The hilarity of this debate can be seen in Mark's love for Nicole Kidman and criticism of Erik's taste in women from the 1800's.
The irony of this website is that Erik is not a woman....this is a let down.
Let me just respond to this statement here posted by RandomViewer2 a year ago...
"I predict that in 20-30 years in time, due to rising power of East Asia, Asian beauty (younger, slimer, cuter) will dominate over current gay fashion ideals. Then the masculine looks will be out of style."
I've noticed Asian women have a culture wide physical lack in variety of looks, (input Erik's statistics). These looks are the very physical traits that are so powerful in that of white women in western culture.....Perhaps it is because of the large uniformed culture of Eastern Asia, or the hundreds of years of little variety of diet in these regions...or even the gay fashion designers' invasions into the east, but I highly doubt that the 'general' Asian beauty that we perceive here in the West would headline Western fashion at all. The first impression of Asian women (basically what we see on the internet and Japanese TV Shows) is that they are very youthful, and even very cute, but they most certainly don't have what it takes. They don't have that 'classic beauty' that is held by the superior white race...(or any other race for that matter)......Of course, classic beauty in this case is referring to the defined physical features that women develop through maturity and individuality with their looks, a proponent of beauty ,which, the far east is very lacking in.
I agree with Visitor, but I think the hairstyle actually makes her look less feminine, because it's too angular. I like her waist, though. She might actually look more feminine with her hair up, but I think she would look even better with long, straight hair (though maybe I'm biased, because I think virtually all women look best with long, straight hair). In general, I think women's hair often suffers from an emphasis on being stylish or artistic, rather that on what is attractive from the standpoint of most heterosexual men. The short hair phenomenon is another example of this.
Rene is definitely above average in attractiveness relative to the other women in the section. Still, the woman who I find the most attractive is Maria A, on page 10, followed by Anna S, Rose McGowan, and Keeley Hazell.
Dude you are...: Der Wanderer’s comment on you features no personal attacks, whereas your replies are full of them and directed toward both him and me. And you have the chutzpah to say that Der Wanderer personally attacked you because you have a point. People who resort to personal attacks, such as yourself, are the ones who have no valid counter-arguments to an argument that deep down they know to be true. You must bow out of this discussion if you cannot behave. You have again accused me of never once admitting someone else to have a valid point, completely ignoring my question, “How can I even begin to admit that some of my ideas are bogus unless you identify them and preferably justify why they are bogus?” Don’t keep coming back to this site if it bothers you.
Dustin: I have addressed twentieth century trends in the looks of models and beauty pageant contestants, but not in graphically illustrated form. Women of low socioeconomic class (SES) are most likely strongly underrepresented among the nude models whose pictures I have been using, for various reasons. Attractive women are underrepresented among low SES women, especially those who take up stripping or nude modeling as a source of livelihood. If by low status you weren’t referring to financial status, then presently there is not much choice. If they were clothed I would still get abusive comments, perhaps less, which it appears you intuitively realize since you would prefer that the public doesn’t get to comment on an alternative site with broadly similar goals, but few things beat minimal dress for illustrative purposes.
Scanning pictures of yesteryears models and actresses is not a bad idea but is far less convenient for me than getting the pictures that I need from the internet. Maybe I can add forums to this site and people can scan these pictures and post them there. In any case, I have definitely planned on coming up with a new site or some publications, somewhere down the road, featuring pictures of non-nude feminine and attractive women, minus science and most of what is in this site. The pictures shall speak for themselves.
Avoiding nudity would make this site more persuasive, but this is a much more time consuming task because I will have to find pictures of women in clothes that clearly reveal their body shape. In any case, I don’t have reasons to be disappointed with how persuasive this site is. Without comments or with comment moderation or some kind of comments policy, it would be difficult to gauge how persuasive this site is, but if you look at the opposition, personal attacks, foul language and people posting under multiple pseudonyms are signs that I have hit a raw nerve, which, of course, will not be literally acknowledged by the opposed. The reasonable criticisms I have either responded to or will respond to pending free time. Thank you for your suggestions.
