Hannah: You have odd preferences if you find Maria Sheriff ugly. She isn’t young anymore, but I don’t have large pictures of her from when she was young. An older woman or two in the attractive women section should not be a problem, just as a few not very feminine women there isn’t a problem.
David: I don’t have an attraction to well-developed muscularity in women. Female wrestlers are bound to have above average muscularity or they wouldn’t fit in a wrestler mould. If you consider the muscularity requirement, then Torrie Wilson is among the better looking women with her level of muscularity.
Gemma Atkinson is in the average to slightly masculine range with respect to masculinity-femininity. She has above average attractiveness.
Which Irina are you talking bout?
I don’t like the look of corsets when they make the waist cartoonishly small. Other than this, I don’t know what to say.
More: Please stick to a single alias. Haifa Wehby has a round face, not an oval one, and her skin isn’t like ivory, but light brown (very light brown with minimal sun exposure). Her face looks more feminine than Maria Sheriff’s, and Haifa is more curvaceous, but borders on the overweight. Anabella Hilal doesn’t have sufficient curves, and it is difficult to judge her attractiveness based on your picture. Both these Middle Eastern women have above average attractiveness.
Zonneschijn: Please stick to a single alias. I mostly avoid porn models. I have Grace Kelly among the randomly shown images on the intro/home page. Diane Kruger isn’t feminine and I found no woman by the name of Janne Wissenner. If you have pictures of feminine and attractive mainstream actresses, mention their names or send me their images and I will have a look.
Oliana: To post pictures, upload them to sites like imageshack.us or hidebehind.com. Then post the urls of the images they give you or the codes for displaying the images at blogs/forums. You may also email the images to me.
Worried: Most women shown within this site are not porn models. There are a lot of nude models, but I have few alternatives at the time being.
Sandy: I recently improved the intro page, and on this page I ask people to read the FAQ. So the site purpose should be within easy access for people stumbling across this site.
I apologize for people squabbling at the blog, but there are few such instances. Please ignore them. If you read this site every now an then, you know who they are. If it gets worse, I will ask people to take their petty disputes elsewhere.
Justanothergirl: I appreciate your comments especially since they are coming from a woman whose looks are not flattered by this site. Don’t be surprised if you occasionally see a feminine contestant in America’s Next Top Model competition or something similar. To make these contests more palatable to the general public, they may throw in a few feminine ones, but the feminine ones will be eliminated.
Don’t believe that an ideal wait-to-hip ratio is 0.7. This was hyped up in the 1990s, but there were methodological shortcomings in the studies by Singh and others; some studies have shown an optimal preference for lower values. Attractiveness is a matter of overall looks. A woman with a higher WHR can look overall better than one with a lower WHR.
You mentioned an English study where women preferred thin models to the average woman. This may be because the average females the participants saw were overweight and the models thin but not too skinny. In Western societies, somewhat thin women are generally preferred to somewhat overweight women. On the other hand, there have been some studies where women preferred thinner models, but these have been in specific contexts discussed here; the overall find is that women are made to feel worse about themselves after viewing thin fashion models. If you find out who did the English study, let me know and I will have a look.
People haven’t been brainwashed to see masculine features as more appealing or else how would controlled laboratory studies generally show the opposite?
Nastya: I am not describing masculinized female models as men. If high cheekbones are selected for to facilitate make-up, why should the face be important for “clothes hangars”? The high cheekbones simply add a more masculine look, which the designers are looking for.
My idea of beauty is not women from adult sites. The issue is how women look rather than what they do. I don’t have much of a choice but to heavily rely on adult sites for the time being. Your own examples are not of feminine beauty. Monica Belluci is an attractive woman, but not a feminine beauty. Laetitia Casta isn’t an example of feminine beauty either; I will address her at some point. You can find pictures of her where it is clear that her backside is somewhat flattened and hips not sufficiently wide. Try others, and you will see that there are few prominent mainstream examples of feminine beauty, but there will be lots of them when I am successful with this site.
E: My argument isn’t that high cheekbones are unattractive, but that masculinization is associated with a higher placement of the cheekbones on the face. Since attractiveness in women is strongly associated with above average femininity, a greater proportion of women considered attractive by most people will have lower cheekbones than higher cheekbones compared to average. On a similar note, even though you haven’t heard of people praising square jaws in women, it wouldn’t be difficult to find pictures of square-jawed women who would be regarded as attractive by most as well as admirers of square-jawed women.
I hope that you are not confusing more horizontally prominent cheekbones (irrelevant to high cheekbones) with the vertical placement of the cheekbones (what matters to whether one has high cheekbones).
Size Queen: Thank you for mentioning the youtube video. I haven’t been interested in models’ measurements. See enough pictures of them and it is obvious what kind of physiques they possess.
I am not a white supremacist/nationalist. Even if I were one, all my arguments backed up by empirical evidence would still stand. It is a shame that you would retract your initial good impression of this site based on the perceived racist beliefs of the author. An argument stands on what kind of evidence backs it up, not the motives or proclivities of the author. I do not have an obsession with detail. I need detail to have an impact, and I will have an impact.
Debra: I am pleased that you like to deal with facts. So do I, and you will find facts aplenty within this site. Judge this site by the facts presented, not by the omission of non-white women, the reasons for which are clearly explained on the FAQ page.
Debra: I didn’t say that 80% of molestations in general are committed by homosexuals. The 80% figure is from a specific study on priests. Homosexual and bisexual individuals are overrepresented among child molesters. This link is part of a sexuality section that makes it clear that abnormal sexuality is much more characteristic of homosexuals and bisexuals, just as increased criminality is too.
Whereas the average woman has gained weight over the past few decades, she hasn’t gained 3 inches in height. Please don’t tell me that women in general have imposed the standards on themselves that people think the fashion industry is responsible for. Why then do controlled laboratory studies show an overwhelming preference for a healthy body weight and above average femininity in the looks of women on the part of contemporary Western women?
I don’t prefer to bombard people with stats and facts. To avoid accusations of subjective arguments, I need to back up my arguments with empirical evidence. Even so, I get accused of making political arguments (See “Digital” above). Imagine what would happen if I didn’t have the stats to back myself up.
1. 80% of molestations are not perpetrated by homosexuals. It is acknowledged by social scientists and law enforcment that the most likely perpetrator in the case of the molestation of a child is a close family friend or a family member who would lead what would be described as a heterosexual life. To suggest that the molestation indicates underlying homosexuality is also an invalid inference. Paedophilia is a prediliction independent of sexual orientation. It is a myth that sexual deviance and crime is largly the preserve of homosexuals.
