Sure, Miranda Kerr's nose looks "broad"... but it's beautiful. She is beautiful. There are so many types of beauty.
I respect your extensive effort in trying to help women with eating disorders by "setting right" the fashion/beauty industry.
But what I can't understand is how you believe changing the worldly definition of "feminine beauty" from what you consider to be the "masculine norm" into your personally-defined "feminine ratio" is going to solve the problem of women not feeling they are beautiful enough.
So long as there are people meticulously dissecting, analyzing, and documenting the exact proportions of beauty, there will be women feeling they are not up to par.
You think an hourglass figure makes a woman femininely beautiful? It is truly lovely, I agree. Yet there are a vast number of women with very different statures outside that definition which still possess incredible and unique loveliness. Hopefully they have people in their lives who appreciate, cherish, and proclaim their personal beauty prior to them finding "scientifically" critical sites such as yours.
Please: Take your research, effort, and hours of meticulous research/documentation and put them to a better use that will truly work on solving some of humanity's greater problems.
Krisa: I am not concerned about bad English in the comments; my concern is with the comprehension, and those with bad English are likely to misunderstand this site. You have failed to understand this site. This site is not concerned with the worth of women or who deserves to be loved.
I am not telling models or those with models’ looks to be sexually involved with specific types of individuals.
If you go through the attractive women section, you will encounter some small-breasted women; I just added one; see the previous article. Femininity does not lie in large breasts, and I am myself not into breasts; if a woman is feminine I care not whether she has small or large breasts, and if I were forced to choose, I'd prefer medium.
This site is about brining feminine beauty to the limelight. It is not about telling women how they should look.
It is inevitable that some women will be upset by it, but most people naturally harbor feminine beauty standards and I am promoting a natural and healthy standard since it cannot be acquired by indulgence in negative health behaviors; the goal is to have more feminine women among models and beauty pageant contestants.
Your poor understanding also reflects in your posting the comment here, where I am talking about an attractive somewhat masculinized woman and arguing that she is better suited to a reproductive task compared to the typical feminine woman.
Hugh Ristik: I will consider placing a prominent link regarding self-esteem issues.
Whipped honey: You have your own definition of femininity, which makes the typical woman feminine. So why ask what proportion of women are feminine?
Physical femininity within a sex is straightforward. Regarding masculine-feminine variation as normally distributed (Gaussian distribution), women deviating from the mean would either be at the masculine or feminine side of the mean. Therefore, the upper limit of the proportion of women who will be feminine within their sex is close to 50%. Since physical features are shaped by many factors other than sex hormones, it will usually be difficult to visually rank women’s femininity if they are close, i.e., it would be difficult to separate values around the mean, around which the majority of women cluster. It should be easy to distinguish those separated by at least one standard deviation (S.D.). So it is safe to say that at least 16% of women are visually feminine within their sex. If I consider the threshold of the distinguishability to be 0.5 S.D., then about 31% of the women will be visually feminine. So basically, the proportion of women who are feminine is close to 50%, but upon visual inspection, this proportion is at least 16% and likely close to 30%.
Prasiddha: Corrina is not feminine, but she is attractive to me nevertheless.
Whipped honey: Teenagers are considered children for a variety of purposes, especially if they are in their mid- or early-teens. If I replace “children” with “teenagers,” the question will still remain. It is not just mini-dresses; the designers prefer to use teenage girls to model other types of clothes also. And the video addresses a girl being made to model a mother with kids.
You need to stop disputing the studies that I cite unless you have read them. The graph you see above does not appear in the study. I made it from their data, and to do so I had to look at it, and although this was years ago, I don’t think I misread the data. They did not report the data on the mid-teen stimuli even though they criticized other studies for not using stimuli in this range, and it should be obvious why.
If I replace “underage” with “children” or “individuals less that age 16,” the point will remain regardless of what the age of consent is. I am not addressing a wrong vs. right issue here but why fashion designers prefer teenage girl models to young adults.
It doesn’t make “any sense” for homosexual men to be strongly attracted to boys in their late teens, and you would know this if the authors had presented the full data; just click on the link in my reply to Rob. Hopefully, you will realize that the sexual preferences of homosexuals are not an issue of what makes sense and what doesn’t. Homosexuals interested in boys typically want to sodomize them, not be sodomized by them, and hence your point about the age at which male virility peaks is not relevant.