LMAO Alex. Honestly you wish you could get a beautiful Eastern European woman. Have you seen them! HOLY SHIT they are the fuckin hottest women on Earth! Of course this is a Brit.
umm: Here is a close-up of Amy’s face. Does she look hideous and retarded to you? How does the masculine face and masculine body of Alessandra Ambrosio work for lingerie photography?
I'm just curious. Where did you hear that more men than women have a horizontal orientation of the belly button and hence a preference for a vertical belly button orientation in women is consistent with a preference for femininity in women?
umm: I am not trying to replace “one impossible ideal with one that is even more unrealistic.” I have explained some of my ideas in an article on setting up alternative fashion industries. The high-fashion equivalent of an alternative fashion industry will need to use models with highly exclusive looks as exclusivity helps market to the elite.
zonneschijn: You asked why I don’t put pictures of far-East Asian women at this site. The answer is lack of time, especially in light of the fact that this site is not targeting East Asians. Anyway, you have put up many pictures of East Asian women though often not very East Asian looking.
umm: More feminine women tend to have a weaker libido, on average, but this does not prevent a given feminine woman from having a strong libido. Even if you exclude social factors, many factors apart from testosterone affect libido. So Kimberly’s stated measurements are not necessarily a lie in reference to her libido.
I don’t have a ‘beautiful women section’ but an ‘attractive women section.’ Female beauty is better conceived of as feminine beauty, whereas female attractiveness will typically but not always be of the feminine variety. I have put a few somewhat masculinized women in the attractive women section and have used appropriate labels; this is not inconsistent with this site’s goals.
Your labels such as weak, stupid, non-threatening or striking are irrelevant. What matters is form/shape, not adjectives.
Other things being equal, bigger breasts are more feminine, but other things will typically not be equal and hence one will easily come across more overall feminine women with smaller breasts. Since I am not equating femininity with large breasts – and Emily has explained this is some detail – I am unlikely to drive many women to getting breast implants. And breast implants are not as deadly as anorexia.
Alex: Natalie is likely British, not Eastern European. Keeley Hazell is famous for her breasts. Her popularity in more mainstream men’s publications is not just because of her breasts, but also luck – she is English; the British constitute a sizeable number of people in Europe, English is the most widely spoken language, she got her start as a Page 3 model, etc. With breasts like Keeley’s and her face, features such as a not-so-prominent backside and shoulders on the broad side will tend to be overlooked by men in general.
And one more thing... I should mention that Natalie T is still attractive, more so than many of the other women in the "attractive" women section. Natalie is more attractive and has a better body than Keeley Hazell whom just doesn't do it for me. Keeley is way too top heavy and has a boring, even unfortunate face and heavy bones and flat backside. Nitpicking again.. but this site is supposed to be about feminine beauty afterall. Why is Keeley nominated to be all over the lad's mags? Maybe a heterosexual male can tell me what the appeal is about Keeley?
I don't like her. It's something about her eyes... they are not soft enough. Actually, maybe it's the overall appearance of her face. Her hair is too coarse and dark. She looks like she could be Eastern European. Her body is nice. I know it sounds like I'm nitpicking, but personally I don't think she is particularly attractive to look at.
Rene is better than most of the women you have in the attractive women section. But I still think Amy from Spunky Angels is better than her, why don't you add Amy?
"i have personally noticed that you seem to like women who look weak, stupid, and nonthreatening. none of the women there are striking or anywhere near beautiful. I guess that should be expected from a racist homophobic man from the"
Be careful with the word "racist". He is not racist if he generally prefers the looks of white women, or because he might think that white women are generally more feminine. Had he preferred black or asian women to white women in terms of looks we wouldn't have heard a thing about racism.
Many people of other races say all the time that they prefer their looks. At the same time they trash white people's looks and no one says a thing. What's the difference? Is that not racism, then?