2. The average stats of the model have indeed changed over the years but so to have the average stats of women in gerneral. The average height has gone from 5ft4' to 5ft7'. The average waist from 26 inches to 32. The average dress size from 10 to 14.
3. The fashion industry does not set out to set standards for womens beauty. It is women who impose these standards on themselves. It is patronizing to suggest that the industry should take responsibility for poor self image. Women should build a confidence in themselves
without help from the fashion industry. There will always be those, both men and women and in areas other than the fashion industry who will never be satisfied with what they have or look like. This is a human trait which is most prevalent in affluent societies where people do not utilise emotional energy on where to find their next meal or being able to afford clothes and shelter.
4. Just as societies with low average wealth (in relative terms) admire a fuller figure as an indication of health and wealth, western societies idealise the slim physique as it suggests spartan living and absence of gluttony and over indulgence.
As you seem to prefer to bombard people with stats and facts to justify your personal views at least verify them first. Otherwise you are simply indulging in reverse engineering of your arguments.
Whipped honey: You tell us that most heterosexual men are attracted to teenage girls even though they have a preference for adult women. This means that their attraction to adult women is stronger. Significant attraction toward girls in their late teens is understandable, but the historical marriage issues had nothing to do with “typical” attraction to teenage girls because too few heterosexual men have/had an interest in girls in their early- to mid-teens strong enough to prefer them to young adult women as stable/main partners. This discussion has digressed here, and I still have to respond there.
You left a comment on why there are more homosexuals in the Catholic priesthood than in the general population. The estimate range I gave you says this clearly, so why repeat the point? The question is, if homosexuals are not overrepresented among child molesters, then why is 25-50% of a population responsible for 80% of the molestations?
I am not posting lengthy text if it is tangential to this site. What is your problem with downloading a zipped file? When you access a web page, you download its contents to your computer, and these could malware without requiring you to download a zipped file. Why would I add malware to a zipped file offered for download? If I had gzipped output enabled, your browser would be downloading this page as a zipped file. Anyway, the updated contents of the zip file have been posted at a different site, which you eventually ran into.
I have clearly stated that the primary purpose of this site isn’t to counter the negative effects of skinny models on some women. So why say, “I don't believe that your primary motivation...”?
Quote:
- If you can find pictures of "feminine" women then why do you care whether those pictures are in the "mainstream" or not?
It isn’t about being feminine, but about being feminine and very attractive. Feminine and very attractive women will usually not pose nude. So it isn’t that I am able to find pictures of lots of feminine and very attractive women. Without some mainstream outlet, most such women are not coming to the limelight. Why do I want to establish at least one mainstream outlet for feminine beauty appreciation? Most men are naturally interested in beautiful women. This needs no explanation; most men are born this way. However, most men are unable to do anything about what is going on. I haven’t seen others trying to bring feminine beauty to the limelight, and I believe that I can do this though it will take time, and hence have taken the task upon myself.
Digital: Your beef is with me. Don't criticize this site because you encounter “bitter, petty minded tirades” in the comments since these are by those not affiliated with this site. The article being commented on is a straightforward one, documenting the dominance of the fashion industry by male homosexuals, and it is argued in the context of explaining the looks of female fashion models. Off-topic issues such as basketball teams and priests are of little relevance to the article.
Blaming female designers and photographers for the looks of female high-fashion models is laughable. They are underrepresented among the powerful individuals in the fashion business. And there has been no trend toward shorter female high-fashion models. In the second half of the twentieth century, the average height of female fashion models increased (link 1, link 2). The average female high-fashion model is about 5-foot-10; most of them cluster around this value tightly. Kate Moss is an anomaly with respect to height, but anomalies do not change the average tendency. It is also easy to see how Kate Moss made it big. When she was discovered, in her mid-teens, she bore an uncanny resemblance to boys in their early adolescence, which more than compensated for her lack of height.
Whereas this site does not address male attractiveness, it would be easy to look up ratings of male attractiveness by women in numerous studies and show that women generally prefer men with above average masculinity in the physique. So don’t bother trying to explain the effeminate physiques of numerous male models in terms of female preferences.
You mentioned a website and some prominent magazines for gay men, but these do not help us infer the preferences of the homosexuals. By law, there cannot be mainstream sources for homosexual men interested in nude boys (less than 18). And you write, “Erik's obssessive belief that gay mags must surely represent an early learning toy catalogue.”! Whereas it is true that many homosexual men prefer muscular men, a substantial proportion of them prefer young boys, much greater than the proportion of heterosexual men who prefer young girls.
Who do you think has assumed “that the current state of fashion represents what has always been in fashion?” Not me (see this article about twentieth century trends), not Danielle (she has mentioned the trends elsewhere) and I don’t think any of the others either.
You have describe this blog as political and described the arguments as “The authors only see what they want to see, and fragmentary or vague evidence is seized upon, hyped up and trumpeted as gospel truth.” The quote applies to your comment. Look around this site; the arguments are extensively backed by citations, the majority from peer-reviewed journals. You, on the other hand, come with so reasonable statements such as wondering whether I am repressing homosexual desires!
Recent trend in among fashion models cannot be blamed on the preferences of upper class white heterosexual individuals. The studies that have documented an overwhelming preference for above average femininity and a healthy body weight in women have not shown a tendency for upper class white individuals to prefer thin and masculine-looking women compared to their lower class counterparts.
What do you mean there is an increasing fondness for lesbian experimentation in colleges and universities? The prevalence of reported homosexual behavior in women has increased over the past two decades, but the most obvious explanation is that with diminishing stigma against homosexuality, a greater proportion of women with a homosexual component to their attractions have participated in lesbian sex. This is not the same as more women experimenting with homosexuality.
I am not prone to obsessions. What you see in the form of this site is required to bring about change. If there is a better way to achieve change, I am unaware of it. Blonde women are a minority within this site. Even if they are overrepresented, this overrepresentation is no more racist than the overrepresentation of men in prison is sexist. Look up high-end models working as fashion models, fitness models or other major types of models...Northern Europeans are overrepresented, period.
When a photographer takes a shot of a busty model/subject in a reclining
pose or lying on her back they will sometimes adjust clothing or use devices such as straps or tape to prevent the breasts from falling to the sides. This is an industry fact. So just because Tyras breasts did not fall to the side does not mean that they are fake. Breast size also fluctuates with overall weight and it is obvious that when Trya retired from editorial and runway modeling she put on weight. I dont see the inference you're making about her nose job. This procedure is not confined to any paticular race. Eye lid sugery is an interesting phenomonon in Asia but is not widespread. A chinese friend used to find my double eyelids funny looking and not paticularily attractive! Plenty of white women try to darken their skin, plump up their lips and get nose jobs. Generalisation makes for a weak argument. A circle of inference.