So wait Erik, I didn't quite catch that. Maybe I was unable to grasp your wording, but is Corinna physically feminine or not? I remember asking this question a while ago (is this your answer?).
Francois, I was saying the same thing. It's absurd to apply "derivation" to nasal structure, and likewise rank that on attractiveness. The royalty of Saudi Arabia, for example, have almost grotesquely large noses. Among the largest I've seen among humans.
HughRistik, I am very skeptical of your statement that straight men don't find a toned woman attractive. I don't know what makes you an expert on what most men find sexually attractive but since you are one you may know more than I do. I see girls who look like this all the time. There is absolutely nothing special about the way she looks.
When I spoke of muscle tone I am not suggesting that she needs to look like a body builder or a fitness model. If this girl worked out she would probably have shapelier arms and legs and she could have a flat stomach. Right now she looks like she is all fat and I don't find that attractive. She can get away with it because she is very young but in a few years it will start to get ugly
Erik, please provide a source for your claim that Hugh Hefner has admitted to experimenting with bisexuality, a reputable, verifiable source. Otherwise, you’re just rumormongering.
The source he provided is the BBC news. I would call them reputable and verifiable. While I would have liked to see a quote from Hef himself about his bisexuality to be absolutely sure, I think this is pretty strong evidence.
1. Self-reporting about sexual matters is notoriously unreliable even with total anonymity; people often lie to themselves about their sexuality, so it’s not stretch that they might lie to themselves when answering a survey.
2. Men who are “life-time exclusive heterosexual” in their BEHAVIOR can still be bisexual in their FEELINGS - and men who repress their bisexual feelings are highly likely to tell a surveyor that they have never had bisexual feelings. It’s called denial.
I agree that many men with bisexual feelings and even behaviors might not report them. (Though I don't think men with bisexual feelings can be considered exclusively heterosexual.) However, it seems biased and close-minded to dismiss these surveys based on that possibility. Say that it's really 25-30% of men who have at least some same-sex behavior or feelings in their lives, rather than 20%, as Erik says. That doesn't really change any of his conclusions, as long as the majority of men are lifetime-exclusive heterosexual (for which there is no rational reason to believe otherwise based on the current evidence).
If “lifetime-exlusive heterosexuality” is what causes men to prefer “feminine” women, then why do some bisexual men prefer “feminine” women, such as the bisexual Lawrence Olivier’s marriage to the “feminine” Vivien Leigh, which ended only because her then-untreatable bipolar disorder made life with her unbearable? If a man who says he is straight but prefers “masculinized” women is probably not “lifetime exclusive heterosexual”, then does a bisexual man’s preference for “feminine” women prove his not really bisexual?
I don't think so. The fact that bisexual men might prefer more masculinity in women than heterosexual men does not mean that there aren't plenty of bisexual men who's preferences are overlapping, or even indistinguishable from straight men. Furthermore, there is greater variability in queer men than in straight men on various dimensions, so the over-representation of bisexual men in the category of men who prefer masculinized features in women could simply be due to greater variability in their preferences (though my suspicion is that on average, bisexual men are more likely to prefer masculinization in women, not just at the extremes).
krisa said: You are telling us how girls who don’ fit in your “feminine” shapes are worthless and not worth being loved or to love!? that’s how i get it.
That's not how I'm reading Erik. Though maybe I interpret him differently because I've read most of his writing, and because I am a man and less likely to take it personally since this website is not about the shape of my body.
I interpreted Erik saying in this post that the woman is attractive despite having somewhat masculinized features.
In reading Erik's writings as a whole, the sense I'm getting is this:
The role of masculinization in female attractive is a matter of degree. A bit of masculinization can make a woman actually sexier than otherwise (I don't remember the link, but I'm sure Erik will provide it when he responds). But as you look at women who are more and more masculinized, there are less and less typical straight men who are attracted to them, or the men who are most attracted to them are less likely to be straight.
Erik is not saying that masculinized women "not worth being loved or to love." Rather, he is saying that less typically straight men will be attracted to them. That doesn't mean that there won't still be a decent amount of men who find them attractive, and if a particular masculinized women can find someone in that pool of men, then she has nothing to worry about.