Many men of different races prefer white women in terms of looks and have always done so. Live with it. Having a physical preference is not racist, just as it's not racism when non-whites declare their races more beautiful, which they do loud and clear every day. I am sick and tired of the double standard, quite frankly. White people are afraid to be proud and to find beauty in their own race, and this is not healthy. This fear and guilt is something almost exclusively seen among whites who have been told for so very long that it is somehow not proper to have these natural feelings that ALL races have.
Eric might think white women are generally more feminine. I think he has shown this to be true here on this site. The fact that white women with delicate and soft features are oftentimes more feminine than women of other races is not his fault. Sometimes truth hurts, but you don't refute an argument by throwing around nasty accusations.
"midwest. oh and its really freaking creepy how you dont realize your insistance that big breasts are feminine will only feed to more and more women hating their bodies and getting breast implants (which will kill a women a lot earlier than an eating disorder)"
If women "hate " their bodies they should address their own mental problems instead of blaming everyone else. Men know that many women prefer big penises but we don't see men with small penises saying that women are the reason that they feel so insecure about their penises, do we? Why don't men attack women's preferences for tall, dark-haired men with large penises? Maybe because they are less immature than many women who don't take personal responsibility for their own insecurities and hang-ups, instead trying to force men to feel attracted to something they are not attracted to.
Should Eric say that small breasts are more feminine or that size doesn't matter, if it clearly does to many men? I don't think the truth is served by lies. He has shown examples of women with small breasts who are still very feminine, and women with big breasts who are not feminine at all in his opinion, so he has clearly shown here that there is not just one desirable feminine female form. Just because someone might prefer a certain type of looks doesn't mean that you cannot find beauty in other types as well.
feminine women do not have a strong libido, a higher sex drive is due to high levels of testosterone, so if this is your arguement then i have to agree with kimberly who is obviously lying about her impossible to have without plastic surgery measurements but is correct that you are only featuring masculinized women in the "beautiful women section"
i have personally noticed that you seem to like women who look weak, stupid, and nonthreatening. none of the women there are striking or anywhere near beautiful. I guess that should be expected from a racist homophobic man from the midwest. oh and its really freaking creepy how you dont realize your insistance that big breasts are feminine will only feed to more and more women hating their bodies and getting breast implants (which will kill a women a lot earlier than an eating disorder)
why do you insist that women who look like they are smoking pot all the time are attractive. the reason why he would never chose amy is because her face is hideous and she look retarded. why do you like women who look high all the time? is it because they look easier to take advantage of?
the reason why a lot of models look like "boys" is because their masculine striking features WORK when photographed. the softer your features are the more retarded and unphotogetic you look on film even though you might look just fine in person. take this from a girl with a weak jaw and chubby cheeks. the masculine people might look ODD in real life but in photos they look beautiful. THAT is why they were considered ugly when they were growing up, because their features are too intense for the real world, but in photography it works
keely has a body that is a million times harder to obtain than a fashion models. most women do not have 22 inch waists, tiny legs, and 32DDD boobs. i dont understand why you want to replace one impossible ideal with one that is even more unrealistic.
Actually Erik, I there is nothing that I must (or even could) learn from you. You seem like a psycho. How much of your time do you spend a day on this site?
If you are talking about beauty pageant winners and models, who are they "masculinised" in comparison too?
Your site contains numerous pictures of nude or semi nude women (and they arent "Art nudes" by any means), therefore they are porn. I think you must learn to not shoot the messenger! The message from most women is clear, nobody gives two hoots about what you think its beautiful or not. We do give two hoots (and so do alot of men, actually) about how offensive it is that you are a self styled expert and you are quite offensive about certain types of women, and even going so far as to call the men who like them "homosexuals" when really it's just your own personal taste. You know, Jim Jones actually claimed he was the only heterosexual in the world (even though he is known to have engaged in anal sex with men!)...I wonder if you can see the parallels here?
So do you currently have a girlfriend or wife?
hahahah! Don't worry, I already know the answer...(oh and someone you chat to on the net and have never met doesn't count), and if by chance you have a wife or gf, I feel sorry for them, because you obviously neglect them in order to further your bizarre agenda here..(that and that they were probably bought from Russia or somewhere like that)
I am a fan of this site. I will offer supportive comments and suggestions as time permits.