Definitely Debra. I retract what I said about this website being wonderful. For a male to be this obsessively detailed about beauty that he does not possess or inhabit shows deep psychological issues. my guess that you are a white nationalist or racialist Erik and thsi is your way of spreading Social Darwinism disguised as beauty theory. You are NOT female so unless you're really a woman you are essentially of talking out your ass regarding something you can never experience or really understand.
Sweet halelujah you are so damn right. Why if I had my way the fairer sex would have a upper age limit, 30, like that film with whats his name. Then they would be piled into the back of a big 'ol pick up truck and dumped off the nearest cliff. Then, you could get another one, younger ya know, with nice titties and a tight ass, although you'd have to brainwash her into going anywhere near your wrinkly ol cock but hey, a mans gotta do what a mans gotta do right? Am I right? Eirk, imposing it on her is highly recommended! But your idea about electrocutin her ass is worth a go first. I have a big generator out back, and crocodile clips. Just bring her round larry! She wont know what hit her. I can put some nightol in her tea. When she wakes up she'll be able to bounce on it! Might put some life in your wizened old meat and 2 veg as well!!! And she'll no longer have to close her eyes and dream of Sean Connerey, one of the few men who get less physically repulsive with age!!!!!!!! Yeee hawwwwwwwwwww!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Maria Sheriff is Okay but if you ask me do I find she pretty? I'll say I don't find she is pretty, but she looks okay. Her face looks not balance,no chin, no eyelid, the down lip is thicker than the upper lip and the last one I'd mention. what do you find pretty in her erik?
I will give you the example of very beautifull women in my thinking.
here Arab singer
why I find this Arab woman is pretty.
1. she has very magical eyes and they attacted people to look, only the eyes already prettier, sparker than the eyes of maria sheriff.
2. she has oval face, her face looks balance not too narrow and not too board.
3. she has beautifull nose.
4. she has hour glass shape
5. she has a kind of face that I'd call it "internation face" the face like her can adapt, make up to look like every nations.
6. she has beautifull skin tone, white ivory, looks clean and bright, not too white too remind u the deadly body or not too dark.
And last one Anabella Helall. This true beauty! =)
Past her prime? Quality of women? You are a strange individual. You are a mysoginist. Do you have any respect for women at all? And why are there so many almost pornographic, sorry, 'glamour' shots? I actually think you are a shit stirrer and dont really believe half the crap that you put on this site. You act like all triggers to all people, racist, homophobic, mysoginistic. I bet you are a black gay transvestite with no
genetalia. Or at least wish you were.
There are indeed disturbing white supremicist under-currents in this website. I slowly began to realise this the more i explored it. I work in a scientific field and I often find both peoples prejudices and also their sensitivities cloud issues. I always like to deal in facts and obviously there are differences between peoples and what each group of peoples consider attractive. A close friend of mine with whom I lived while at college was from Beijing, China and we would often discuss the differences in both her and my (western europe) societies attitudes on attractivness. I find the attempts to explain the noticible absence of non white women on this website almost laughable if there were not so pernicious. The feeble attempts to intellectualise this attitude is transparent.
Ho ho ho, Erik, you ARE a racist! AND a complete fuck up! I was suspicious of your constant postings of only milky white blondes in your 'attractive women' section and the above postings only prove my, and several others' suspicions correct. Plus, I read the first twenty or so pages of your idiotic book published by iUniverse as a PDF. I cannot believe anyone actually gave you a high school diploma, much less a publishing deal. YOU CANNOT WRITE. Your syntax is more confused than your sexuality (and fuck me if it isn't!) and your jargon-filled text is absurd, disguising the most laughably simplistic assumptions on sexual identity under a flimsy blanket of unconvincing verbiage. You sad, screwed up, self infatuated little no talent. You resemble an academic like Jesse Jackson resembles a Klansman (and you should know what THEY look like, Grand Dragon!) And let's face it, no one who posts here actually holds you in any regard. You, of all the perverted, sexually stunted little cunts on Earth, calling ANYONE else 'mentally challenged'?! For sexual dysfunction, you make Jack the Ripper look like Casanova! You're mentally, emotionally AND erotically challenged! Poor, poor Erik... BTW, pal, we all know what's really going on in the heads of poor bastards like you who prate on and on about the 'homosexual agenda'. You probably consider those busty blondes no more attractive than your grossly stereotyped fashion designers would. Fess up, you sad case. And enjoy the rest of your life.
Wow, just looking over the rest of the site, you really are obssessed, aren't you Erik? BTW, can we take your over-emphasis on blonde models as proof of your racism? If not, why not? It wouldn't be any more presumptuous than your manipulative, ahem carefully selected 'reliable sources'.
As an afterthought, were you molested? Sorry if that were the case. But it would explain your tacky little fixation. Or maybe repressed feelings of homosexual attraction are what's at work here. Oh, who cares. You're clearly a f**k up regardless.
Um, just came across this blog, interesting at least. But it seems that too many here, wanting to draw attention to the psychological maladies or eccentricities of others, are oblivious to their own. Bitter, petty minded tirades are appearing every other post, and scrolling down this blog unleashes a maddening whirlwind of perverted priests, gender denying fashionistas, 'white trash' glamour girls and all white basketball teams. This is less of a reasoned debate than a rattle-tossing flamewar! Yes, I wonder if fashion's emphasis on the tall, lithe female type contains a subtle homoerotic subtext. But as more female designers and photographers (Prada, Jil Sander, Stella McCartney, Corrine Day, Elaine Constantine, Ellen von Unwerth et al) came onto the scene, quirky, shorter girls such as Kate Moss and Devon Aoki have been seen on the runways along with the Grecian goddesses. I think it's precisely the growing presence of female creatives which is driving the drift toward youth, in models of both sexes.
Designers such as Halston, Dior and Gaultier would never have launched the careers of childlike drips such as Kate Moss or Twiggy (styled and launched at 16 by her then boyfriend Justin de Villeneuve and a favourite of the very hetero David Bailey). Self possessed, even matriarchal women dominate the imaginations of gay men, both in the repressed past and the liberated present. Gay mens' female icons: Bette Davis, Rosalind Russell, Joan Crawford. Womens' idea of female perfection: Audrey Hepburn, a sexless, Bambi-eyed lollipop whose extreme thinness resulted from childhood starvation.