Women with a moderate level of masculinization can still be attractive to many men, even typically straight men... they just won't be able to reach the elite levels of attractiveness to most straight men to justify having them in modeling or in beauty pageants. That is a bar that most women, feminine or not, will not reach, so no woman should feel bad that she can't reach it.
The ultimate judge of your attractiveness is what happens in your interactions with men in the real world. If you have men in your life who are into you, then you have no reason to worry about your looks. There are plenty of women, even with masculinized features, who are plenty attractive enough to find a man that they can be happy with. These women shouldn't feel bad just because, as Erik points out, they aren't at the elite level of attractiveness to most men that they should be doing fashion modeling or beauty pageants.
but attraction and stuff.... you are blowing of self-esteem of skinny and not-so-feminine girls who can’t do anyting about it while are you pumping it up for the big-boobed and wide-hipped girls.
Erik thinks in a way that is rigorous and logical, but don't quite know how to communicate his ideas in a way that is emotionally aware. That is why he was surprised, for instance, when someone like Melisande was hurt when he described her as masculinized, even while acknowledging that she was beautiful (though he seems to be becoming increasingly aware of this issue).
As I've suggested to him, it might help to have a disclaimer towards women reading the website that tells them what his ideas do and don't imply about them, their looks, and their attractiveness towards men. I know he mentions these subjects in a couple places, but I think he needs to put something from a link on the front page, with a blinking red 36pt font. Well, maybe that's a bit extreme, but you get the idea.
My compliments for putting this together so well. I wholeheartedly agree with you.
As for the comments by Adrian: I knew you wrote a few "dangerous" things, things that we almost are not allowed to say anymore, things that can be taken out of the context easily. Which is exactly what Adrian does. Don't let folks like him scare you off.
I am looking forward to any more articles on this site, I will bookmarm it !
Is she ultra-hot? Of course not. But she is quite cute. This is the type of girl that many heterosexual men would be thrilled to have as a girlfriend, and she looks approachable. She is definitely more attractive than the girl that she replaced (while there are a lot of women in the attractive women section that I like, there are still a few who are plain or unattractive in my opinion).
Danielle said: This girl has a terrible body! She has no muscle tone to speak of.
Wow. You really do not "get" heterosexual men at all. They do NOT find muscle tone attractive in women, or at most are indifferent to it. I'm not sure exactly how much muscle you mean by "muscle tone," and it is nice if a girl is fit and trim, but any pronounced musculature is unattractive. I can still be attracted to girls with a bit of musculature, but I think it is actually more of a minus than a bit of chubbiness.
In this case, if we consider that the more prominent nasal bones are, the more derived they are, hooked noses are then the most derived nose type, no ?
well thank you. i'm not questioning myself. i think some other girl can question herself. just like high fashion which is telling females to be super-skinny this guy erik is also telling us to be the opposite. but someone cannot just change him/herself and his body shape only because they are told how should they look like to be attractive.
Erik is terrible just like all those gay fashion makers are.
I am sure you are attractive. Don't let this website make you question yourself. This website contains so many flaws and mistakes that I will not even try to list them here. No, this guy does not speak for most straight men; he just thinks he does.
:-)
You are telling us how girls who don’ fit in your “feminine” shapes are worthless and not worth being loved or to love!? that’s how i get it. See, if i compare myself to your “feminine woman” i think i have feminine body, except fot the breasts which are rather small.. my face is both feminine and masculine. i have serious and loving relationship with a MAN very straight one, who of course, like every man and woman, questioned his sexual orientation once in his childhood. but he is more straight than most man i know, who fall for all those manlike supermodels you describe, he likes widw hips and full botties, he doesn’ care much bout breast as long they exist and are not ugly-shaped. he gives mine his full attention.
i’m a bit of bisexual, with many homosexual experiences, maybe that’s why i don’t find models unattractive? because i’m bisexual? so they all should be with girls or with bisexual men?
i mean, they have features of both gendres, so they can’t be good enough for straight oriented men?!
i think sexual attraction is more than that!
ofcourse it is about physichs, but it is about smell, about brains, about getting along…
i mean, you are right and agree with you when you’re talking about extremes, and anorexia because of media…
but attraction and stuff.... you are blowing of self-esteem of skinny and not-so-feminine girls who can’t do anyting about it while are you pumping it up for the big-boobed and wide-hipped girls.
