In terms of facial attractiveness, the oval shape face is absolutly NOT the most 'ideal', since it would imply a narrowing forhead, i.e. the broadest point of the face would be situated at the mid-face point and then narrowing at the forhead, which is not the ideal shape as it is less-attractive than a broad forhead, where the widest or equal-widest point of the face is situated at the forhead.
P.s.... believe or not but most of people who live in Nordic and Slavic countries are jewish or have jewish ancestries...so.... think again!Study history my dear critics!
Europeans nordics/slavic dont have jewish ancestory and nor have they ever claimed to have either
Emily, I don't know how old you are but you should look into the romantic life of Halle Berry. She is an African American so probably rather ugly and "primitive" to you but she is considered by most people to be one of the most beautiful stars in Hollywood.
Despite her stunning looks an early boyfriend beat her so badly that she lost most hearing in one ear. She's been married twice and both husbands cheated on her. Her last husband sought treatment as a sex addict! Her beauty and her Oscar couldn't keep her ex-husband faithful, but she seems happy now with her present boyfriend. The point is that beautiful women get beaten, cheated on, and dumped every day. How a man treats depends almost solely on his character. If you are ugly a good man will still be faithful and respectful. If you a beautiful a selfish, self-absorbed man will treat you as badly as he thinks he can get away with. In fact many such men reject beautiful women and actively seek unattractive women because they think (usually correctly) that unattractive will be insecure enough to tolerate multiple forms of abuse and degradation. However if a beautiful woman shows herself to be insecure these selfish, uncaring men are quite happy to inflict the same misery on her. I have seen stunningly gorgeous women who were abused or neglected as children end up with the most vile men imaginable reenacting the abuse of their upbringing.
In short Emily you need to put your obsession with beauty into context. Beauty may give you a wider pool of men to choose from but it doesn't make picking a good man any easier.
Oh my god....I think I will puke...sorry, not from all these women or animal pictures you posetd here...but from your texts and things you say!I am shocked! This site must be deleted and destroyed becouse it is the most ugliest site ever and is full of discrimination and full of ungraceful comments! How can you say that latin, nordic, or whatever woman are ugly if you judge only by few lousy pics...thats rubish! You cant tell things about these nations if you dont know anything at all. By the way, most of them porn star women you put here had multiple plastic surgeries...plus many of them Hollywood or whatever stars had plastics done....so how you can call it a idolised beauty? Rubish!
Like this so called Kardashian- she had so many plastic surgeries we cant even count them alltogether! What a hell...wake up and put back your eyes in your eyesockets, dont judge with your balls or whatever in that matter....for women and men in this website, there are no real nordic, latin, or whatever people in this f****g world, becouse they mixed with other f******g races all the time...like Scandinavian wikings used to make other nations who they cought in their way made as slaves...even latin people were registred in their slave population.So they mixed...if you would go to like Russia- you would see not only Slawic people but aswell Latvian, Lithuanian, Mongolian, Kazakstani, and whatever you know...becouse, THE WORLD IS MIXED AND THERE ARE NO PARTICAL RACE PERSONOFICATIONARY SIGNS THAT WOULD SAY SOMETHING ABOUT THE RACE. Like me,I have latvian, polish, jewish and whatever mix in me and well you cant judge me by the means of your imagined racial charecteristics!!!
I know so many scandinavian women, who have been born there and their parent have been born there but who are tiny and small framed and with nice curves, so just dont bullshit here with all your comments. You need to stop!Think again....those pictures you put in are just pictures, and even if the women are living in the particular country can be mixed with different races aswell, so this site should be more about feminine beauty as the main question ...not to judge races by their looks, becouse people are different, even latin person have small bum and big bone structure, I have seen lots of latin women like that in University where i study! So,just study more about history and...well, study more,dont sit so often in internet downloading silly porn photos or whatever in that matter! lol
Thank you for listening!
P.s.... believe or not but most of people who live in Nordic and Slavic countries are jewish or have jewish ancestries...so.... think again!Study history my dear critics!
"Porn is full of bottle blondes so not everyone agrees with you"
You cannot compare pornography to advertising, and you were the one who brought up advertising, and I explained to you why it is that blondes are preferred in many types of commercials.
Now, pornography is full of fake blondes since blondes are and will remain "What gentlemen prefer" but the real deal is often unavailable. They are sexually the most desireable women to most men, so again, your preference for coarse and masculine Arabic/black women with huge and protruding behinds is not shared by most men.
"As for romance and sweetness you don't see how true feminine sexuality, as opposed to the masculine style in porn, is far sweeter, more loving and ineffably more romantic than uptight good manners."
It is you who fail to understand that feminine sexuality AND romance and sweetness are not antagonistic. It is possible to offer both. Take away sweetness and femininity and add vulgarity and masculinity, and you have Kim Kardashian, and that's the way you like it.
For you, sexual stimulation means there should be no class, no sweetness and no femininity. You want to "do" someone who is primitive, vulgar, and basically a grotesque caricature of a feminine woman. You want a sexual object you don't have to feel any respect for. If they have some kind of respect for themselves they would probably be called uptight by you.
This site deals with femininity, and femininity in women and objects for sexual stimulation are not always the same thing. You are proof of that. There are also men who are sexually stimulated by shoes or lifeless objects, children, animals, boys, etc. Does that make their objects feminine?
In short, femininity and your sexual fetish are not the same thing.
I have NEVER said anything positive about pornography. Why do you throw in strawmen? You are the one who has chosen a woman who might very well work in pornography. She is masculine, hard and vulgar, and anything but feminine. She also looks like she would go with anyone, and that is what is appealing to men like you. That's what turns you on.
No one claims Grace Kelly is curvier than Sofia Loren. What's your point? However, no one could claim Sofia is more feminine than Grace. Again, you miserably fail to understand femininity, and equate breast size with femininity.
Sofia's coarse face, masculine jaw and crocodile mouth make her much more masculine and coarse, like most mediterranean women, compared to Nordics.
Maria Grazia Cucinotta would be a better example;
Like Sofia, she has a masculine face but it also has at least some feminine qualities to it, and it is more gracile. She too is curvy. Again, you were wrong before. Italian men are breast fixated. The behind is of secondary importance. If a girl has an enormous behind and tiny breasts she will be of less interest to them than if she has large and well-formed breasts and a flattish behind. Their own stars confirm this.
"backpedaling, posting pictures of normal and attractive women."
I posted them because I've posted Latin American women and Kim is Armenian so I wanted to underline that I am not biased against Europeans. Even you can't claim that Grace Kelly is curvier than Sophia Loren.
"They also often appear in commercials for detergents and for things related to motherhood and babies."
Porn is full of bottle blondes so not everyone agrees with you. Soap and baby clothes are sterile, infantile things that don't relate to adult romance and eroticism.
" liquor, sexy underwear and chocolate commercials, for example, for the same reason. They seem less pure, romantic, sweet and feminine."