And visit the male model forum 'modelhommes.com' to observe the differences between gay mens' and (young) womens' ideas of what is attractive in guys. The slender, elfin Mathias Lauridsen has few male admirers, whereas girls love his looks precisely because of his self-effacing, shy boyishness. One girl on 'The Fashion Spot' even encourages posts of boyish looking guys such as Stas Svetlichnyy under the premise of 'boys against men'. A bitter, misguided feminism runs under a great deal of the use of men in modern advertising; ads for trendy, youth oriented products such as mp3 players and mobile communications often feature slender, longhaired males who are more apparently feminine than the 'girlfriends' pictured next to them. They have almost no place in gay culture. Quite the contrary, shaven headed beefcakes full of attitude are what gay guys seem to want, just flick through a gay magazine to find out. Ruby lipped teenagers are actually thin on the ground there, despite Erik's obssessive belief that gay mags must surely represent an early learning toy catalogue. A 'twink' subculture exists, but it certainly doesn't seem to be the gay norm.
And why does everyone assume that the current state of fashion represents what has always been in fashion? Women such as Cindy Crawford, Claudia Schiffer and Naomi Campbell may be unusually tall and slender, but they were nothing like the mopey, stick-like, rabbits in headlights that skulk along the catwalk now. Miuccia Prada, above all, seems to favour the palest, youngest and most abashed looking girls. Vivienne Westwood sent the then 13 year old Rachael Kirby down her catwalk in the late nineties. Seventies models such as Iman, Jerry Hall and Marie Helvin were slim, sure, but healthy and confident too. Heterosexual Guy Bourdin reduced several models to tears with the pornographic and violent themes of his shoots. Homosexual Herb Ritts received praise from Cindy Crawford, a woman with a 165 IQ, because 'he photographed women as they wanted to be seen'.
This is the problem with blogs like this, which are political at heart. The authors only see what they want to see, and fragmentary or vague evidence is seized upon, hyped up and trumpeted as gospel truth. And furthermore, what looks good in clothes and what looks good out of them sometimes ARE different. As a 17 year old guy, I stood at 6'2" and weighed just 10 stones, with a 27 inch waist. I looked great in clothes. At 33, I weigh 14 stones and work out. I look far better in the buff than I used to, but I'll never work a suit the same way. Curves look fantastic in a bikini, incongruous in a Grecian column.
Good luck in your quest to promote the archetypally feminine beauty. Most women have broad hips and full breasts, and should be happy to possess a look that is healthy and sensual. But why do you think that an emphasis on 'hourglass' figures (most women will never have the 24 inch waists of your 'womanlike' examples) and tiny facial features (some women have small eyes, strong chins and angular bone structure) is any less arbitrary? By positing every tall slim woman as 'masculine', you're hardly doing your bit for female self esteem, are you?!
To be honest, I think that the peculiar recent trends in fashion have their roots not in gay mens' collective psychology, but in a sex-denying drift in white middle class culture. Archetypal femininity in image reflects the same thing in mind, and bourgeois womens' minds are focusing less and less on family and caregiving and more on self fulfillment. In ethnic and white working class cultures where family is your reason for existing, not just a 'lifestyle choice', the curvy 'babe' still rules, as does the fully grown hunk. Black or Latina women have no time whatsoever for the hollow chested, permanently anxious boy rockers and Euro teens who white middle class girls fall head over heels for, from Gerard Way and Pete Doherty to the hollow cheeked blandards of the Paris and Milan shows. And of course, an increasing fondness for lesbian experimentation is taking place in colleges and universities, partly as a bitter rejection of everything 'patriarchal'. But, there you go. Erik obviously has his issues (and how!), and the agitprop girls love to blame everybody but themselves for their unhappiness, so gay guys will get it in the neck again. Even if, like the majority, they've never had any interest in female fashion whatsoever.
Thanks Eric for your nod of approval for tall women. If you had explored this site you would see that concern over the weight of women as a threat to her health is bottom of the list. Using it, as well as height and 'masculine' facial features, as another example of why she should not be considered beautiful or attractive to men seems the primary objective. My post was commenting on the entire site, not just the article on weight. I have seen close at hand very slim healthy girls and girls with genuine weight problems such as anorexia and believe me there is a difference. It is just another form of inverse discrimination to lambast all girls who are very slim. In reference to your remark, I neither expressly said or inferred your definition of 'child like bodies'. I said plump women with infantile features i.e. fair hair, full cheeks, big eyes and full red lips. This was for many centuries considered the most attractive female form in Europe. Wanting to be a stone lighter and starving yourself to death are worlds apart. There is a far higher rate of eating disorders in the general population than in the modelling industry. Blaming it on the industry would require you to ignore the documented history of the disease which extends a long way further back than when 'thin was in'. The issue is not black and white.
Debra, the major issue is that these women are very light.
At no point has the problem been one of models’ height.
Stature matters little to beauty; taller women are all right.
Men liked child-like bodies? LOL! Please browse this site.
1. I think they look mad altogether. I saw a program about them on TG4. They like what they do so fair play and there are men who like it too, although not all of them are 100% upstairs. Anyways, it is not about being attractive to the opposite sex. e.g. Arnold Scwartzenegger
2.I dont know who Irina is but I've seen Gemma on Hollyoaks. I do not think breast implants are a good thing from a purly physical point of view. The surgury is invasive, it destroys natural breast tissue /shape, it is not permanent and another surgery is inevitable.
3. Corsets are grand unless I see them as an analogy for the oppression and control of women in society but I dont so they're grand. I wouldnt wear them though.
Yeah Barbie makes me seeth, cause my boyfriend looks just like GI Joe. Get real. I played with all sorts of dolls and none of them gave me any complexes. My mother was my role model in life and she always ensured I healthy body image. How? By never even mentioning the words body image.
And Maria Sheriff looks like Chris Crocker
Haifa has had three quarters of her original nose lobbed off.
Hannah: You have odd preferences if you find Maria Sheriff ugly. She isn’t young anymore, but I don’t have large pictures of her from when she was young. An older woman or two in the attractive women section should not be a problem, just as a few not very feminine women there isn’t a problem.
David: I don’t have an attraction to well-developed muscularity in women. Female wrestlers are bound to have above average muscularity or they wouldn’t fit in a wrestler mould. If you consider the muscularity requirement, then Torrie Wilson is among the better looking women with her level of muscularity.
Gemma Atkinson is in the average to slightly masculine range with respect to masculinity-femininity. She has above average attractiveness.