You are telling us how girls who don' fit in your "feminine" shapes are worthless and not worth being loved or to love!? that's how i get it. See, if i compare myself to your "feminine woman" i think i have feminine body, except fot the breasts which are rather small.. my face is both feminine and masculine. i have serious and loving relationship with a MAN very straight one, who of course, like every man and woman, questioned his sexual orientation once in his childhood. but he is more straight than most man i know, who fall for all those manlike supermodels you describe, he likes widw hips and full botties, he doesn' care much bout breast as long they exist and are not ugly-shaped. he gives mine his full attention.
i'm a bit of bisexual, with many homosexual experiences, maybe that's why i don't find models unattractive? because i'm bisexual? so they all should be with girls or with bisexual men?
i mean, they have features of both gendres, so they can't be good enough for straight oriented men?!
i think sexual attraction is more than that!
ofcourse it is about physichs, but it is about smell, about brains, about getting along...
i mean, you are right and agree with you when you're talking about extremes, and anorexia because of media...
but attraction and stuff.... you are blowing of self-esteem of skinny and not-so-feminine girls who can't do anyting about it while are you pumping it up for the big-boobed and wide-hipped girls.
I stated that women use lingerie to put themselves in the mood. I should have added that women *also* use lingerie to put men in the mood; I overstated it when I said putting men in the mood is not a consideration at all.
Quote:
"Women generally use it to put their male partner in the mood. So what would be the basic marketing consideration? Obviously, “buy this lingerie and acquire this woman’s sex appeal [to heterosexual men].”
No, what should be the basic marketing consideration is, "Buy this lingerie and you will feel good about yourself sexually and that will make you confident and relaxed enough to put a heterosexual man in the mood."
The lingerie model's primary job is to project the woman's preferred self-image.
:down:
"Reading the lies such as that of women wishing androginous,manlier look for themselves"
Bron, I am not sure if this comment is directed to me, but if it is, I have never said that women wish to have an androgynous, manlier look *for themselves*. I said that some (not all) women unconsciously respond to an androgynous look in fashion models because women respond hormonally to masculinity.
I have never heard of a woman who wants to look manlier than she naturally does, except for those very rare women who actually want to be men, and that is a separate issue.
:blank:
"I am French and heterosexual, and I can assure you that this girl is the perfect girl...
She has the brazilian (small breasts, large backside) body that we love in the Mediterranean region.
Fascinating that French men generally prefer small breasts; white American men generally prefer big breasts.
Erik, do you have any data about racial/ethnic differences in male preferences in female body types?
:wow:
"Why are children used to model clothes for women in their 30s and 40s?"
Why are you calling teenagers children?
Why are you claiming that minidresses that barely cover the behind are marketed to women in the 30's and 40's when most of the women who wear such clothes are in their teens and 20's?
Quote:
"Note that the data concerning ratings of individuals aged 15-18 are not reported. Why do you think the authors never reported this data?"
The data concerning ratings of individuals aged 15-18 is reported in the category "late teens", which covers roughly 16-19, almost the exact same age range as 15-18.
"Underage" is an artificial construct of law, not nature. Depending on which country you're in, a 13-year-old may be of legal age or a 19-year-old may be underage.
Female fertility and fecundity peak in the early to mid 20's; male virility and libido peak in the late teens; therefore it makes perfect sense for heterosexual men to prefer women their early to mid 20's and for homosexual men to prefer men in their late teens, though according to this study, homosexual men like men in their early to mid 20's almost as much. What's wrong with that?
:blank:
Also, would you say there's a lack of models and the like with large jaws and cheekbones in the US? (though strongly feminine as well?) What could this be attributed to? There seems to be alot of variation when it comes to east asia in terms of that, but they're just pretty uncommon in western markets.
Also, one other thing to note about your site- in that one 7-part series, when you're comparing asian and european models to women from tribal and tradition societies, that's pretty..... poor. "Attractive" individuals are hard to come by in those societies due to how tightly-knit those populations are and thus leading to little pressure for truly attractive traits. There's also how those stressful lifestyles accentuate ageing and testosterone levels, contributing to greater masculinity.