Rebecca Romijn does not bear comparison to Raquel Welch http://www.bikiniscience.com/models/RW19_SS/RW196520_S/RW196520_J/RW19652020.JPG, Jane Fonda, or the young to middle aged Elizabeth Taylor, among others; indeed, her looks are obviously inferior in femininity and attractiveness to heterosexuals to those of typical actresses and models who were active during the first two thirds of the twentieth century. Only a communist would deny this truth. There must be some method of visual presentation that can demonstrate, with much more persuasive power than this site has so far developed, the true extent of the decline in the average of femininity and attractiveness of high status models and actresses that has occurred since the 1960s. The need for improvement of persuasive methods is evidenced by the undesirable effect that the low social status of Erik's chosen instruments of contrast, internet glamour models, has on many who visit this site. A perusal of the comments sections shows that a high percentage of those who choose to comment are influenced more by social status than by reason or the experience of their eyes. What improvements could be made to Erik's approach? Consider the following hypothetical: if a time machine were available and could be used to collect certain models for the purpose of a photo shoot, side by side comparison photos could be taken that would prove many of the points made on this site, e.g., a side by side bikini shoot comparing cameron diaz or julia roberts to jane fonda. Many actresses and models of the 1950s - 1960s interval are still household names, and it is easy to convince most people that lesser known figures from that period were neither white trash nor porn stars. Time travel is not currently available, but there is a vast stock of photographic evidence that could be appropriately presented online in order to approximate the scientific and persuasive effects the time travel project would have. Schools of fashion design have libraries in which this evidence is reposited in book form. One need only make digital scans of some older photographs that are not subject to copyright protection to begin producing side by side comparisons between past and current high status models. Some effort would be required to scan these photographs, but the effort would be worthwhile as a way to avoid relying on nude photography and near-pornography. A new and more public relations optimal website might be the best outlet for displaying the results of the method I have outlined. The most striking contrasts might be found between top fashion models of the 1950s and those of the 2000s. There are many factors that complicate such a comparison, e.g., changes in fashion setting institutions over time (see http://www.slate.com/id/2135561/), but such a comparison could be a knife in the heart of homosexual hegemony over the modeling world. A new website might have other virtues, such as simpler content more easily understood by the masses and the absence of a comments section.
Carolyn Lynley was once the top teen model in the United States:
i mean ill give erik kudos for changing some of his very unattractive women in his attractive women section but i feel like he has a long way to go. now i know i come off rude and just plain horrible sometimes, but erik is a person that knows how to push peoples buttons. i really do hope that the guy finds happiness in whatever he does, but i hope he can find happiness without necessarily demeaning others. not to say he is demeaning others but he doesnt seem like the nicest guy.
evolutionary suicide is nothing but a theoretical possibility. THEORETICAL being the key word there. Now don't get me wrong, I am not one to dismiss something just because it is a theory. I do have an open mind. However, even if evolutionary suicide is occuring we still do not need someone to tell us what is or is not attractive. And if evolutionary suicide is occuring then why would I care if who I pick is attractive or not? ... because evolution has no meaning anymore and therefore we are free to choose whomever since it goes towards nothing really. Im tired and done with this whole website. I find no credibility in it. All I see is some lonely guy who writes meaningless articles that he thinks are true. There is nothing wrong with studying things and researching things, however when you believe your work is extremely accurate and argue every single possible point never once admitting someone else to have a valid point, then we have a problem.
The hilarity of this debate can be seen in Mark's love for Nicole Kidman and criticism of Erik's taste in women from the 1800's.
The irony of this website is that Erik is not a woman....this is a let down.
Let me just respond to this statement here posted by RandomViewer2 a year ago...
"I predict that in 20-30 years in time, due to rising power of East Asia, Asian beauty (younger, slimer, cuter) will dominate over current gay fashion ideals. Then the masculine looks will be out of style."