Which Irina are you talking bout?
I don’t like the look of corsets when they make the waist cartoonishly small. Other than this, I don’t know what to say.
More: Please stick to a single alias. Haifa Wehby has a round face, not an oval one, and her skin isn’t like ivory, but light brown (very light brown with minimal sun exposure). Her face looks more feminine than Maria Sheriff’s, and Haifa is more curvaceous, but borders on the overweight. Anabella Hilal doesn’t have sufficient curves, and it is difficult to judge her attractiveness based on your picture. Both these Middle Eastern women have above average attractiveness.
Zonneschijn: Please stick to a single alias. I mostly avoid porn models. I have Grace Kelly among the randomly shown images on the intro/home page. Diane Kruger isn’t feminine and I found no woman by the name of Janne Wissenner. If you have pictures of feminine and attractive mainstream actresses, mention their names or send me their images and I will have a look.
Oliana: To post pictures, upload them to sites like imageshack.us or hidebehind.com. Then post the urls of the images they give you or the codes for displaying the images at blogs/forums. You may also email the images to me.
Worried: Most women shown within this site are not porn models. There are a lot of nude models, but I have few alternatives at the time being.
Sandy: I recently improved the intro page, and on this page I ask people to read the FAQ. So the site purpose should be within easy access for people stumbling across this site.
I apologize for people squabbling at the blog, but there are few such instances. Please ignore them. If you read this site every now an then, you know who they are. If it gets worse, I will ask people to take their petty disputes elsewhere.
Justanothergirl: I appreciate your comments especially since they are coming from a woman whose looks are not flattered by this site. Don’t be surprised if you occasionally see a feminine contestant in America’s Next Top Model competition or something similar. To make these contests more palatable to the general public, they may throw in a few feminine ones, but the feminine ones will be eliminated.
Don’t believe that an ideal wait-to-hip ratio is 0.7. This was hyped up in the 1990s, but there were methodological shortcomings in the studies by Singh and others; some studies have shown an optimal preference for lower values. Attractiveness is a matter of overall looks. A woman with a higher WHR can look overall better than one with a lower WHR.
You mentioned an English study where women preferred thin models to the average woman. This may be because the average females the participants saw were overweight and the models thin but not too skinny. In Western societies, somewhat thin women are generally preferred to somewhat overweight women. On the other hand, there have been some studies where women preferred thinner models, but these have been in specific contexts discussed here; the overall find is that women are made to feel worse about themselves after viewing thin fashion models. If you find out who did the English study, let me know and I will have a look.
People haven’t been brainwashed to see masculine features as more appealing or else how would controlled laboratory studies generally show the opposite?
Nastya: I am not describing masculinized female models as men. If high cheekbones are selected for to facilitate make-up, why should the face be important for “clothes hangars”? The high cheekbones simply add a more masculine look, which the designers are looking for.
My idea of beauty is not women from adult sites. The issue is how women look rather than what they do. I don’t have much of a choice but to heavily rely on adult sites for the time being. Your own examples are not of feminine beauty. Monica Belluci is an attractive woman, but not a feminine beauty. Laetitia Casta isn’t an example of feminine beauty either; I will address her at some point. You can find pictures of her where it is clear that her backside is somewhat flattened and hips not sufficiently wide. Try others, and you will see that there are few prominent mainstream examples of feminine beauty, but there will be lots of them when I am successful with this site.
Marquardt’s mask has high cheekbones, is invalid, and has been formally refuted.
E: My argument isn’t that high cheekbones are unattractive, but that masculinization is associated with a higher placement of the cheekbones on the face. Since attractiveness in women is strongly associated with above average femininity, a greater proportion of women considered attractive by most people will have lower cheekbones than higher cheekbones compared to average. On a similar note, even though you haven’t heard of people praising square jaws in women, it wouldn’t be difficult to find pictures of square-jawed women who would be regarded as attractive by most as well as admirers of square-jawed women.
I hope that you are not confusing more horizontally prominent cheekbones (irrelevant to high cheekbones) with the vertical placement of the cheekbones (what matters to whether one has high cheekbones).
Size Queen: Thank you for mentioning the youtube video. I haven’t been interested in models’ measurements. See enough pictures of them and it is obvious what kind of physiques they possess.
I am not a white supremacist/nationalist. Even if I were one, all my arguments backed up by empirical evidence would still stand. It is a shame that you would retract your initial good impression of this site based on the perceived racist beliefs of the author. An argument stands on what kind of evidence backs it up, not the motives or proclivities of the author. I do not have an obsession with detail. I need detail to have an impact, and I will have an impact.
Debra: I am pleased that you like to deal with facts. So do I, and you will find facts aplenty within this site. Judge this site by the facts presented, not by the omission of non-white women, the reasons for which are clearly explained on the FAQ page.
Debra: I didn’t say that 80% of molestations in general are committed by homosexuals. The 80% figure is from a specific study on priests. Homosexual and bisexual individuals are overrepresented among child molesters. This link is part of a sexuality section that makes it clear that abnormal sexuality is much more characteristic of homosexuals and bisexuals, just as increased criminality is too.
Whereas the average woman has gained weight over the past few decades, she hasn’t gained 3 inches in height. Please don’t tell me that women in general have imposed the standards on themselves that people think the fashion industry is responsible for. Why then do controlled laboratory studies show an overwhelming preference for a healthy body weight and above average femininity in the looks of women on the part of contemporary Western women?
I don’t prefer to bombard people with stats and facts. To avoid accusations of subjective arguments, I need to back up my arguments with empirical evidence. Even so, I get accused of making political arguments (See “Digital” above). Imagine what would happen if I didn’t have the stats to back myself up.
Erik:
1. 80% of molestations are not perpetrated by homosexuals. It is acknowledged by social scientists and law enforcment that the most likely perpetrator in the case of the molestation of a child is a close family friend or a family member who would lead what would be described as a heterosexual life. To suggest that the molestation indicates underlying homosexuality is also an invalid inference. Paedophilia is a prediliction independent of sexual orientation. It is a myth that sexual deviance and crime is largly the preserve of homosexuals.
2. The average stats of the model have indeed changed over the years but so to have the average stats of women in gerneral. The average height has gone from 5ft4' to 5ft7'. The average waist from 26 inches to 32. The average dress size from 10 to 14.