I am French and heterosexual, and I can assure you that this girl is the perfect girl. Her face is very attractive and cute. She has the brazilian (small breasts, large backside) body that we love in the Mediterranean region. @ Danielle: About the muscled belly interest, only women and gays look at that. :-)
Sure, Miranda Kerr's nose looks "broad"... but it's beautiful. She is beautiful. There are so many types of beauty.
I respect your extensive effort in trying to help women with eating disorders by "setting right" the fashion/beauty industry.
But what I can't understand is how you believe changing the worldly definition of "feminine beauty" from what you consider to be the "masculine norm" into your personally-defined "feminine ratio" is going to solve the problem of women not feeling they are beautiful enough.
So long as there are people meticulously dissecting, analyzing, and documenting the exact proportions of beauty, there will be women feeling they are not up to par.
You think an hourglass figure makes a woman femininely beautiful? It is truly lovely, I agree. Yet there are a vast number of women with very different statures outside that definition which still possess incredible and unique loveliness. Hopefully they have people in their lives who appreciate, cherish, and proclaim their personal beauty prior to them finding "scientifically" critical sites such as yours.
Please: Take your research, effort, and hours of meticulous research/documentation and put them to a better use that will truly work on solving some of humanity's greater problems.
Krisa: I am not concerned about bad English in the comments; my concern is with the comprehension, and those with bad English are likely to misunderstand this site. You have failed to understand this site. This site is not concerned with the worth of women or who deserves to be loved.
I am not telling models or those with models’ looks to be sexually involved with specific types of individuals.
If you go through the attractive women section, you will encounter some small-breasted women; I just added one; see the previous article. Femininity does not lie in large breasts, and I am myself not into breasts; if a woman is feminine I care not whether she has small or large breasts, and if I were forced to choose, I'd prefer medium.
This site is about brining feminine beauty to the limelight. It is not about telling women how they should look.
It is inevitable that some women will be upset by it, but most people naturally harbor feminine beauty standards and I am promoting a natural and healthy standard since it cannot be acquired by indulgence in negative health behaviors; the goal is to have more feminine women among models and beauty pageant contestants.
Your poor understanding also reflects in your posting the comment here, where I am talking about an attractive somewhat masculinized woman and arguing that she is better suited to a reproductive task compared to the typical feminine woman.
Hugh Ristik: I will consider placing a prominent link regarding self-esteem issues.
Whipped honey: You have your own definition of femininity, which makes the typical woman feminine. So why ask what proportion of women are feminine?
Physical femininity within a sex is straightforward. Regarding masculine-feminine variation as normally distributed (Gaussian distribution), women deviating from the mean would either be at the masculine or feminine side of the mean. Therefore, the upper limit of the proportion of women who will be feminine within their sex is close to 50%. Since physical features are shaped by many factors other than sex hormones, it will usually be difficult to visually rank women’s femininity if they are close, i.e., it would be difficult to separate values around the mean, around which the majority of women cluster. It should be easy to distinguish those separated by at least one standard deviation (S.D.). So it is safe to say that at least 16% of women are visually feminine within their sex. If I consider the threshold of the distinguishability to be 0.5 S.D., then about 31% of the women will be visually feminine. So basically, the proportion of women who are feminine is close to 50%, but upon visual inspection, this proportion is at least 16% and likely close to 30%.
Prasiddha: Corrina is not feminine, but she is attractive to me nevertheless.
Jon: The article argues that over a broad range, height is not related to attractiveness in women.
Whipped honey: Teenagers are considered children for a variety of purposes, especially if they are in their mid- or early-teens. If I replace “children” with “teenagers,” the question will still remain. It is not just mini-dresses; the designers prefer to use teenage girls to model other types of clothes also. And the video addresses a girl being made to model a mother with kids.
You need to stop disputing the studies that I cite unless you have read them. The graph you see above does not appear in the study. I made it from their data, and to do so I had to look at it, and although this was years ago, I don’t think I misread the data. They did not report the data on the mid-teen stimuli even though they criticized other studies for not using stimuli in this range, and it should be obvious why.
If I replace “underage” with “children” or “individuals less that age 16,” the point will remain regardless of what the age of consent is. I am not addressing a wrong vs. right issue here but why fashion designers prefer teenage girl models to young adults.