No liquor, sexy underwear and chocolate are luxurious and sensual. Less pure, I suppose, but who'd want to drink detergent instead of brandy?
As for romance and sweetness you don't see how true feminine sexuality, as opposed to the masculine style in porn, is far sweeter, more loving and ineffably more romantic than uptight good manners.
"You have a fetish for primate behinds. You are therefore not capable of properly judging female looks." First off how is liking large buttocks any different from liking large breasts? Secondly almost all men have fetishes, sexual quirks, and fantasies that give high minded women nightmares but they are the rule rather than the exception. Erik may just as easily be judged as having a fetish for hypergirly girls. A common theme of this site is that gay men are incompetent judges of female beauty, but since you aren't sexually attracted to women why are you any better?
Emily I think there's a lot about men and what men want in women that you don't understand.
"backpedaling, posting pictures of normal and attractive women."
I posted them because I've posted Latin American women and Kim is Armenian so I wanted to underline that I am not biased against Europeans. Even you can't claim that Grace Kelly is curvier than Sophia Loren.
"They also often appear in commercials for detergents and for things related to motherhood and babies."
Porn is full of bottle blondes so not everyone agrees with you. Soap and baby clothes are sterile, infantile things that don't relate to adult romance and eroticism.
" liquor, sexy underwear and chocolate commercials, for example, for the same reason. They seem less pure, romantic, sweet and feminine."
No liquor, sexy underwear and chocolate are luxurious and sensual. Less pure, I suppose, but who'd want to drink detergent instead of brandy?
As for romance and sweetness you don't see how true feminine sexuality, as opposed to the masculine style in porn, is far sweeter, more loving and ineffably more romantic than uptight good manners.
"You have a fetish for primate behinds. You are therefore not capable of properly judging female looks." First off how is liking large buttocks any different from liking large breasts? Secondly almost all men have fetishes, sexual quirks, and fantasies that give high minded women nightmares but they are the rule rather than the exception. A common theme of this site is that gay men are incompetent judges of female beauty, but since you aren't sexually attracted to women why are you any better.
Emily I think there's a lot about men and what men want in women that you don't understand.
This guy bashes Grace Kelly in favour of Kim Kardashian. Would you believe it? Listen, I will say this gently..I think you might find that other sites suit you better. This one clearly is not for you.
Nice try at backpedaling, posting pictures of normal and attractive women. Unfortunately for you, you have already shown your true colours.
"Nordics are unique? True anthropologically but here in America blond girls like the one you post are in every magazine selling tooth paste and"
Certainly. Since they are the more feminine and beautiful, in an angelic way, that others cannot emulate even when they try desperately with fake blonde hair, blue contacts, etc.
Toothpaste is related to freshness and purity, and therefore Nordic women are more suited since they seem more pure, feminine and clean. Advertising works like that. They also often appear in commercials for detergents and for things related to motherhood and babies.
Brunettes and non-Nordics in general are used for liquor, sexy underwear and chocolate commercials, for example, for the same reason. They seem less pure, romantic, sweet and feminine.
Now, Kim has an utterly masculine and coarse face, totally lacking any kind of grace, femininity and softness. She has that unflattering dark pigment around the eyes and most probably a moustache she shaves every day. Without makeup she looks like a man, and not a feminine one, either.
Her almost black eyes are proof of what I said before. The colour adds hardness to her already hard and coarse features. She looks very Arabic, sprinkled with black and maybe Mexican/asian admixture. Like many of mixed race her face is disharmonious, as if it couldn't decide what it wanted to be.
She is chubby with short legs, fat thighs, a ridiculous and ugly behind, and I suspect fake breasts. I am amazed, quite frankly, that anyone could be so stupid as to try to pass her off as some kind of ideal.
You have a fetish for primate behinds. You are therefore not capable of properly judging female looks. Your opinion and perception is clouded by the fetish you have. As for sexiness that is not the same thing as vulgarity, a swollen primate behind or brown hair. You have a fetish that you try to pass off as sexiness, but this site deals with normal men's taste, and with femininity.
I would kick Eva out of bed. You wouldn't simply because you are like everyone, can't resist any strikingly beautiful women. The one who can resist (trust me, they exist, they are "straight", albeit very very rare you could never see one in your life)... you can say he is somewhat "God-like". Like Jesus.
Well said Lish. The perception of beauty arrises from the self image, genetics and social/familial conditioning of the beholder. What you find beautiful/ugly says everything about you and nothing about the object you label whether it be a person, a painting, a house, anything.
Erik isn't looking to increase the self esteem of women, he is just looking to turn the bias upside down. He objectifies women just like the gay fasion designers. Many straight men seem to think they "own" women and Erik is just upset that the gay boys have stolen his property.
Another point is that most women feel insecure about their looks, even these models. Truth is that some of these models have the exact same self image as a 300 pound woman. As long as women are valued mostly for their appearance they will suffer low self image. Regardless of how you look as a female someone will call you ugly and deem you worthless because of it! It seems to me that most men straight or gay have some degree of hatred towards females.
Emily, have you ever seen a gorilla? They do not have rounded buttocks.
The gorilla has a flat nose, while Kim's is long. The gorilla has thin lips while Kim's are full and sexy. Please name one specific feature of hers that resembles a gorilla or else brush up on your metaphors and find a better comparison.
Nordics are unique? True anthropologically but here in America blond girls like the one you post are in every magazine selling tooth paste and bubble gum and that particular type (even if the girls need peroxide and silicone to achieve the look) end up in Playboy. The over-saturation of this type of girl in the media makes the look boring to me. Now they're clearly attractive to a lot of men but I am not one of them. Everyone has their tastes and we all don't fit into a box. I am not "anti-European" even if my taste differs from yours. Grace Kelly was a beautiful woman, but to my taste she is "pretty but not sexy". A woman can be sexy and elegant but Grace Kelly is not to me. Here are some beautiful, elegant, sexy European woman.
This one was born in Britain to American parents but cannot be left out
"Kim Kardashian's face and body combine to form my ideal type"
I actually laughed when I saw this since everything falls into place. Here we have a man who bashes Nordics and European women in general, and what is his ideal...
This! No wonder he doesn't understand what this site is about.
This vile creature with one of the most masculine, coarse and unfeminine faces I have EVER seen in my life is his preference. lol She looks like a transvestite.
Let us put it this way, a gorilla has more grace and femininity than this.
Gays are not entitled to marry who they love. Then I also want to be able to marry who I love - whether it be a cat, a bird, a child, a Jew etc. in a Christian Church, since I feel "entitled". No one has the right to impose their beliefs on someone else, and that is exactly what homosexuals are doing, forcing others to marry them when it runs contrary to Christian beliefs and religion.
That's something I have noticed often, homosexuals' sense of entitlement. I am not so arrogant as to believe that I have an automatic entitlement to something just because it may suit me. I respect religious freedom.