3. The fashion industry does not set out to set standards for womens beauty. It is women who impose these standards on themselves. It is patronizing to suggest that the industry should take responsibility for poor self image. Women should build a confidence in themselves
without help from the fashion industry. There will always be those, both men and women and in areas other than the fashion industry who will never be satisfied with what they have or look like. This is a human trait which is most prevalent in affluent societies where people do not utilise emotional energy on where to find their next meal or being able to afford clothes and shelter.
4. Just as societies with low average wealth (in relative terms) admire a fuller figure as an indication of health and wealth, western societies idealise the slim physique as it suggests spartan living and absence of gluttony and over indulgence.
As you seem to prefer to bombard people with stats and facts to justify your personal views at least verify them first. Otherwise you are simply indulging in reverse engineering of your arguments.
Whipped honey: You tell us that most heterosexual men are attracted to teenage girls even though they have a preference for adult women. This means that their attraction to adult women is stronger. Significant attraction toward girls in their late teens is understandable, but the historical marriage issues had nothing to do with “typical” attraction to teenage girls because too few heterosexual men have/had an interest in girls in their early- to mid-teens strong enough to prefer them to young adult women as stable/main partners. This discussion has digressed here, and I still have to respond there.
You left a comment on why there are more homosexuals in the Catholic priesthood than in the general population. The estimate range I gave you says this clearly, so why repeat the point? The question is, if homosexuals are not overrepresented among child molesters, then why is 25-50% of a population responsible for 80% of the molestations?
I am not posting lengthy text if it is tangential to this site. What is your problem with downloading a zipped file? When you access a web page, you download its contents to your computer, and these could malware without requiring you to download a zipped file. Why would I add malware to a zipped file offered for download? If I had gzipped output enabled, your browser would be downloading this page as a zipped file. Anyway, the updated contents of the zip file have been posted at a different site, which you eventually ran into.
I have clearly stated that the primary purpose of this site isn’t to counter the negative effects of skinny models on some women. So why say, “I don't believe that your primary motivation...”?
Quote:
It isn’t about being feminine, but about being feminine and very attractive. Feminine and very attractive women will usually not pose nude. So it isn’t that I am able to find pictures of lots of feminine and very attractive women. Without some mainstream outlet, most such women are not coming to the limelight. Why do I want to establish at least one mainstream outlet for feminine beauty appreciation? Most men are naturally interested in beautiful women. This needs no explanation; most men are born this way. However, most men are unable to do anything about what is going on. I haven’t seen others trying to bring feminine beauty to the limelight, and I believe that I can do this though it will take time, and hence have taken the task upon myself.
Digital: Your beef is with me. Don't criticize this site because you encounter “bitter, petty minded tirades” in the comments since these are by those not affiliated with this site. The article being commented on is a straightforward one, documenting the dominance of the fashion industry by male homosexuals, and it is argued in the context of explaining the looks of female fashion models. Off-topic issues such as basketball teams and priests are of little relevance to the article.
Blaming female designers and photographers for the looks of female high-fashion models is laughable. They are underrepresented among the powerful individuals in the fashion business. And there has been no trend toward shorter female high-fashion models. In the second half of the twentieth century, the average height of female fashion models increased (link 1, link 2). The average female high-fashion model is about 5-foot-10; most of them cluster around this value tightly. Kate Moss is an anomaly with respect to height, but anomalies do not change the average tendency. It is also easy to see how Kate Moss made it big. When she was discovered, in her mid-teens, she bore an uncanny resemblance to boys in their early adolescence, which more than compensated for her lack of height.
Your argument about what women prefer in the looks of women is based on a few anecdotes, whereas I have cited numerous studies showing that most men and most women have similar preferences for women’s looks.
Whereas this site does not address male attractiveness, it would be easy to look up ratings of male attractiveness by women in numerous studies and show that women generally prefer men with above average masculinity in the physique. So don’t bother trying to explain the effeminate physiques of numerous male models in terms of female preferences.
You mentioned a website and some prominent magazines for gay men, but these do not help us infer the preferences of the homosexuals. By law, there cannot be mainstream sources for homosexual men interested in nude boys (less than 18). And you write, “Erik's obssessive belief that gay mags must surely represent an early learning toy catalogue.”! Whereas it is true that many homosexual men prefer muscular men, a substantial proportion of them prefer young boys, much greater than the proportion of heterosexual men who prefer young girls.
Who do you think has assumed “that the current state of fashion represents what has always been in fashion?” Not me (see this article about twentieth century trends), not Danielle (she has mentioned the trends elsewhere) and I don’t think any of the others either.
You gave one anecdotal example of a homosexual treating models nicely and a heterosexual driving them to tears, whereas the truth is that mental illnesses such as sadism/masochism/sadomasochism are much more prevalent among homosexuals and bisexuals. The S&M imagery coming from the fashion industry is overwhelmingly the product of the homosexuals in it.
You have describe this blog as political and described the arguments as “The authors only see what they want to see, and fragmentary or vague evidence is seized upon, hyped up and trumpeted as gospel truth.” The quote applies to your comment. Look around this site; the arguments are extensively backed by citations, the majority from peer-reviewed journals. You, on the other hand, come with so reasonable statements such as wondering whether I am repressing homosexual desires!
I am not describing every tall and slim woman as masculine. I have clearly stated that there are plenty of tall and feminine women around. I have also shown numerous examples of slim women who are feminine (example).
Recent trend in among fashion models cannot be blamed on the preferences of upper class white heterosexual individuals. The studies that have documented an overwhelming preference for above average femininity and a healthy body weight in women have not shown a tendency for upper class white individuals to prefer thin and masculine-looking women compared to their lower class counterparts.
What do you mean there is an increasing fondness for lesbian experimentation in colleges and universities? The prevalence of reported homosexual behavior in women has increased over the past two decades, but the most obvious explanation is that with diminishing stigma against homosexuality, a greater proportion of women with a homosexual component to their attractions have participated in lesbian sex. This is not the same as more women experimenting with homosexuality.
I am not prone to obsessions. What you see in the form of this site is required to bring about change. If there is a better way to achieve change, I am unaware of it. Blonde women are a minority within this site. Even if they are overrepresented, this overrepresentation is no more racist than the overrepresentation of men in prison is sexist. Look up high-end models working as fashion models, fitness models or other major types of models...Northern Europeans are overrepresented, period.