It doesn’t make “any sense” for homosexual men to be strongly attracted to boys in their late teens, and you would know this if the authors had presented the full data; just click on the link in my reply to Rob. Hopefully, you will realize that the sexual preferences of homosexuals are not an issue of what makes sense and what doesn’t. Homosexuals interested in boys typically want to sodomize them, not be sodomized by them, and hence your point about the age at which male virility peaks is not relevant.
So wait Erik, I didn't quite catch that. Maybe I was unable to grasp your wording, but is Corinna physically feminine or not? I remember asking this question a while ago (is this your answer?).
Thanks.
Miss Norway, Argentina and Lebanon look very feminine don't they ?
Francois, I was saying the same thing. It's absurd to apply "derivation" to nasal structure, and likewise rank that on attractiveness. The royalty of Saudi Arabia, for example, have almost grotesquely large noses. Among the largest I've seen among humans.
HughRistik, I am very skeptical of your statement that straight men don't find a toned woman attractive. I don't know what makes you an expert on what most men find sexually attractive but since you are one you may know more than I do. I see girls who look like this all the time. There is absolutely nothing special about the way she looks.
When I spoke of muscle tone I am not suggesting that she needs to look like a body builder or a fitness model. If this girl worked out she would probably have shapelier arms and legs and she could have a flat stomach. Right now she looks like she is all fat and I don't find that attractive. She can get away with it because she is very young but in a few years it will start to get ugly
Whipped Honey said:
The source he provided is the BBC news. I would call them reputable and verifiable. While I would have liked to see a quote from Hef himself about his bisexuality to be absolutely sure, I think this is pretty strong evidence.
I agree that many men with bisexual feelings and even behaviors might not report them. (Though I don't think men with bisexual feelings can be considered exclusively heterosexual.) However, it seems biased and close-minded to dismiss these surveys based on that possibility. Say that it's really 25-30% of men who have at least some same-sex behavior or feelings in their lives, rather than 20%, as Erik says. That doesn't really change any of his conclusions, as long as the majority of men are lifetime-exclusive heterosexual (for which there is no rational reason to believe otherwise based on the current evidence).
I don't think so. The fact that bisexual men might prefer more masculinity in women than heterosexual men does not mean that there aren't plenty of bisexual men who's preferences are overlapping, or even indistinguishable from straight men. Furthermore, there is greater variability in queer men than in straight men on various dimensions, so the over-representation of bisexual men in the category of men who prefer masculinized features in women could simply be due to greater variability in their preferences (though my suspicion is that on average, bisexual men are more likely to prefer masculinization in women, not just at the extremes).
krisa said:
You are telling us how girls who don’ fit in your “feminine” shapes are worthless and not worth being loved or to love!? that’s how i get it.
That's not how I'm reading Erik. Though maybe I interpret him differently because I've read most of his writing, and because I am a man and less likely to take it personally since this website is not about the shape of my body.
I interpreted Erik saying in this post that the woman is attractive despite having somewhat masculinized features.
In reading Erik's writings as a whole, the sense I'm getting is this:
The role of masculinization in female attractive is a matter of degree. A bit of masculinization can make a woman actually sexier than otherwise (I don't remember the link, but I'm sure Erik will provide it when he responds). But as you look at women who are more and more masculinized, there are less and less typical straight men who are attracted to them, or the men who are most attracted to them are less likely to be straight.
Erik is not saying that masculinized women "not worth being loved or to love." Rather, he is saying that less typically straight men will be attracted to them. That doesn't mean that there won't still be a decent amount of men who find them attractive, and if a particular masculinized women can find someone in that pool of men, then she has nothing to worry about.
Women with a moderate level of masculinization can still be attractive to many men, even typically straight men... they just won't be able to reach the elite levels of attractiveness to most straight men to justify having them in modeling or in beauty pageants. That is a bar that most women, feminine or not, will not reach, so no woman should feel bad that she can't reach it.
