Standard UK english in which words are spelt differently etc...

"Hmm," has it ever occurred to you that your strict, high and mighty tastes in "women" are conditioned by the media? How dare you critize a beautiful, natural woman like camille. HOW DARE YOU. You are clearly a dick. It's little wonder you didn't leave your name because if you did I don't think you would ever find any place to put said dick, ever again. Have fun jerking off to porn, idiot.

Camille is a beaut. :)

After tons of research, some of which is actually quite interesting and accurate, Erik comes to the conclusion that the following women still pass as feminine and are therefore attractive even though they contradict literally everything he presents as scientific evidence supporting the idea that femininity is the largest contributor to an attractive woman and the desire of any lifetime exclusive heterosexual male.

Angelina Jolie:

Erik has mentioned that although she has sharp facial angles she is feminine anyways. I don't know about that Erik...

angelina jolie Pictures, Images and Photos

Ok, to be fair YOUNG Angelina Jolie:

angelina jolie Pictures, Images and Photos

16 Pictures, Images and Photos

Megan Fox:

Megan Fox Pictures, Images and Photos

Megan Fox Pictures, Images and Photos

iuby Pictures, Images and Photos

Keeley Hazel:

Keeley Hazel Pictures, Images and Photos

keeley hazel Pictures, Images and Photos

Idk. I am just confused. Erik doesn't seem to actually like feminine women it seems...

Yes, the women above are attractive. Yes, they would be MORE attractive if they were more feminine. But, the point is that a more masculine woman CAN be more attractive than a feminine woman if she has better bone structure. What makes Megan Fox so attractive and sexy? Her bone structure, not her femininity. The same goes for the other two. Let's look at Charlize theron. So in conclusion, yes if Megan Fox actually had an hourglass figure, and more rounded angles she would probably look better. I just think it comes down to a lot more than just femininity, although femininity combined with good bone structure is what truly makes a woman beautiful. Although the most attractive thing to any male is a woman who takes good care of herself and takes good care of him.

Several of your points are inaccurate:

"Men tend to want their partner's physical beauty to last, which means they will select a woman with a thinner frame and lower body fat (signs of a healthy metabolism), smaller breasts and average hips (these would grow and widen after childbirth to a more voluptuous form as she became a mother)"

You're simply wrong here. This sounds to me more of how a women who isn't really blessed with a feminine figure is going to think and say. No heterosexual man is going to go out of his way to want to find a woman with a thinner than usual frame, smaller breasts and smaller hips than they would desire. Your reasons for this are wrong. Women with very feminine and curvy bodies have no more chance of getting "fat" than any other women out there. This reasoning usually comes from the fashion fanatics who want to defend their androgynous idols so I am surprised seeing as how you started expressing yourself as if you are not of that mentality.

Curvy women who become overweight become overweight like any other man or woman. They eat too much and don't try to take care of it. Thinking that a curvy woman's body is not going to last is to have a fantastical mindset of what weight gain is and believe that no one has control of it if you have a certain body type. That is just wrong.

Finally, your use of the word "voluptuous" is used incorrectly. Victoria Secret models, or any models working in fashion, are not voluptuous in any way.

Although there is a ton of scientific evidence behind what is considered feminine and what is masculine, it seems the author seems to like to pick and choose certain traits from women he either likes or dislikes causing an extremely unprofessional subjective quality about the article. Although he uses scientific research to back up his claims, the method he uses to identify whether a female as feminine or masculine cannot even be remotely considered a scientific process.

The bottom line is that there are significant scientific evidence that proves there are noticeable differences between what is considered feminine and masculine, but the author himself lacks the knowledge, understanding, education, or even credibility to assert his own opinions as truth. The author needs to understand that a subjective interpretation of an objective certainty cannot be considered truth.

Not to mention, Camille, from the pictures posted, does not even possess the feminine characteristics claimed. What WHR? What feminine posterior protrusion?

Your website is almost criminally stupid.

You rank right up there with Scientology, Jack Thompson, the Kansas Board Of Education, and the Westboro Baptist Church in the amount of idiocy you spout.

That'd almost be impressive if it wasn't such a bad thing.....