I've noticed Asian women have a culture wide physical lack in variety of looks, (input Erik's statistics). These looks are the very physical traits that are so powerful in that of white women in western culture.....Perhaps it is because of the large uniformed culture of Eastern Asia, or the hundreds of years of little variety of diet in these regions...or even the gay fashion designers' invasions into the east, but I highly doubt that the 'general' Asian beauty that we perceive here in the West would headline Western fashion at all. The first impression of Asian women (basically what we see on the internet and Japanese TV Shows) is that they are very youthful, and even very cute, but they most certainly don't have what it takes. They don't have that 'classic beauty' that is held by the superior white race...(or any other race for that matter)......Of course, classic beauty in this case is referring to the defined physical features that women develop through maturity and individuality with their looks, a proponent of beauty ,which, the far east is very lacking in.
Erik,
is rene above average femininity?
Although she is attractive, take away the fancy make up her face is probably bland.
Oops, I messed up that link: http://akinokure.blogspot.com/2008/09/older-women-lying-to-younger-girls.html
I agree with Visitor, but I think the hairstyle actually makes her look less feminine, because it's too angular. I like her waist, though. She might actually look more feminine with her hair up, but I think she would look even better with long, straight hair (though maybe I'm biased, because I think virtually all women look best with long, straight hair). In general, I think women's hair often suffers from an emphasis on being stylish or artistic, rather that on what is attractive from the standpoint of most heterosexual men. The short hair phenomenon is another example of this.
Rene is definitely above average in attractiveness relative to the other women in the section. Still, the woman who I find the most attractive is Maria A, on page 10, followed by Anna S, Rose McGowan, and Keeley Hazell.
Dude you are...: Der Wanderer’s comment on you features no personal attacks, whereas your replies are full of them and directed toward both him and me. And you have the chutzpah to say that Der Wanderer personally attacked you because you have a point. People who resort to personal attacks, such as yourself, are the ones who have no valid counter-arguments to an argument that deep down they know to be true. You must bow out of this discussion if you cannot behave. You have again accused me of never once admitting someone else to have a valid point, completely ignoring my question, “How can I even begin to admit that some of my ideas are bogus unless you identify them and preferably justify why they are bogus?” Don’t keep coming back to this site if it bothers you.
Dustin: I have addressed twentieth century trends in the looks of models and beauty pageant contestants, but not in graphically illustrated form. Women of low socioeconomic class (SES) are most likely strongly underrepresented among the nude models whose pictures I have been using, for various reasons. Attractive women are underrepresented among low SES women, especially those who take up stripping or nude modeling as a source of livelihood. If by low status you weren’t referring to financial status, then presently there is not much choice. If they were clothed I would still get abusive comments, perhaps less, which it appears you intuitively realize since you would prefer that the public doesn’t get to comment on an alternative site with broadly similar goals, but few things beat minimal dress for illustrative purposes.
Scanning pictures of yesteryears models and actresses is not a bad idea but is far less convenient for me than getting the pictures that I need from the internet. Maybe I can add forums to this site and people can scan these pictures and post them there. In any case, I have definitely planned on coming up with a new site or some publications, somewhere down the road, featuring pictures of non-nude feminine and attractive women, minus science and most of what is in this site. The pictures shall speak for themselves.
Avoiding nudity would make this site more persuasive, but this is a much more time consuming task because I will have to find pictures of women in clothes that clearly reveal their body shape. In any case, I don’t have reasons to be disappointed with how persuasive this site is. Without comments or with comment moderation or some kind of comments policy, it would be difficult to gauge how persuasive this site is, but if you look at the opposition, personal attacks, foul language and people posting under multiple pseudonyms are signs that I have hit a raw nerve, which, of course, will not be literally acknowledged by the opposed. The reasonable criticisms I have either responded to or will respond to pending free time. Thank you for your suggestions.
LMAO Alex. Honestly you wish you could get a beautiful Eastern European woman. Have you seen them! HOLY SHIT they are the fuckin hottest women on Earth! Of course this is a Brit.
umm: Here is a close-up of Amy’s face. Does she look hideous and retarded to you? How does the masculine face and masculine body of Alessandra Ambrosio work for lingerie photography?