The ultimate judge of your attractiveness is what happens in your interactions with men in the real world. If you have men in your life who are into you, then you have no reason to worry about your looks. There are plenty of women, even with masculinized features, who are plenty attractive enough to find a man that they can be happy with. These women shouldn't feel bad just because, as Erik points out, they aren't at the elite level of attractiveness to most men that they should be doing fashion modeling or beauty pageants.
but attraction and stuff.... you are blowing of self-esteem of skinny and not-so-feminine girls who can’t do anyting about it while are you pumping it up for the big-boobed and wide-hipped girls.
Erik thinks in a way that is rigorous and logical, but don't quite know how to communicate his ideas in a way that is emotionally aware. That is why he was surprised, for instance, when someone like Melisande was hurt when he described her as masculinized, even while acknowledging that she was beautiful (though he seems to be becoming increasingly aware of this issue).
As I've suggested to him, it might help to have a disclaimer towards women reading the website that tells them what his ideas do and don't imply about them, their looks, and their attractiveness towards men. I know he mentions these subjects in a couple places, but I think he needs to put something from a link on the front page, with a blinking red 36pt font. Well, maybe that's a bit extreme, but you get the idea.
Erik,
My compliments for putting this together so well. I wholeheartedly agree with you.
As for the comments by Adrian: I knew you wrote a few "dangerous" things, things that we almost are not allowed to say anymore, things that can be taken out of the context easily. Which is exactly what Adrian does. Don't let folks like him scare you off.
I am looking forward to any more articles on this site, I will bookmarm it !
Regards,
Paul.
Is she ultra-hot? Of course not. But she is quite cute. This is the type of girl that many heterosexual men would be thrilled to have as a girlfriend, and she looks approachable. She is definitely more attractive than the girl that she replaced (while there are a lot of women in the attractive women section that I like, there are still a few who are plain or unattractive in my opinion).
Danielle said:
This girl has a terrible body! She has no muscle tone to speak of.
Wow. You really do not "get" heterosexual men at all. They do NOT find muscle tone attractive in women, or at most are indifferent to it. I'm not sure exactly how much muscle you mean by "muscle tone," and it is nice if a girl is fit and trim, but any pronounced musculature is unattractive. I can still be attracted to girls with a bit of musculature, but I think it is actually more of a minus than a bit of chubbiness.
In this case, if we consider that the more prominent nasal bones are, the more derived they are, hooked noses are then the most derived nose type, no ?
well thank you. i'm not questioning myself. i think some other girl can question herself. just like high fashion which is telling females to be super-skinny this guy erik is also telling us to be the opposite. but someone cannot just change him/herself and his body shape only because they are told how should they look like to be attractive.
Erik is terrible just like all those gay fashion makers are.
Krisa
I am sure you are attractive. Don't let this website make you question yourself. This website contains so many flaws and mistakes that I will not even try to list them here. No, this guy does not speak for most straight men; he just thinks he does.
:-)
FIRST of all, sorry for my bad english.
You are telling us how girls who don’ fit in your “feminine” shapes are worthless and not worth being loved or to love!? that’s how i get it. See, if i compare myself to your “feminine woman” i think i have feminine body, except fot the breasts which are rather small.. my face is both feminine and masculine. i have serious and loving relationship with a MAN very straight one, who of course, like every man and woman, questioned his sexual orientation once in his childhood. but he is more straight than most man i know, who fall for all those manlike supermodels you describe, he likes widw hips and full botties, he doesn’ care much bout breast as long they exist and are not ugly-shaped. he gives mine his full attention.
i’m a bit of bisexual, with many homosexual experiences, maybe that’s why i don’t find models unattractive? because i’m bisexual? so they all should be with girls or with bisexual men?
i mean, they have features of both gendres, so they can’t be good enough for straight oriented men?!
i think sexual attraction is more than that!
ofcourse it is about physichs, but it is about smell, about brains, about getting along…
i mean, you are right and agree with you when you’re talking about extremes, and anorexia because of media…
but attraction and stuff.... you are blowing of self-esteem of skinny and not-so-feminine girls who can’t do anyting about it while are you pumping it up for the big-boobed and wide-hipped girls.
and yes ofcourse i wish i had bigger boobs!!
but i can’ be perfect, and what is perfect?
Posted by krisa on December 02, 2007 at 10:07
ERIK, WHAT ROUGH ESTIMATE PERCENTAGE OF WHITE WOMEN WOULD YOU SAY ARE "FEMININE"?