By the way, is this forced right of homosexuals to marry limited to Christianity? I haven't heard a thing about forcing Jews or Muslims to marry gay couples. That is unacceptable. Muslims and Jews should also have to marry homosexual couples, otherwise the law to me seems blatantly discriminatory and unvalid.
"So you admit this site is about Europeans and their (on average) tastes and not about science. Not surprising."
Oh, the bitter tone of an anti-European man. Talk about hanging himself. You do a pretty nice job at that, I think. The more you write the more you reveal your anti-Nordic, anti-European stance.
That is all well and good. Just don't ask to be taken seriously as an unbiased observer. You are far from it, and I think it goes beyond looks. The negativity seen in your words now have a subtle, but nasty and malicious tone. As long as we know you are blatantly anti-European and anti-Nordic we can take what you say in that context.
European women of Northern European descent, and to some extent Eastern European descent, are the most feminine ones and the most gracile ones, and to a majority the most beautiful ones, so why not use them as examples? This site is about femininity, and no, the size of the breasts and behind in itself does not equate femininity. Sorry to disappoint you.
There are many vulgar, coarse and primitive women who have enormous curves, but who look anything but feminine. Of course you are unable to see and understand the difference, so much at this site is probably incomprehensible to you.
Science, and the preference for European women as a beauty standard, is not at odds. There is no conflict there. Trying to pass off some of your primate examples as feminine would however be at odds, since there is precious little femininity there and a lot of vulgarity and primitiveness, which go against the essence of femininity.
If not, surely, black women with huge, protruding behinds in some tribes in Africa must surely be the most feminine ones, not to mention those women who need to carry their breasts around in a wheelbarrow.
"Biased and anti-Nordic? While you the women you post are attractive none of them "do it" for me. Their looks are too lacquered over and have nothing unique or interesting about them. "
Nordics are unique. The ones you like are the ones who are banal. Cheapness, vulgarity and latin primate style can be found anywhere.
By the way, I think it's funny..we have two fake blondes here - Godis and Voice of Reason - who constantly diss Nordic girls. Could it get any more transparent than that?
"Unclassy? I love female curvature and I am unapologetic"
Well, your taste does seem unclassy but no one should be asked to apologize for having bad taste. South American women with primate behinds tend to look cheap and vulgar. Vulgarity is something I see as distinctly unfeminine. That is, a girl who has huge curves but who looks primitive or cheap will not be more feminine than the one who has softer curves. On the contrary.
That is why Grace Kelly is a lasting beauty icon and the others all too often forgettable. Grace, style, romanticism and softness are things that last. Maybe since they are so hard to come by. Comparatively few women in the world have that style, and it is very much Nordic in essence.
.
If size in itself was what mattered we would have a latin/black female ideal. We haven't. The beauty ideal has always been the North European, more feminine and sweeter beauty. Men in general love romantic girls - not someone who looks like she came from a cheap pornographic magazine.
This is not to say a woman should lack curves. She shouldn't. No one likes the curveless body of an asian girl, unless they go for the pre-pubescent look, which I think in itself should raise questions since it runs contrary to Western women's mature and adult bodies.
However, a primitive and vulgar look is not feminine. A good example is Beyonce at the Oscars, who tried to pull off some kind of Nicole Kidman Moulin Rouge imitation, ending up looking embarrassingly out of place. Her thighs looked like they could smash cement.
Wasn't it Barack Obama who said "a pig with lipstick is still a pig"? Well, in that case it could be said that an ape in a dress is still an ape.
Latin women lack the soft femininity of the Nordics. That's why they can seldom pull off bleaching their hair blonde. They often end up looking grotesque, or in bad cases like transvestites, since the colour in itself is too feminine, romantic and soft for them, which makes their coarser features stand out more. This goes for many Slavic girls, too, as often seen in Romania, Hungary etc., where many horror examples can be found.
Histrionics? I think all women are drama queens to some degree, comes with the territory.
I may have been a bit over the top, this was because I was speaking to a guttermouth and needed to speak in the language they would understand.
Emily,
I am sure you are foaming at the mouth with envy but I am not going to get into another mud slinging contest with you, maybe I am too unclassy to stoop to that level lol.
You might be attractive and be very good looking but people will judge you on the basis of your personality, so being opinionated and a gutter mouth will actually overshadow the fact that you are good looking. I try and be a nice person generally, having good looks is a plus as it makes people more approachable to you. That doesn't mean I can't be bitchy and mean (I think you already know that).
As for blonde hair, I am sure there are a lot of peroxide blondes in Sweden too. This is another racist perception again, people change their hair colour because they are wanna be Nordics. I change my hair colour like I change my outfit, this is either because of boredom or fashion and not because I want to be Nordic. I am honey blonde at the moment and I have gone from jet black to platinum blonde to Red previously.
To be honest, I think I have spent far too much time arguing on this website, I was sat at home because I was recuperating from a wisdom teeth extraction so probably won't post much anymore now that I am better.
Natasha,
I know you didn't ask me but although her butt is as flat as most Hollywood actresses Mila Kunis is very attractive and her beauty is underrated in Hollywood. Megan Fox is hot though she has had a ton of plastic surgery and according to what I've read wears contacts to get her striking ice blue eyes. Angelina Jolie is kind of mannish looking though I still think she's pretty.
Kim Kardashian's face and body combine to form my ideal type, but like most people who get plastic surgery she looked better before.
Kim has a long, somewhat pointy face and her shorter nose balanced it out far better than the long and pointy nose she later acquired.
Olivia Wilde looks like a man. She almost looks as though she could crush walnuts with that jaw of hers.
I seriously suspect this was the photographer's idea because she has never worn short hair in any other circumstance. She probably knows that her masculine jaw really needs long hair to keep her from looking like a transvestite, as she does in that photo.
I don’t wish to address this directly to Peter the clown and ignoramus since I don’t want him to respond, but the type of comment he left above is not welcome here. He said, “… but if Erik says that then we must assume …” There is no reason for the if and the comment based on this if when he could have just read what I have written. People shouldn’t bother commenting without reading and understanding the argument.
Box: You asked why do men have nipples? Species with two or more sexes descend from species with a single sex. This means that the sexes are derived from the modification of a basic design. Nipples are part of this basic design.
Natasha: I am not simply saying that an effeminate male is going to be more attracted to a masculine woman. The possibilities I discussed are various scenarios evaluated in light of how well they can achieve the goal mentioned in the beginning. None can achieve the goal, but the most successful will be scenario #4. Scenario #4, or the majority of men (including effeminate, normal and masculine) preferring above average femininity in women (not hyperfemininity as you have stated since there is an upper limit to which femininity remains attractive), is expected to be a much more common tendency than scenario #3 (people preferring individuals having an opposite level of masculinity-femininity). The prevalence of scenario #3 would be difficult to discern since without some investigation it will not be clear that an effeminate man-masculinized woman pairing is a matter of preference or limited choice, but there are reasons to believe that it will be a less-important-than-#4 tendency, but a tendency nevertheless, in mate choice.