After looking at the women you've labeled as attractive I've decided that you must be doing this site as a joke. Sure, you've got a few bombshells in there like Amy on page 3, but most of the rest are ghastly! Dasha on page 11 looks butch, Silvia on page 3 looks like she's been in the sun too long, and Elkie on page 7 has crooked eyes! It's fine with me if you get into those women, but don't call me 'nonheterosexual' for not being attracted to someone who looks old enough to be my mom!

And another thing, you said Jessica Alba looks masculine? Check out that picture you've got up of Sally Todd! Jawline bigger than any guy I've seen and a shirt that looks stuffed. Sure you're not the one who's 'nonheterosexual'?

Finally, let's humor you for a minute and say that the whole fashion industry really is a giant gay conspiracy to make straight men want to fondle teenage boys. Even if that's their objective, they wouldn't be able to force anything of the sort on the market. A principles course in Microeconomics will tell you that the consumer has far more power over the producer than the reverse. Producers can try to convince the consumer that they want their product (i.e. advertising), but at the end of the day, if no one wants those edible, candy-flavored flip flops they won't buy it and the producer will either change products or go out of business. The public has certain demands and the role of the producer is to meet those demands as efficiently as possible. The same thing goes for advertising (i.e. runway models); producers find out what works and they use it. Using skinny models is simply a reaction to what has worked well in the past.

But if you look at beautiful women and all you can see is adolescent boys, maybe the problem isn't with the fashion community...

Hi, is a person named erik the manager of this site? i just wanted to know what the aim of this site was? is it to let women who do not have supermodel-esque features realise their own beauty by comdemming models? if that's the case then you should let women understand that even though society perceives models like gisele and heidi to be beautiful and sexy, regular women are beautiful in their own right as well... instead, all i've noticed is that u have brushed of these models looks as ugly and non-sexy and have used glamour models to show what true beauty is. is that your aim? to show R-rated models as the real beauties of this world? u may think that i'm a supporter or great fan of high fashion models and such. but that is not the case. I just feel that if u wanted to rid women of the idea that only high fashion models are beautiful, then u have done that. but only because u have replaced it with your opinion that only glamour models are sexy and beautiful, since all your comparisons were between high fashion models and glamour models. I would also like to ask you, what about women who do have high fashion model features? are you saying these women are hideous and will never have - what u like to call - 'life time exclusive' partners? i happen to be someone who has a prominent jaw line, robust cheekbones, small pelvis and many other masculine features.. i am very slender and tall as well, but i'm not a model. are you saying that i look horrible?

Alessandra Ambrosio vs. Camille

get rid of the s. and turn v on it's side:

Alessandra Ambrosio > Camille

Camille looks kinda funny(especially in the first pic), while Aless is cute.

Hello, Erik,

I usually agree with you about VS's show being a transvestite parade, but I somehow remembered that there used to be much more attractive, feminine looking women in their catalogue in the nineties. I am a German living in Spain and last week I came across some pictures of Vanessa Lorenzo, a Spanisch girl modeling for them like 10 or 15 years ago. As I see in the internet, she is described as being a "petite model", (petite meaning "short" by the way in the fashion industry, not "slim") being 1'70m tall, which is over the average female population not only in Spain, but also in Germany or Sweden:

Vanessa is way too skinny for my taste, but she definitely looks womanly having a very narrow waist, rounded hips - and even if her breasts are too small, they look natural and feminine, much better than those transvestite fakes most of VS models have these days. Furhtermore, she has round eyes, a small, well proportioned mouth and the line of her cheekbones and jaw ist soft, fine features to sum up.
Why do you no longer see girls like her or Laetitia Casta in this show? May it be that they did have a straight guy casting models 10 years ago? Were those models less successful to sell lingerie? I don't think so...

(Sorry for my poor English, by the way, I hope you get my point)

And by the way, if somebody wants to compare Vanessa Lorenzo with another model of the same ethnicity, here is the new Spaniard among VS's models Clara Alonso. Compare her body with Vanessa's body in the picture with the flowers above with Clara's body in lingerie. Doesn't Clara even look like a Doppelgängerin of Ambrosio somehow? And her facial features: long chin, thick eyebrows...