When a photographer takes a shot of a busty model/subject in a reclining
pose or lying on her back they will sometimes adjust clothing or use devices such as straps or tape to prevent the breasts from falling to the sides. This is an industry fact. So just because Tyras breasts did not fall to the side does not mean that they are fake. Breast size also fluctuates with overall weight and it is obvious that when Trya retired from editorial and runway modeling she put on weight. I dont see the inference you're making about her nose job. This procedure is not confined to any paticular race. Eye lid sugery is an interesting phenomonon in Asia but is not widespread. A chinese friend used to find my double eyelids funny looking and not paticularily attractive! Plenty of white women try to darken their skin, plump up their lips and get nose jobs. Generalisation makes for a weak argument. A circle of inference.
eBambi
The Models - Photographers (but not only) social network.
Join now:
http://www.ebambi.com
Definitely Debra. I retract what I said about this website being wonderful. For a male to be this obsessively detailed about beauty that he does not possess or inhabit shows deep psychological issues. my guess that you are a white nationalist or racialist Erik and thsi is your way of spreading Social Darwinism disguised as beauty theory. You are NOT female so unless you're really a woman you are essentially of talking out your ass regarding something you can never experience or really understand.
Sweet halelujah you are so damn right. Why if I had my way the fairer sex would have a upper age limit, 30, like that film with whats his name. Then they would be piled into the back of a big 'ol pick up truck and dumped off the nearest cliff. Then, you could get another one, younger ya know, with nice titties and a tight ass, although you'd have to brainwash her into going anywhere near your wrinkly ol cock but hey, a mans gotta do what a mans gotta do right? Am I right? Eirk, imposing it on her is highly recommended! But your idea about electrocutin her ass is worth a go first. I have a big generator out back, and crocodile clips. Just bring her round larry! She wont know what hit her. I can put some nightol in her tea. When she wakes up she'll be able to bounce on it! Might put some life in your wizened old meat and 2 veg as well!!! And she'll no longer have to close her eyes and dream of Sean Connerey, one of the few men who get less physically repulsive with age!!!!!!!! Yeee hawwwwwwwwwww!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Maria Sheriff is Okay but if you ask me do I find she pretty? I'll say I don't find she is pretty, but she looks okay. Her face looks not balance,no chin, no eyelid, the down lip is thicker than the upper lip and the last one I'd mention. what do you find pretty in her erik?
I will give you the example of very beautifull women in my thinking.
here Arab singer
why I find this Arab woman is pretty.
1. she has very magical eyes and they attacted people to look, only the eyes already prettier, sparker than the eyes of maria sheriff.
2. she has oval face, her face looks balance not too narrow and not too board.
3. she has beautifull nose.
4. she has hour glass shape
5. she has a kind of face that I'd call it "internation face" the face like her can adapt, make up to look like every nations.
6. she has beautifull skin tone, white ivory, looks clean and bright, not too white too remind u the deadly body or not too dark.
And last one Anabella Helall. This true beauty! =)
Past her prime? Quality of women? You are a strange individual. You are a mysoginist. Do you have any respect for women at all? And why are there so many almost pornographic, sorry, 'glamour' shots? I actually think you are a shit stirrer and dont really believe half the crap that you put on this site. You act like all triggers to all people, racist, homophobic, mysoginistic. I bet you are a black gay transvestite with no
genetalia. Or at least wish you were.
There are indeed disturbing white supremicist under-currents in this website. I slowly began to realise this the more i explored it. I work in a scientific field and I often find both peoples prejudices and also their sensitivities cloud issues. I always like to deal in facts and obviously there are differences between peoples and what each group of peoples consider attractive. A close friend of mine with whom I lived while at college was from Beijing, China and we would often discuss the differences in both her and my (western europe) societies attitudes on attractivness. I find the attempts to explain the noticible absence of non white women on this website almost laughable if there were not so pernicious. The feeble attempts to intellectualise this attitude is transparent.
PS
To the web designer: Are you a white nationalist or white supremacist? I ask this with complete seriousness.
You may find this fascinating:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3PwdHSu9sQ
It deals with how madonna and models like Gisele Bundchen claim much more hourglass and busty stats/measurements then they actually possess.
Here is also a great blog post by Super Amanda:
http://superamanda.blogspot.com/2007_01_01_archive.html
Scroll down.
You have a wonderful website.
Thanks
Ho ho ho, Erik, you ARE a racist! AND a complete fuck up! I was suspicious of your constant postings of only milky white blondes in your 'attractive women' section and the above postings only prove my, and several others' suspicions correct. Plus, I read the first twenty or so pages of your idiotic book published by iUniverse as a PDF. I cannot believe anyone actually gave you a high school diploma, much less a publishing deal. YOU CANNOT WRITE. Your syntax is more confused than your sexuality (and fuck me if it isn't!) and your jargon-filled text is absurd, disguising the most laughably simplistic assumptions on sexual identity under a flimsy blanket of unconvincing verbiage. You sad, screwed up, self infatuated little no talent. You resemble an academic like Jesse Jackson resembles a Klansman (and you should know what THEY look like, Grand Dragon!) And let's face it, no one who posts here actually holds you in any regard. You, of all the perverted, sexually stunted little cunts on Earth, calling ANYONE else 'mentally challenged'?! For sexual dysfunction, you make Jack the Ripper look like Casanova! You're mentally, emotionally AND erotically challenged! Poor, poor Erik... BTW, pal, we all know what's really going on in the heads of poor bastards like you who prate on and on about the 'homosexual agenda'. You probably consider those busty blondes no more attractive than your grossly stereotyped fashion designers would. Fess up, you sad case. And enjoy the rest of your life.
Wow, just looking over the rest of the site, you really are obssessed, aren't you Erik? BTW, can we take your over-emphasis on blonde models as proof of your racism? If not, why not? It wouldn't be any more presumptuous than your manipulative, ahem carefully selected 'reliable sources'.
As an afterthought, were you molested? Sorry if that were the case. But it would explain your tacky little fixation. Or maybe repressed feelings of homosexual attraction are what's at work here. Oh, who cares. You're clearly a f**k up regardless.
Um, just came across this blog, interesting at least. But it seems that too many here, wanting to draw attention to the psychological maladies or eccentricities of others, are oblivious to their own. Bitter, petty minded tirades are appearing every other post, and scrolling down this blog unleashes a maddening whirlwind of perverted priests, gender denying fashionistas, 'white trash' glamour girls and all white basketball teams. This is less of a reasoned debate than a rattle-tossing flamewar! Yes, I wonder if fashion's emphasis on the tall, lithe female type contains a subtle homoerotic subtext. But as more female designers and photographers (Prada, Jil Sander, Stella McCartney, Corrine Day, Elaine Constantine, Ellen von Unwerth et al) came onto the scene, quirky, shorter girls such as Kate Moss and Devon Aoki have been seen on the runways along with the Grecian goddesses. I think it's precisely the growing presence of female creatives which is driving the drift toward youth, in models of both sexes.