I didn’t say that we have become more child-like (in our faces). Compared to ancestral species, modern humans have become more child-like in the size of their adult face, but not shape (which is a new development).
Very masculine women have not been bred out in Northern Europe. The article discusses the phenomenon known as sexually antagonistic selection, one consequence of which is that no matter how hard we try to naturally make women more feminine and men more masculine, every generation will see its share of effeminate men and masculinized women. Under intense sexual selection that is directed toward exaggerating secondary sexual characteristics or making men look more masculine and women look more feminine, the proportion of individuals with various problems, including reduced fertility, such as effeminate men, masculine women, hypermasculine men and hyperfeminine women will increase such that the average fertility of the population is reduced (though given enough time, other selective forces could restore the average fertility to what it was).
Some people have a difficult time understanding that it is certainly possible for Northern Europe to simultaneously disproportionately have the most feminine-looking European women, have more feminine looking women on average and also disproportionately the most masculine-looking European women. Stronger sexual selection tends to do things like this for a while, the example here being the women more feminine-looking on average (shifting the average), the women being overrepresented among the very feminine (partly because of shifting of the average and partly because of greater dispersion around the mean) and the women being overrepresented among the very masculine (because of greater dispersion around the mean). But given enough time, selective forces could take care of the greater dispersion around the mean and the more strongly sexually selected population could end up with more feminine-looking women on average, women overrepresented among the very feminine and women underrepresented among the very masculine.
To my knowledge there's no objective measure of the rear end, like bra size, so all we have are subjective opinions. So if I say that Nordic women tend to be flatter than others you can't prove me wrong and vice versa. So there's really no point in continuing this discussion.
"but these big backsides are not attractive to most Europeans and hence I have not bothered featuring them at this site."
So you admit this site is about Europeans and their (on average) tastes and not about science. Not surprising.
Feminist: This site does not exist to help or harm women’s self-esteem, but not discussing women’s bodies will not help boost their self-esteem. I could stop discussing the matter, but the fashion industry won’t. There is also interesting research from Iran about women that had grown up after the Islamic revolution and not been exposed to Western media. These women had a good deal of concern about their looks, on average. In short, women themselves will not stop discussing their bodies regardless of what the media or I have to say. Most humans share the same standards of beauty and many will be disappointed if they fall short of what they consider highly desirable in looks. You have to learn to live with this.
The pictures that I am using neither represent exploitation of women nor reduce women to objects for the purpose of sexual gratification. While looking at the women’s pictures, no one loses sight of them having a personality, life history, interests, goals, etc. In the event that some of these women were forced by poverty to pose nude, your wrath is much more appropriately directed toward the single most important poverty generating factor in Western societies – leeching of the public’s wealth by parasitic bankers – than the photographers who shot these women in the nude. I have yet to see feminist groups do anything about the banking parasites; educate yourself and do something about it; objecting to women posing nude will do nothing.
Some of the correlates of beauty that this site discusses transcend cultures, time and even species. They are not necessarily insignificant. Even if they are, then this is what this site is about, and you should not be bothered by a site that discusses insignificant issues.
There is no hypocrisy in a discussion of feminine beauty with information on cellulite reduction. Some women are interested in improving their looks. What is wrong or hypocritical about providing some such information?
There is nothing in this site about how women should look, but it is about what most people find optimally attractive in women’s looks, information that is overall better for women than their being misguided by the fashion media.
anonanon: Carrie Prejean’s virginity is irrelevant to whether she is a hypocrite since she did not make a moral or religious argument or portray herself as morally righteous. Read her answer carefully. Nothing about her that has come to light after her answer makes her a hypocrite. Even if it turns out that she is a hypocrite, her answer to Perez Hilton’s question would not be an example of her hypocrisy.
Maybe on average femininity has increased in the population, in both males and females. You had at least one page I've seen on all the ancestors known of homosapien and how we have become more "childlike" looking (forgot the term for this), especially as you see northern europeans having been forced to be more sexually selective due to harsh cold weather conditions. Maybe most men do prefer the hyperfeminine women, so those hypermasculine men (due to attractiveness- (though it's been disputed that many women prefer these men if at all only during ovulation, and more feminine men as mates, from what I've read)) will mate with the most feminine and thereby most attractive women they can get, but so will the hyperfeminine men- and some WILL be able to, due to other factors (wealth, power, force). In places like Northern Europe where many men died due to harsh conditions, the hypermasculine women were probably bred out because there were usually no men left to "settle" for them, and in turn the population on average became more feminine, although the men didn't become exceedingly feminine because they still needed the strength to hunt and do other hard, laborious tasks. So therefore, the extent of femininity a person can actually be would have a threshold, or maximum point, due to environmental pressures.
Also, I have read that hyperfeminine men tend to have less and slower moving sperm, and coupled with a hypermasculine woman's increased fertility problems, may have limited their reproduction (although of course this is much less limiting in today's society, due to various forms of fertility treatments).
For number 4- I was wondering that too. perhaps that is why there are as many non-feminine women as there are, because you would think they might be weeded out to some extent at this point; they probably put out more, and therefore reproduce a lot more than the feminine women. I also wonder if this means that hyperfeminine women, who have on average less active libidos than hypermasculine women, will somewhat die out themselves, especially with the culture we are currently living in where female promiscuity is less frowned upon as well as single mothers and narrow hips. Although this makes sense, I'd like to also see some proof that females with higher male hormone levels (and therefore higher waist-hip ratios which create more masculine female figures) do indeed have higher libidos than those who don't. I am a definite pear shape which generally means I will have low androgens and low estrogens as well, with a whr of ~.71 at 27/38 waist/hip measurements. However, I have a very high libido, (which every single guy I've been sexual with has remarked and rarely been able to keep up with) and I don't think I can say in real life that I've seen this proven.
It's seemed more to me that more attractive women are more sexually active on average, but maybe this is more of a confidence issue than anything else.
This is interesting, but doesn't it kind of divert from one of the points of your site being that "lifetime" heterosexual males will overwhelmingly choose the hyperfeminine women? This entry makes a whole lot of sense and explains why some men like randomly less feminine things than others (I know men who think bigger than small breasts are repulsive, for example, even if they are aesthetically proportionate and pleasing to most), and therefore that heterosexual men can indeed be fully attracted to masculine women as compared to feminine women and that beauty really DOES somewhat vary in the eye of the beholder, although a result of science.
And by this are you in essence saying that on average an effeminate male is going to be more attracted to a masculine female? This is the main point I got, although I also got that you're saying they may just end up with that female because that's all they can get, so to speak. Or is it that you're just not sure, and these are two different but both plausible possibilities?
In terms of facial attractiveness, the oval shape face is absolutly NOT the most 'ideal', since it would imply a narrowing forhead, i.e. the broadest point of the face would be situated at the mid-face point and then narrowing at the forhead, which is not the ideal shape as it is less-attractive than a broad forhead, where the widest or equal-widest point of the face is situated at the forhead.