To Erik:
I'm just curious. Where did you hear that more men than women have a horizontal orientation of the belly button and hence a preference for a vertical belly button orientation in women is consistent with a preference for femininity in women?
hahahahahah ahah hahhahhah hahahha
you make me laugh hard
its not about how they cut your umbilical cord
its decided like months before birth...
hahahah hahahahahahah ahhahahahahhahahaahhahaahahhahaha hah haahha ha hahah ah ha hah ahah hah ha
umm: I am not trying to replace “one impossible ideal with one that is even more unrealistic.” I have explained some of my ideas in an article on setting up alternative fashion industries. The high-fashion equivalent of an alternative fashion industry will need to use models with highly exclusive looks as exclusivity helps market to the elite.
zonneschijn: You asked why I don’t put pictures of far-East Asian women at this site. The answer is lack of time, especially in light of the fact that this site is not targeting East Asians. Anyway, you have put up many pictures of East Asian women though often not very East Asian looking.
umm: More feminine women tend to have a weaker libido, on average, but this does not prevent a given feminine woman from having a strong libido. Even if you exclude social factors, many factors apart from testosterone affect libido. So Kimberly’s stated measurements are not necessarily a lie in reference to her libido.
I don’t have a ‘beautiful women section’ but an ‘attractive women section.’ Female beauty is better conceived of as feminine beauty, whereas female attractiveness will typically but not always be of the feminine variety. I have put a few somewhat masculinized women in the attractive women section and have used appropriate labels; this is not inconsistent with this site’s goals.
Your labels such as weak, stupid, non-threatening or striking are irrelevant. What matters is form/shape, not adjectives.
Other things being equal, bigger breasts are more feminine, but other things will typically not be equal and hence one will easily come across more overall feminine women with smaller breasts. Since I am not equating femininity with large breasts – and Emily has explained this is some detail – I am unlikely to drive many women to getting breast implants. And breast implants are not as deadly as anorexia.
Alex: I will be adding Amy, hopefully shortly. I have been trying to find where I put her pictures.
Alex: Natalie is likely British, not Eastern European. Keeley Hazell is famous for her breasts. Her popularity in more mainstream men’s publications is not just because of her breasts, but also luck – she is English; the British constitute a sizeable number of people in Europe, English is the most widely spoken language, she got her start as a Page 3 model, etc. With breasts like Keeley’s and her face, features such as a not-so-prominent backside and shoulders on the broad side will tend to be overlooked by men in general.
And one more thing... I should mention that Natalie T is still attractive, more so than many of the other women in the "attractive" women section. Natalie is more attractive and has a better body than Keeley Hazell whom just doesn't do it for me. Keeley is way too top heavy and has a boring, even unfortunate face and heavy bones and flat backside. Nitpicking again.. but this site is supposed to be about feminine beauty afterall. Why is Keeley nominated to be all over the lad's mags? Maybe a heterosexual male can tell me what the appeal is about Keeley?
I don't like her. It's something about her eyes... they are not soft enough. Actually, maybe it's the overall appearance of her face. Her hair is too coarse and dark. She looks like she could be Eastern European. Her body is nice. I know it sounds like I'm nitpicking, but personally I don't think she is particularly attractive to look at.
Rene is better than most of the women you have in the attractive women section. But I still think Amy from Spunky Angels is better than her, why don't you add Amy?
"i have personally noticed that you seem to like women who look weak, stupid, and nonthreatening. none of the women there are striking or anywhere near beautiful. I guess that should be expected from a racist homophobic man from the"
Be careful with the word "racist". He is not racist if he generally prefers the looks of white women, or because he might think that white women are generally more feminine. Had he preferred black or asian women to white women in terms of looks we wouldn't have heard a thing about racism.
Many people of other races say all the time that they prefer their looks. At the same time they trash white people's looks and no one says a thing. What's the difference? Is that not racism, then?