I don't think any of them are masculine. Some are MORE masculine then others, but no where near the look of a man, well a healthy man anyways. If a guy doesn't exercise and eat healthy then he wont develop as masculine as he should. And that might be why you find these girls unattractive. Because they kinda look like you.

wow.....In my family many of the girls were born with full lips...what most women have their lips done to be as such. Women in general I feel are beautiful ....We have outwardly appearance....then we have inward appearance. I can not sit here and say that Yes, the cheekbones and such make the masculine look for some models...I find all the women here attractive...I also think there are some Pretty men as well...They seem more feminine looking then some women in general...I will go with this saying and its not scientific at all or maybe it is..either way...It is a matter of many factors...but let me get back to what I was going to say..."Beauty Us In The Eye Of The Beholder" What one person sees as beauty another may find ugly...We can be scientific sure...and break it down as such...which to me takes away from the fact that the women on this page in fact all are beautiful in their own right. ; )

Sorry for the typo......"Beauty Is In The Eye Of The Beholder"

Can't you spell hanger correctly, you moron? You spelled it "hangar," which is a structure where airplanes are housed.

Boring. I like women who are healthy that exercise regularly and eat a healthy diet. women that are not stick figures and women that are not floppy or needlessly rotund. Just like I dont like the idea of an alcoholic or a smoker. they are not healthy and probably are not happy.

I like a little musculature on a well fleshed out woman. I'm not talking about fat. I mean fleshy tight and firm but soft and curvy at the same time. If she has muscles well as long as they aren't ropey and veiny and hard then all is well.

a healthy diet and regular exercise precludes being too skinny or fat. the right amount of protein and calcium makes your body fill out. the right amount of vitamins and minerals makes your skins hair and nails healthy and glossy and great to touch. Fatty acids and oils of the right kind also help with all of those things and also being limber and staying youthful.

Get some perspective guys. I dont want to make love to bones or the next heart attack patient. there is a lot of room to sway but if you ain't healthy you aren't happy and you aren't productive.. oh but what about the people who are naturally skinny and naturally robust? well if they are healthy and happy someone will scoop them up and happily take them home, this I guarantee you

Skanky girls? Excuse me, but you have no right to call a girl "skanky" based on theyellowness of her teeth or any other physical aspect that you find disagreeable. Yes you may not find her looks pleasing, but beauty is subjective. When you use the term "skanky" and "whorerish" to describe women you don't know, based solely on their looks, you slander and disrespect these women, and make yourself out to be just another brain washed sexist man.

Do you ever hear women casting harsh and extreme judgements of worth on men because they haven't shaved in a while or have a beer belly? Are "ugly" men worthless whores and skanks?

If your going to demean women, do it in the privacy of your narrow little mind.

I stumbled upon this site through Google. After reading some of it, I just want to say something: Erik, I hope at some point in your life, you'll get the chance to touch a real woman. Maybe that would cure you. One can only hope!

Seriously people nobody noticed it was some kind of troll who's trying to make people react on his article?
If he had written: "Alessandra Ambrosio" is damn sexy it would be just one blog out of the 1 000 000 000 000 000 saying the same thing.

And looking at his galery of "Attractive women" 99% of them are cheap porn/erotic models from cheap magazines/websites and most of the girls are from Eastern Europe. So honestly I don't think he's a reference in matters of taste XD

I think I got what he meant by "feminine" look. But he should have never compared Alessandra to that girl Camille (who is she btw?).
He should have made the comparision between Alessandra and Monica Bellucci for example. Indeed, Monica has more "female" features like a higher waist-to-hip ratio and stuff like that.
But beauty comes in all shapes and I don't think society is trying to make us like "women who look like men" as he wrote. I'm pretty sure some men have fantasies over Kim Kardashian or Beyonce.
And one last thing, that girl Camille is not even a good example, to me she's NOT even hour-glass shaped and she's almost flat-chested. I mean, if I was a guy I wouldn't defenitely hit her :s :s

Is every positive comment on here really written by whoever made this? That's what it seems like. WHy is every "feminine woman" on this thing so ugly where all teh "masculine" (yeah right) women are hot? Let's see how you look so we can criticise and say how masculine you are. Post your pic up. Everyone knows what masculine women really are and you have not one on your cite. There is no butch dyke on here.

You're the one who does't know what real femininity is. You seem really sick Erik, you should get help. You poor thing. I feel so.. sorry for you...

Flat bones DO NOT equal feminine and bones with definition DO NOT equal masculinity.


Click here to post a new comment