This applies also to men, e.g. Burak Ozcivit
P.s.... believe or not but most of people who live in Nordic and Slavic countries are jewish or have jewish ancestries...so.... think again!Study history my dear critics!
Europeans nordics/slavic dont have jewish ancestory and nor have they ever claimed to have either
Emily, I don't know how old you are but you should look into the romantic life of Halle Berry. She is an African American so probably rather ugly and "primitive" to you but she is considered by most people to be one of the most beautiful stars in Hollywood.
Despite her stunning looks an early boyfriend beat her so badly that she lost most hearing in one ear. She's been married twice and both husbands cheated on her. Her last husband sought treatment as a sex addict! Her beauty and her Oscar couldn't keep her ex-husband faithful, but she seems happy now with her present boyfriend. The point is that beautiful women get beaten, cheated on, and dumped every day. How a man treats depends almost solely on his character. If you are ugly a good man will still be faithful and respectful. If you a beautiful a selfish, self-absorbed man will treat you as badly as he thinks he can get away with. In fact many such men reject beautiful women and actively seek unattractive women because they think (usually correctly) that unattractive will be insecure enough to tolerate multiple forms of abuse and degradation. However if a beautiful woman shows herself to be insecure these selfish, uncaring men are quite happy to inflict the same misery on her. I have seen stunningly gorgeous women who were abused or neglected as children end up with the most vile men imaginable reenacting the abuse of their upbringing.
In short Emily you need to put your obsession with beauty into context. Beauty may give you a wider pool of men to choose from but it doesn't make picking a good man any easier.
Oh my god....I think I will puke...sorry, not from all these women or animal pictures you posetd here...but from your texts and things you say!I am shocked! This site must be deleted and destroyed becouse it is the most ugliest site ever and is full of discrimination and full of ungraceful comments! How can you say that latin, nordic, or whatever woman are ugly if you judge only by few lousy pics...thats rubish! You cant tell things about these nations if you dont know anything at all. By the way, most of them porn star women you put here had multiple plastic surgeries...plus many of them Hollywood or whatever stars had plastics done....so how you can call it a idolised beauty? Rubish!
Like this so called Kardashian- she had so many plastic surgeries we cant even count them alltogether! What a hell...wake up and put back your eyes in your eyesockets, dont judge with your balls or whatever in that matter....for women and men in this website, there are no real nordic, latin, or whatever people in this f****g world, becouse they mixed with other f******g races all the time...like Scandinavian wikings used to make other nations who they cought in their way made as slaves...even latin people were registred in their slave population.So they mixed...if you would go to like Russia- you would see not only Slawic people but aswell Latvian, Lithuanian, Mongolian, Kazakstani, and whatever you know...becouse, THE WORLD IS MIXED AND THERE ARE NO PARTICAL RACE PERSONOFICATIONARY SIGNS THAT WOULD SAY SOMETHING ABOUT THE RACE. Like me,I have latvian, polish, jewish and whatever mix in me and well you cant judge me by the means of your imagined racial charecteristics!!!
I know so many scandinavian women, who have been born there and their parent have been born there but who are tiny and small framed and with nice curves, so just dont bullshit here with all your comments. You need to stop!Think again....those pictures you put in are just pictures, and even if the women are living in the particular country can be mixed with different races aswell, so this site should be more about feminine beauty as the main question ...not to judge races by their looks, becouse people are different, even latin person have small bum and big bone structure, I have seen lots of latin women like that in University where i study! So,just study more about history and...well, study more,dont sit so often in internet downloading silly porn photos or whatever in that matter! lol
Thank you for listening!
P.s.... believe or not but most of people who live in Nordic and Slavic countries are jewish or have jewish ancestries...so.... think again!Study history my dear critics!
"Porn is full of bottle blondes so not everyone agrees with you"
You cannot compare pornography to advertising, and you were the one who brought up advertising, and I explained to you why it is that blondes are preferred in many types of commercials.
Now, pornography is full of fake blondes since blondes are and will remain "What gentlemen prefer" but the real deal is often unavailable. They are sexually the most desireable women to most men, so again, your preference for coarse and masculine Arabic/black women with huge and protruding behinds is not shared by most men.
"As for romance and sweetness you don't see how true feminine sexuality, as opposed to the masculine style in porn, is far sweeter, more loving and ineffably more romantic than uptight good manners."
It is you who fail to understand that feminine sexuality AND romance and sweetness are not antagonistic. It is possible to offer both. Take away sweetness and femininity and add vulgarity and masculinity, and you have Kim Kardashian, and that's the way you like it.
For you, sexual stimulation means there should be no class, no sweetness and no femininity. You want to "do" someone who is primitive, vulgar, and basically a grotesque caricature of a feminine woman. You want a sexual object you don't have to feel any respect for. If they have some kind of respect for themselves they would probably be called uptight by you.
This site deals with femininity, and femininity in women and objects for sexual stimulation are not always the same thing. You are proof of that. There are also men who are sexually stimulated by shoes or lifeless objects, children, animals, boys, etc. Does that make their objects feminine?
In short, femininity and your sexual fetish are not the same thing.
I have NEVER said anything positive about pornography. Why do you throw in strawmen? You are the one who has chosen a woman who might very well work in pornography. She is masculine, hard and vulgar, and anything but feminine. She also looks like she would go with anyone, and that is what is appealing to men like you. That's what turns you on.
No one claims Grace Kelly is curvier than Sofia Loren. What's your point? However, no one could claim Sofia is more feminine than Grace. Again, you miserably fail to understand femininity, and equate breast size with femininity.
Sofia's coarse face, masculine jaw and crocodile mouth make her much more masculine and coarse, like most mediterranean women, compared to Nordics.
Maria Grazia Cucinotta would be a better example;
Like Sofia, she has a masculine face but it also has at least some feminine qualities to it, and it is more gracile. She too is curvy. Again, you were wrong before. Italian men are breast fixated. The behind is of secondary importance. If a girl has an enormous behind and tiny breasts she will be of less interest to them than if she has large and well-formed breasts and a flattish behind. Their own stars confirm this.
Cucinotta;
anyway, I think this site should be updated more frequently.
it's nice to learn how other people think about feminine beauty.
but I'm still happy that at least this one was not crowned miss usa, because she's just NOT beautiful.
I know many pornstars WAY prettier.
"backpedaling, posting pictures of normal and attractive women."
I posted them because I've posted Latin American women and Kim is Armenian so I wanted to underline that I am not biased against Europeans. Even you can't claim that Grace Kelly is curvier than Sophia Loren.
"They also often appear in commercials for detergents and for things related to motherhood and babies."
Porn is full of bottle blondes so not everyone agrees with you. Soap and baby clothes are sterile, infantile things that don't relate to adult romance and eroticism.
" liquor, sexy underwear and chocolate commercials, for example, for the same reason. They seem less pure, romantic, sweet and feminine."