This is not a rhetorical question. I would really like to know your answer.
FIRST of all, sorry for my bad english.
You are telling us how girls who don' fit in your "feminine" shapes are worthless and not worth being loved or to love!? that's how i get it. See, if i compare myself to your "feminine woman" i think i have feminine body, except fot the breasts which are rather small.. my face is both feminine and masculine. i have serious and loving relationship with a MAN very straight one, who of course, like every man and woman, questioned his sexual orientation once in his childhood. but he is more straight than most man i know, who fall for all those manlike supermodels you describe, he likes widw hips and full botties, he doesn' care much bout breast as long they exist and are not ugly-shaped. he gives mine his full attention.
i'm a bit of bisexual, with many homosexual experiences, maybe that's why i don't find models unattractive? because i'm bisexual? so they all should be with girls or with bisexual men?
i mean, they have features of both gendres, so they can't be good enough for straight oriented men?!
i think sexual attraction is more than that!
ofcourse it is about physichs, but it is about smell, about brains, about getting along...
i mean, you are right and agree with you when you're talking about extremes, and anorexia because of media...
but attraction and stuff.... you are blowing of self-esteem of skinny and not-so-feminine girls who can't do anyting about it while are you pumping it up for the big-boobed and wide-hipped girls.
and yes ofcourse i wish i had bigger boobs!!
but i can' be perfect, and what is perfect?
What women use lingerie for: Clarification
I stated that women use lingerie to put themselves in the mood. I should have added that women *also* use lingerie to put men in the mood; I overstated it when I said putting men in the mood is not a consideration at all.
Quote:
No, what should be the basic marketing consideration is, "Buy this lingerie and you will feel good about yourself sexually and that will make you confident and relaxed enough to put a heterosexual man in the mood."
The lingerie model's primary job is to project the woman's preferred self-image.
:down:
feminine woman=feminine daughter
masculine woman=masculine daughter
feminine woman=feminine son
masculine woman=masculine son
Bron
Quote:
Bron, I am not sure if this comment is directed to me, but if it is, I have never said that women wish to have an androgynous, manlier look *for themselves*. I said that some (not all) women unconsciously respond to an androgynous look in fashion models because women respond hormonally to masculinity.
I have never heard of a woman who wants to look manlier than she naturally does, except for those very rare women who actually want to be men, and that is a separate issue.
:blank:
François
Quote:
Fascinating that French men generally prefer small breasts; white American men generally prefer big breasts.
Erik, do you have any data about racial/ethnic differences in male preferences in female body types?
:wow:
Quote:
Why are you calling teenagers children?
Why are you claiming that minidresses that barely cover the behind are marketed to women in the 30's and 40's when most of the women who wear such clothes are in their teens and 20's?
Quote:
The data concerning ratings of individuals aged 15-18 is reported in the category "late teens", which covers roughly 16-19, almost the exact same age range as 15-18.
"Underage" is an artificial construct of law, not nature. Depending on which country you're in, a 13-year-old may be of legal age or a 19-year-old may be underage.
Female fertility and fecundity peak in the early to mid 20's; male virility and libido peak in the late teens; therefore it makes perfect sense for heterosexual men to prefer women their early to mid 20's and for homosexual men to prefer men in their late teens, though according to this study, homosexual men like men in their early to mid 20's almost as much. What's wrong with that?
:blank:
Also, would you say there's a lack of models and the like with large jaws and cheekbones in the US? (though strongly feminine as well?) What could this be attributed to? There seems to be alot of variation when it comes to east asia in terms of that, but they're just pretty uncommon in western markets.
Also, one other thing to note about your site- in that one 7-part series, when you're comparing asian and european models to women from tribal and tradition societies, that's pretty..... poor. "Attractive" individuals are hard to come by in those societies due to how tightly-knit those populations are and thus leading to little pressure for truly attractive traits. There's also how those stressful lifestyles accentuate ageing and testosterone levels, contributing to greater masculinity.
I am French and heterosexual, and I can assure you that this girl is the perfect girl. Her face is very attractive and cute. She has the brazilian (small breasts, large backside) body that we love in the Mediterranean region. @ Danielle: About the muscled belly interest, only women and gays look at that. :-)
Pages