Many men of different races prefer white women in terms of looks and have always done so. Live with it. Having a physical preference is not racist, just as it's not racism when non-whites declare their races more beautiful, which they do loud and clear every day. I am sick and tired of the double standard, quite frankly. White people are afraid to be proud and to find beauty in their own race, and this is not healthy. This fear and guilt is something almost exclusively seen among whites who have been told for so very long that it is somehow not proper to have these natural feelings that ALL races have.
Eric might think white women are generally more feminine. I think he has shown this to be true here on this site. The fact that white women with delicate and soft features are oftentimes more feminine than women of other races is not his fault. Sometimes truth hurts, but you don't refute an argument by throwing around nasty accusations.
"midwest. oh and its really freaking creepy how you dont realize your insistance that big breasts are feminine will only feed to more and more women hating their bodies and getting breast implants (which will kill a women a lot earlier than an eating disorder)"
If women "hate " their bodies they should address their own mental problems instead of blaming everyone else. Men know that many women prefer big penises but we don't see men with small penises saying that women are the reason that they feel so insecure about their penises, do we? Why don't men attack women's preferences for tall, dark-haired men with large penises? Maybe because they are less immature than many women who don't take personal responsibility for their own insecurities and hang-ups, instead trying to force men to feel attracted to something they are not attracted to.
Should Eric say that small breasts are more feminine or that size doesn't matter, if it clearly does to many men? I don't think the truth is served by lies. He has shown examples of women with small breasts who are still very feminine, and women with big breasts who are not feminine at all in his opinion, so he has clearly shown here that there is not just one desirable feminine female form. Just because someone might prefer a certain type of looks doesn't mean that you cannot find beauty in other types as well.
feminine women do not have a strong libido, a higher sex drive is due to high levels of testosterone, so if this is your arguement then i have to agree with kimberly who is obviously lying about her impossible to have without plastic surgery measurements but is correct that you are only featuring masculinized women in the "beautiful women section"
i have personally noticed that you seem to like women who look weak, stupid, and nonthreatening. none of the women there are striking or anywhere near beautiful. I guess that should be expected from a racist homophobic man from the midwest. oh and its really freaking creepy how you dont realize your insistance that big breasts are feminine will only feed to more and more women hating their bodies and getting breast implants (which will kill a women a lot earlier than an eating disorder)
why do you insist that women who look like they are smoking pot all the time are attractive. the reason why he would never chose amy is because her face is hideous and she look retarded. why do you like women who look high all the time? is it because they look easier to take advantage of?
the reason why a lot of models look like "boys" is because their masculine striking features WORK when photographed. the softer your features are the more retarded and unphotogetic you look on film even though you might look just fine in person. take this from a girl with a weak jaw and chubby cheeks. the masculine people might look ODD in real life but in photos they look beautiful. THAT is why they were considered ugly when they were growing up, because their features are too intense for the real world, but in photography it works
keely has a body that is a million times harder to obtain than a fashion models. most women do not have 22 inch waists, tiny legs, and 32DDD boobs. i dont understand why you want to replace one impossible ideal with one that is even more unrealistic.
Actually Erik, I there is nothing that I must (or even could) learn from you. You seem like a psycho. How much of your time do you spend a day on this site?
If you are talking about beauty pageant winners and models, who are they "masculinised" in comparison too?
Your site contains numerous pictures of nude or semi nude women (and they arent "Art nudes" by any means), therefore they are porn. I think you must learn to not shoot the messenger! The message from most women is clear, nobody gives two hoots about what you think its beautiful or not. We do give two hoots (and so do alot of men, actually) about how offensive it is that you are a self styled expert and you are quite offensive about certain types of women, and even going so far as to call the men who like them "homosexuals" when really it's just your own personal taste. You know, Jim Jones actually claimed he was the only heterosexual in the world (even though he is known to have engaged in anal sex with men!)...I wonder if you can see the parallels here?
So do you currently have a girlfriend or wife?
hahahah! Don't worry, I already know the answer...(oh and someone you chat to on the net and have never met doesn't count), and if by chance you have a wife or gf, I feel sorry for them, because you obviously neglect them in order to further your bizarre agenda here..(that and that they were probably bought from Russia or somewhere like that)
I am a fan of this site. I will offer supportive comments and suggestions as time permits.