No liquor, sexy underwear and chocolate are luxurious and sensual. Less pure, I suppose, but who'd want to drink detergent instead of brandy?
As for romance and sweetness you don't see how true feminine sexuality, as opposed to the masculine style in porn, is far sweeter, more loving and ineffably more romantic than uptight good manners.
"You have a fetish for primate behinds. You are therefore not capable of properly judging female looks." First off how is liking large buttocks any different from liking large breasts? Secondly almost all men have fetishes, sexual quirks, and fantasies that give high minded women nightmares but they are the rule rather than the exception. Erik may just as easily be judged as having a fetish for hypergirly girls. A common theme of this site is that gay men are incompetent judges of female beauty, but since you aren't sexually attracted to women why are you any better?
Emily I think there's a lot about men and what men want in women that you don't understand.
"backpedaling, posting pictures of normal and attractive women."
I posted them because I've posted Latin American women and Kim is Armenian so I wanted to underline that I am not biased against Europeans. Even you can't claim that Grace Kelly is curvier than Sophia Loren.
"They also often appear in commercials for detergents and for things related to motherhood and babies."
Porn is full of bottle blondes so not everyone agrees with you. Soap and baby clothes are sterile, infantile things that don't relate to adult romance and eroticism.
" liquor, sexy underwear and chocolate commercials, for example, for the same reason. They seem less pure, romantic, sweet and feminine."
No liquor, sexy underwear and chocolate are luxurious and sensual. Less pure, I suppose, but who'd want to drink detergent instead of brandy?
As for romance and sweetness you don't see how true feminine sexuality, as opposed to the masculine style in porn, is far sweeter, more loving and ineffably more romantic than uptight good manners.
"You have a fetish for primate behinds. You are therefore not capable of properly judging female looks." First off how is liking large buttocks any different from liking large breasts? Secondly almost all men have fetishes, sexual quirks, and fantasies that give high minded women nightmares but they are the rule rather than the exception. A common theme of this site is that gay men are incompetent judges of female beauty, but since you aren't sexually attracted to women why are you any better.
Emily I think there's a lot about men and what men want in women that you don't understand.
This guy bashes Grace Kelly in favour of Kim Kardashian. Would you believe it? Listen, I will say this gently..I think you might find that other sites suit you better. This one clearly is not for you.
Nice try at backpedaling, posting pictures of normal and attractive women. Unfortunately for you, you have already shown your true colours.
"Nordics are unique? True anthropologically but here in America blond girls like the one you post are in every magazine selling tooth paste and"
Certainly. Since they are the more feminine and beautiful, in an angelic way, that others cannot emulate even when they try desperately with fake blonde hair, blue contacts, etc.
Toothpaste is related to freshness and purity, and therefore Nordic women are more suited since they seem more pure, feminine and clean. Advertising works like that. They also often appear in commercials for detergents and for things related to motherhood and babies.
Brunettes and non-Nordics in general are used for liquor, sexy underwear and chocolate commercials, for example, for the same reason. They seem less pure, romantic, sweet and feminine.
Now, Kim has an utterly masculine and coarse face, totally lacking any kind of grace, femininity and softness. She has that unflattering dark pigment around the eyes and most probably a moustache she shaves every day. Without makeup she looks like a man, and not a feminine one, either.
Her almost black eyes are proof of what I said before. The colour adds hardness to her already hard and coarse features. She looks very Arabic, sprinkled with black and maybe Mexican/asian admixture. Like many of mixed race her face is disharmonious, as if it couldn't decide what it wanted to be.
She is chubby with short legs, fat thighs, a ridiculous and ugly behind, and I suspect fake breasts. I am amazed, quite frankly, that anyone could be so stupid as to try to pass her off as some kind of ideal.
You have a fetish for primate behinds. You are therefore not capable of properly judging female looks. Your opinion and perception is clouded by the fetish you have. As for sexiness that is not the same thing as vulgarity, a swollen primate behind or brown hair. You have a fetish that you try to pass off as sexiness, but this site deals with normal men's taste, and with femininity.
To Gee,
I would kick Eva out of bed. You wouldn't simply because you are like everyone, can't resist any strikingly beautiful women. The one who can resist (trust me, they exist, they are "straight", albeit very very rare you could never see one in your life)... you can say he is somewhat "God-like". Like Jesus.
By the way, I am not gay.
Well said Lish. The perception of beauty arrises from the self image, genetics and social/familial conditioning of the beholder. What you find beautiful/ugly says everything about you and nothing about the object you label whether it be a person, a painting, a house, anything.
Erik isn't looking to increase the self esteem of women, he is just looking to turn the bias upside down. He objectifies women just like the gay fasion designers. Many straight men seem to think they "own" women and Erik is just upset that the gay boys have stolen his property.
Another point is that most women feel insecure about their looks, even these models. Truth is that some of these models have the exact same self image as a 300 pound woman. As long as women are valued mostly for their appearance they will suffer low self image. Regardless of how you look as a female someone will call you ugly and deem you worthless because of it! It seems to me that most men straight or gay have some degree of hatred towards females.
Emily, have you ever seen a gorilla? They do not have rounded buttocks.
The gorilla has a flat nose, while Kim's is long. The gorilla has thin lips while Kim's are full and sexy. Please name one specific feature of hers that resembles a gorilla or else brush up on your metaphors and find a better comparison.
Nordics are unique? True anthropologically but here in America blond girls like the one you post are in every magazine selling tooth paste and bubble gum and that particular type (even if the girls need peroxide and silicone to achieve the look) end up in Playboy. The over-saturation of this type of girl in the media makes the look boring to me. Now they're clearly attractive to a lot of men but I am not one of them. Everyone has their tastes and we all don't fit into a box. I am not "anti-European" even if my taste differs from yours. Grace Kelly was a beautiful woman, but to my taste she is "pretty but not sexy". A woman can be sexy and elegant but Grace Kelly is not to me. Here are some beautiful, elegant, sexy European woman.
This one was born in Britain to American parents but cannot be left out
Booty man;
"Kim Kardashian's face and body combine to form my ideal type"
I actually laughed when I saw this since everything falls into place. Here we have a man who bashes Nordics and European women in general, and what is his ideal...
This! No wonder he doesn't understand what this site is about.
This vile creature with one of the most masculine, coarse and unfeminine faces I have EVER seen in my life is his preference. lol She looks like a transvestite.
Let us put it this way, a gorilla has more grace and femininity than this.
"I feel gays are entitled to marry who they love"
Gays are not entitled to marry who they love. Then I also want to be able to marry who I love - whether it be a cat, a bird, a child, a Jew etc. in a Christian Church, since I feel "entitled". No one has the right to impose their beliefs on someone else, and that is exactly what homosexuals are doing, forcing others to marry them when it runs contrary to Christian beliefs and religion.
That's something I have noticed often, homosexuals' sense of entitlement. I am not so arrogant as to believe that I have an automatic entitlement to something just because it may suit me. I respect religious freedom.