Designers such as Halston, Dior and Gaultier would never have launched the careers of childlike drips such as Kate Moss or Twiggy (styled and launched at 16 by her then boyfriend Justin de Villeneuve and a favourite of the very hetero David Bailey). Self possessed, even matriarchal women dominate the imaginations of gay men, both in the repressed past and the liberated present. Gay mens' female icons: Bette Davis, Rosalind Russell, Joan Crawford. Womens' idea of female perfection: Audrey Hepburn, a sexless, Bambi-eyed lollipop whose extreme thinness resulted from childhood starvation.
And visit the male model forum 'modelhommes.com' to observe the differences between gay mens' and (young) womens' ideas of what is attractive in guys. The slender, elfin Mathias Lauridsen has few male admirers, whereas girls love his looks precisely because of his self-effacing, shy boyishness. One girl on 'The Fashion Spot' even encourages posts of boyish looking guys such as Stas Svetlichnyy under the premise of 'boys against men'. A bitter, misguided feminism runs under a great deal of the use of men in modern advertising; ads for trendy, youth oriented products such as mp3 players and mobile communications often feature slender, longhaired males who are more apparently feminine than the 'girlfriends' pictured next to them. They have almost no place in gay culture. Quite the contrary, shaven headed beefcakes full of attitude are what gay guys seem to want, just flick through a gay magazine to find out. Ruby lipped teenagers are actually thin on the ground there, despite Erik's obssessive belief that gay mags must surely represent an early learning toy catalogue. A 'twink' subculture exists, but it certainly doesn't seem to be the gay norm.
And why does everyone assume that the current state of fashion represents what has always been in fashion? Women such as Cindy Crawford, Claudia Schiffer and Naomi Campbell may be unusually tall and slender, but they were nothing like the mopey, stick-like, rabbits in headlights that skulk along the catwalk now. Miuccia Prada, above all, seems to favour the palest, youngest and most abashed looking girls. Vivienne Westwood sent the then 13 year old Rachael Kirby down her catwalk in the late nineties. Seventies models such as Iman, Jerry Hall and Marie Helvin were slim, sure, but healthy and confident too. Heterosexual Guy Bourdin reduced several models to tears with the pornographic and violent themes of his shoots. Homosexual Herb Ritts received praise from Cindy Crawford, a woman with a 165 IQ, because 'he photographed women as they wanted to be seen'.
This is the problem with blogs like this, which are political at heart. The authors only see what they want to see, and fragmentary or vague evidence is seized upon, hyped up and trumpeted as gospel truth. And furthermore, what looks good in clothes and what looks good out of them sometimes ARE different. As a 17 year old guy, I stood at 6'2" and weighed just 10 stones, with a 27 inch waist. I looked great in clothes. At 33, I weigh 14 stones and work out. I look far better in the buff than I used to, but I'll never work a suit the same way. Curves look fantastic in a bikini, incongruous in a Grecian column.
Good luck in your quest to promote the archetypally feminine beauty. Most women have broad hips and full breasts, and should be happy to possess a look that is healthy and sensual. But why do you think that an emphasis on 'hourglass' figures (most women will never have the 24 inch waists of your 'womanlike' examples) and tiny facial features (some women have small eyes, strong chins and angular bone structure) is any less arbitrary? By positing every tall slim woman as 'masculine', you're hardly doing your bit for female self esteem, are you?!
To be honest, I think that the peculiar recent trends in fashion have their roots not in gay mens' collective psychology, but in a sex-denying drift in white middle class culture. Archetypal femininity in image reflects the same thing in mind, and bourgeois womens' minds are focusing less and less on family and caregiving and more on self fulfillment. In ethnic and white working class cultures where family is your reason for existing, not just a 'lifestyle choice', the curvy 'babe' still rules, as does the fully grown hunk. Black or Latina women have no time whatsoever for the hollow chested, permanently anxious boy rockers and Euro teens who white middle class girls fall head over heels for, from Gerard Way and Pete Doherty to the hollow cheeked blandards of the Paris and Milan shows. And of course, an increasing fondness for lesbian experimentation is taking place in colleges and universities, partly as a bitter rejection of everything 'patriarchal'. But, there you go. Erik obviously has his issues (and how!), and the agitprop girls love to blame everybody but themselves for their unhappiness, so gay guys will get it in the neck again. Even if, like the majority, they've never had any interest in female fashion whatsoever.
Thanks Eric for your nod of approval for tall women. If you had explored this site you would see that concern over the weight of women as a threat to her health is bottom of the list. Using it, as well as height and 'masculine' facial features, as another example of why she should not be considered beautiful or attractive to men seems the primary objective. My post was commenting on the entire site, not just the article on weight. I have seen close at hand very slim healthy girls and girls with genuine weight problems such as anorexia and believe me there is a difference. It is just another form of inverse discrimination to lambast all girls who are very slim. In reference to your remark, I neither expressly said or inferred your definition of 'child like bodies'. I said plump women with infantile features i.e. fair hair, full cheeks, big eyes and full red lips. This was for many centuries considered the most attractive female form in Europe. Wanting to be a stone lighter and starving yourself to death are worlds apart. There is a far higher rate of eating disorders in the general population than in the modelling industry. Blaming it on the industry would require you to ignore the documented history of the disease which extends a long way further back than when 'thin was in'. The issue is not black and white.
Debra, the major issue is that these women are very light.
At no point has the problem been one of models’ height.
Stature matters little to beauty; taller women are all right.
Men liked child-like bodies? LOL! Please browse this site.
1. I think they look mad altogether. I saw a program about them on TG4. They like what they do so fair play and there are men who like it too, although not all of them are 100% upstairs. Anyways, it is not about being attractive to the opposite sex. e.g. Arnold Scwartzenegger
2.I dont know who Irina is but I've seen Gemma on Hollyoaks. I do not think breast implants are a good thing from a purly physical point of view. The surgury is invasive, it destroys natural breast tissue /shape, it is not permanent and another surgery is inevitable.
3. Corsets are grand unless I see them as an analogy for the oppression and control of women in society but I dont so they're grand. I wouldnt wear them though.
Yeah Barbie makes me seeth, cause my boyfriend looks just like GI Joe. Get real. I played with all sorts of dolls and none of them gave me any complexes. My mother was my role model in life and she always ensured I healthy body image. How? By never even mentioning the words body image.
Are you serious? Malformed nose? This is just hipocrasy, replacing one set of crazy standards with another.
Pages