Rebecca Romijn does not bear comparison to Raquel Welch http://www.bikiniscience.com/models/RW19_SS/RW196520_S/RW196520_J/RW19652020.JPG, Jane Fonda, or the young to middle aged Elizabeth Taylor, among others; indeed, her looks are obviously inferior in femininity and attractiveness to heterosexuals to those of typical actresses and models who were active during the first two thirds of the twentieth century. Only a communist would deny this truth. There must be some method of visual presentation that can demonstrate, with much more persuasive power than this site has so far developed, the true extent of the decline in the average of femininity and attractiveness of high status models and actresses that has occurred since the 1960s. The need for improvement of persuasive methods is evidenced by the undesirable effect that the low social status of Erik's chosen instruments of contrast, internet glamour models, has on many who visit this site. A perusal of the comments sections shows that a high percentage of those who choose to comment are influenced more by social status than by reason or the experience of their eyes. What improvements could be made to Erik's approach? Consider the following hypothetical: if a time machine were available and could be used to collect certain models for the purpose of a photo shoot, side by side comparison photos could be taken that would prove many of the points made on this site, e.g., a side by side bikini shoot comparing cameron diaz or julia roberts to jane fonda. Many actresses and models of the 1950s - 1960s interval are still household names, and it is easy to convince most people that lesser known figures from that period were neither white trash nor porn stars. Time travel is not currently available, but there is a vast stock of photographic evidence that could be appropriately presented online in order to approximate the scientific and persuasive effects the time travel project would have. Schools of fashion design have libraries in which this evidence is reposited in book form. One need only make digital scans of some older photographs that are not subject to copyright protection to begin producing side by side comparisons between past and current high status models. Some effort would be required to scan these photographs, but the effort would be worthwhile as a way to avoid relying on nude photography and near-pornography. A new and more public relations optimal website might be the best outlet for displaying the results of the method I have outlined. The most striking contrasts might be found between top fashion models of the 1950s and those of the 2000s. There are many factors that complicate such a comparison, e.g., changes in fashion setting institutions over time (see http://www.slate.com/id/2135561/), but such a comparison could be a knife in the heart of homosexual hegemony over the modeling world. A new website might have other virtues, such as simpler content more easily understood by the masses and the absence of a comments section.
Carolyn Lynley was once the top teen model in the United States:
AA.jpg)
CC.jpg)
.jpg)
useful links:
http://www.asahi-net.or.jp/~hj7h-tkhs/eng_actress.html
http://www.mdolla.com/2008/04/fashion-models-from-1960-1970.html
http://www.cinemasirens.com/galleries.html
http://actresspictures.co.uk/scansl/lynley/s.htm
see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YzQ13tSgW6U and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6QguOmD-s4 for a good time
i mean ill give erik kudos for changing some of his very unattractive women in his attractive women section but i feel like he has a long way to go. now i know i come off rude and just plain horrible sometimes, but erik is a person that knows how to push peoples buttons. i really do hope that the guy finds happiness in whatever he does, but i hope he can find happiness without necessarily demeaning others. not to say he is demeaning others but he doesnt seem like the nicest guy.
evolutionary suicide is nothing but a theoretical possibility. THEORETICAL being the key word there. Now don't get me wrong, I am not one to dismiss something just because it is a theory. I do have an open mind. However, even if evolutionary suicide is occuring we still do not need someone to tell us what is or is not attractive. And if evolutionary suicide is occuring then why would I care if who I pick is attractive or not? ... because evolution has no meaning anymore and therefore we are free to choose whomever since it goes towards nothing really. Im tired and done with this whole website. I find no credibility in it. All I see is some lonely guy who writes meaningless articles that he thinks are true. There is nothing wrong with studying things and researching things, however when you believe your work is extremely accurate and argue every single possible point never once admitting someone else to have a valid point, then we have a problem.
by the way I am constantly re-inventing myself for your information.
Pages