By the way, is this forced right of homosexuals to marry limited to Christianity? I haven't heard a thing about forcing Jews or Muslims to marry gay couples. That is unacceptable. Muslims and Jews should also have to marry homosexual couples, otherwise the law to me seems blatantly discriminatory and unvalid.
"So you admit this site is about Europeans and their (on average) tastes and not about science. Not surprising."
Oh, the bitter tone of an anti-European man. Talk about hanging himself. You do a pretty nice job at that, I think. The more you write the more you reveal your anti-Nordic, anti-European stance.
That is all well and good. Just don't ask to be taken seriously as an unbiased observer. You are far from it, and I think it goes beyond looks. The negativity seen in your words now have a subtle, but nasty and malicious tone. As long as we know you are blatantly anti-European and anti-Nordic we can take what you say in that context.
European women of Northern European descent, and to some extent Eastern European descent, are the most feminine ones and the most gracile ones, and to a majority the most beautiful ones, so why not use them as examples? This site is about femininity, and no, the size of the breasts and behind in itself does not equate femininity. Sorry to disappoint you.
There are many vulgar, coarse and primitive women who have enormous curves, but who look anything but feminine. Of course you are unable to see and understand the difference, so much at this site is probably incomprehensible to you.
Science, and the preference for European women as a beauty standard, is not at odds. There is no conflict there. Trying to pass off some of your primate examples as feminine would however be at odds, since there is precious little femininity there and a lot of vulgarity and primitiveness, which go against the essence of femininity.
If not, surely, black women with huge, protruding behinds in some tribes in Africa must surely be the most feminine ones, not to mention those women who need to carry their breasts around in a wheelbarrow.
"Biased and anti-Nordic? While you the women you post are attractive none of them "do it" for me. Their looks are too lacquered over and have nothing unique or interesting about them. "
Nordics are unique. The ones you like are the ones who are banal. Cheapness, vulgarity and latin primate style can be found anywhere.
By the way, I think it's funny..we have two fake blondes here - Godis and Voice of Reason - who constantly diss Nordic girls. Could it get any more transparent than that?
"Unclassy? I love female curvature and I am unapologetic"
Well, your taste does seem unclassy but no one should be asked to apologize for having bad taste. South American women with primate behinds tend to look cheap and vulgar. Vulgarity is something I see as distinctly unfeminine. That is, a girl who has huge curves but who looks primitive or cheap will not be more feminine than the one who has softer curves. On the contrary.
That is why Grace Kelly is a lasting beauty icon and the others all too often forgettable. Grace, style, romanticism and softness are things that last. Maybe since they are so hard to come by. Comparatively few women in the world have that style, and it is very much Nordic in essence.
If size in itself was what mattered we would have a latin/black female ideal. We haven't. The beauty ideal has always been the North European, more feminine and sweeter beauty. Men in general love romantic girls - not someone who looks like she came from a cheap pornographic magazine.
This is not to say a woman should lack curves. She shouldn't. No one likes the curveless body of an asian girl, unless they go for the pre-pubescent look, which I think in itself should raise questions since it runs contrary to Western women's mature and adult bodies.
However, a primitive and vulgar look is not feminine. A good example is Beyonce at the Oscars, who tried to pull off some kind of Nicole Kidman Moulin Rouge imitation, ending up looking embarrassingly out of place. Her thighs looked like they could smash cement.
Wasn't it Barack Obama who said "a pig with lipstick is still a pig"? Well, in that case it could be said that an ape in a dress is still an ape.
Latin women lack the soft femininity of the Nordics. That's why they can seldom pull off bleaching their hair blonde. They often end up looking grotesque, or in bad cases like transvestites, since the colour in itself is too feminine, romantic and soft for them, which makes their coarser features stand out more. This goes for many Slavic girls, too, as often seen in Romania, Hungary etc., where many horror examples can be found.
booty guy,
Histrionics? I think all women are drama queens to some degree, comes with the territory.
I may have been a bit over the top, this was because I was speaking to a guttermouth and needed to speak in the language they would understand.
Emily,
I am sure you are foaming at the mouth with envy but I am not going to get into another mud slinging contest with you, maybe I am too unclassy to stoop to that level lol.
You might be attractive and be very good looking but people will judge you on the basis of your personality, so being opinionated and a gutter mouth will actually overshadow the fact that you are good looking. I try and be a nice person generally, having good looks is a plus as it makes people more approachable to you. That doesn't mean I can't be bitchy and mean (I think you already know that).
As for blonde hair, I am sure there are a lot of peroxide blondes in Sweden too. This is another racist perception again, people change their hair colour because they are wanna be Nordics. I change my hair colour like I change my outfit, this is either because of boredom or fashion and not because I want to be Nordic. I am honey blonde at the moment and I have gone from jet black to platinum blonde to Red previously.
To be honest, I think I have spent far too much time arguing on this website, I was sat at home because I was recuperating from a wisdom teeth extraction so probably won't post much anymore now that I am better.
Natasha,
I know you didn't ask me but although her butt is as flat as most Hollywood actresses Mila Kunis is very attractive and her beauty is underrated in Hollywood. Megan Fox is hot though she has had a ton of plastic surgery and according to what I've read wears contacts to get her striking ice blue eyes. Angelina Jolie is kind of mannish looking though I still think she's pretty.
Kim Kardashian's face and body combine to form my ideal type, but like most people who get plastic surgery she looked better before.
Kim has a long, somewhat pointy face and her shorter nose balanced it out far better than the long and pointy nose she later acquired.
Olivia Wilde looks like a man. She almost looks as though she could crush walnuts with that jaw of hers.
I seriously suspect this was the photographer's idea because she has never worn short hair in any other circumstance. She probably knows that her masculine jaw really needs long hair to keep her from looking like a transvestite, as she does in that photo.
I don’t wish to address this directly to Peter the clown and ignoramus since I don’t want him to respond, but the type of comment he left above is not welcome here. He said, “… but if Erik says that then we must assume …” There is no reason for the if and the comment based on this if when he could have just read what I have written. People shouldn’t bother commenting without reading and understanding the argument.
Box: You asked why do men have nipples? Species with two or more sexes descend from species with a single sex. This means that the sexes are derived from the modification of a basic design. Nipples are part of this basic design.
Natasha: I am not simply saying that an effeminate male is going to be more attracted to a masculine woman. The possibilities I discussed are various scenarios evaluated in light of how well they can achieve the goal mentioned in the beginning. None can achieve the goal, but the most successful will be scenario #4. Scenario #4, or the majority of men (including effeminate, normal and masculine) preferring above average femininity in women (not hyperfemininity as you have stated since there is an upper limit to which femininity remains attractive), is expected to be a much more common tendency than scenario #3 (people preferring individuals having an opposite level of masculinity-femininity). The prevalence of scenario #3 would be difficult to discern since without some investigation it will not be clear that an effeminate man-masculinized woman pairing is a matter of preference or limited choice, but there are reasons to believe that it will be a less-important-than-#4 tendency, but a tendency nevertheless, in mate choice.
So the argument remains that most men prefer above average femininity in the looks of women (and not necessarily the same level of femininity exaggeration; see example).
I didn’t say that we have become more child-like (in our faces). Compared to ancestral species, modern humans have become more child-like in the size of their adult face, but not shape (which is a new development).
Very masculine women have not been bred out in Northern Europe. The article discusses the phenomenon known as sexually antagonistic selection, one consequence of which is that no matter how hard we try to naturally make women more feminine and men more masculine, every generation will see its share of effeminate men and masculinized women. Under intense sexual selection that is directed toward exaggerating secondary sexual characteristics or making men look more masculine and women look more feminine, the proportion of individuals with various problems, including reduced fertility, such as effeminate men, masculine women, hypermasculine men and hyperfeminine women will increase such that the average fertility of the population is reduced (though given enough time, other selective forces could restore the average fertility to what it was).
Some people have a difficult time understanding that it is certainly possible for Northern Europe to simultaneously disproportionately have the most feminine-looking European women, have more feminine looking women on average and also disproportionately the most masculine-looking European women. Stronger sexual selection tends to do things like this for a while, the example here being the women more feminine-looking on average (shifting the average), the women being overrepresented among the very feminine (partly because of shifting of the average and partly because of greater dispersion around the mean) and the women being overrepresented among the very masculine (because of greater dispersion around the mean). But given enough time, selective forces could take care of the greater dispersion around the mean and the more strongly sexually selected population could end up with more feminine-looking women on average, women overrepresented among the very feminine and women underrepresented among the very masculine.
Erik,
To my knowledge there's no objective measure of the rear end, like bra size, so all we have are subjective opinions. So if I say that Nordic women tend to be flatter than others you can't prove me wrong and vice versa. So there's really no point in continuing this discussion.
"but these big backsides are not attractive to most Europeans and hence I have not bothered featuring them at this site."
So you admit this site is about Europeans and their (on average) tastes and not about science. Not surprising.
Feminist: This site does not exist to help or harm women’s self-esteem, but not discussing women’s bodies will not help boost their self-esteem. I could stop discussing the matter, but the fashion industry won’t. There is also interesting research from Iran about women that had grown up after the Islamic revolution and not been exposed to Western media. These women had a good deal of concern about their looks, on average. In short, women themselves will not stop discussing their bodies regardless of what the media or I have to say. Most humans share the same standards of beauty and many will be disappointed if they fall short of what they consider highly desirable in looks. You have to learn to live with this.
The pictures that I am using neither represent exploitation of women nor reduce women to objects for the purpose of sexual gratification. While looking at the women’s pictures, no one loses sight of them having a personality, life history, interests, goals, etc. In the event that some of these women were forced by poverty to pose nude, your wrath is much more appropriately directed toward the single most important poverty generating factor in Western societies – leeching of the public’s wealth by parasitic bankers – than the photographers who shot these women in the nude. I have yet to see feminist groups do anything about the banking parasites; educate yourself and do something about it; objecting to women posing nude will do nothing.
Some of the correlates of beauty that this site discusses transcend cultures, time and even species. They are not necessarily insignificant. Even if they are, then this is what this site is about, and you should not be bothered by a site that discusses insignificant issues.
There is no hypocrisy in a discussion of feminine beauty with information on cellulite reduction. Some women are interested in improving their looks. What is wrong or hypocritical about providing some such information?
There is nothing in this site about how women should look, but it is about what most people find optimally attractive in women’s looks, information that is overall better for women than their being misguided by the fashion media.
anonanon: Carrie Prejean’s virginity is irrelevant to whether she is a hypocrite since she did not make a moral or religious argument or portray herself as morally righteous. Read her answer carefully. Nothing about her that has come to light after her answer makes her a hypocrite. Even if it turns out that she is a hypocrite, her answer to Perez Hilton’s question would not be an example of her hypocrisy.
Maybe on average femininity has increased in the population, in both males and females. You had at least one page I've seen on all the ancestors known of homosapien and how we have become more "childlike" looking (forgot the term for this), especially as you see northern europeans having been forced to be more sexually selective due to harsh cold weather conditions. Maybe most men do prefer the hyperfeminine women, so those hypermasculine men (due to attractiveness- (though it's been disputed that many women prefer these men if at all only during ovulation, and more feminine men as mates, from what I've read)) will mate with the most feminine and thereby most attractive women they can get, but so will the hyperfeminine men- and some WILL be able to, due to other factors (wealth, power, force). In places like Northern Europe where many men died due to harsh conditions, the hypermasculine women were probably bred out because there were usually no men left to "settle" for them, and in turn the population on average became more feminine, although the men didn't become exceedingly feminine because they still needed the strength to hunt and do other hard, laborious tasks. So therefore, the extent of femininity a person can actually be would have a threshold, or maximum point, due to environmental pressures.
Also, I have read that hyperfeminine men tend to have less and slower moving sperm, and coupled with a hypermasculine woman's increased fertility problems, may have limited their reproduction (although of course this is much less limiting in today's society, due to various forms of fertility treatments).
For number 4- I was wondering that too. perhaps that is why there are as many non-feminine women as there are, because you would think they might be weeded out to some extent at this point; they probably put out more, and therefore reproduce a lot more than the feminine women. I also wonder if this means that hyperfeminine women, who have on average less active libidos than hypermasculine women, will somewhat die out themselves, especially with the culture we are currently living in where female promiscuity is less frowned upon as well as single mothers and narrow hips. Although this makes sense, I'd like to also see some proof that females with higher male hormone levels (and therefore higher waist-hip ratios which create more masculine female figures) do indeed have higher libidos than those who don't. I am a definite pear shape which generally means I will have low androgens and low estrogens as well, with a whr of ~.71 at 27/38 waist/hip measurements. However, I have a very high libido, (which every single guy I've been sexual with has remarked and rarely been able to keep up with) and I don't think I can say in real life that I've seen this proven.
It's seemed more to me that more attractive women are more sexually active on average, but maybe this is more of a confidence issue than anything else.
This is interesting, but doesn't it kind of divert from one of the points of your site being that "lifetime" heterosexual males will overwhelmingly choose the hyperfeminine women? This entry makes a whole lot of sense and explains why some men like randomly less feminine things than others (I know men who think bigger than small breasts are repulsive, for example, even if they are aesthetically proportionate and pleasing to most), and therefore that heterosexual men can indeed be fully attracted to masculine women as compared to feminine women and that beauty really DOES somewhat vary in the eye of the beholder, although a result of science.
And by this are you in essence saying that on average an effeminate male is going to be more attracted to a masculine female? This is the main point I got, although I also got that you're saying they may just end up with that female because that's all they can get, so to speak. Or is it that you're just not sure, and these are two different but both plausible possibilities?
Pages