Women's Complex Reaction to Female Beauty Goes Beyond Aesthetics
"What do you mean by a big girl? Overweight? Tall? Mentally mature/wise?"
By big girl I mean I am an adult. I am not a child trying to figure out my sexuality. I know myself.
Alice Dellal (thanks for the name, I was getting tired of typing Vogue Paris, Sep. 2007 model on the left) is one of the very few women you call "masculinized" who actually does have a masculine face. Most of them range from androgynous to barely androgynous to not even androgynous.
I don't find Alice Dellal beautiful. I find Alice Dellal disconcerting and even a little distasteful because she has a man's face on a woman's body. (And yes, I can both feel negative about her manliness and positive about her resemblance to Prince William, because it's Prince William, not her, I'm feeling positive about.) My reaction to her was strong enough so that her outfits are now fixed in memory. I don't even like the tacky outfits, but I remember them. A woman with different taste in clothes from mine, perhaps from a different part of the country, might both remember and like her outfits, and might buy them, or something else by the same designer, as opposed to the outfits she merely likes but doesn't *remember*. Do you see what I'm getting at? This model's face forces your eyes to stop.
"Which of the following scenarios do you think makes more sense for marketing clothes to women? Use a woman whose looks remind women of a man (as in Alice Dellal, who reminds you of Prince William) or use a woman who looks good to the greatest number of women with sufficient money, prompting them to aspire to the looks of this woman and suggest that one can, in part, acquire this woman’s status/appeal by putting on her clothes/jewelry?"
Cindy Crawford, one of the most successful models of all time, said, and I am paraphrasing because I cannot remember or find the exact quote, but this is the exact meaning: "Let's face it, the most popular models are not always the most gorgeous. Women can relate to me."
You have to understand women's complex reaction to female beauty: aesthetic pleasure, arousal, identification, envy, insecurity, resentment of the priveleges accorded to the beautiful, awareness that beauty is a double-edged sword and beautiful women pay a heavy price.
You suggest that women's reaction to female beauty is supposed to begin and end with aesthetic pleasure, and erase the entire rest of that sentence.
The "super six" most successful supermodels of the 1990's were all in some way less attractive than their most physically similar competitors in modeling's highest echelon. Cindy Crawford was not as beautiful as Stephanie Seymour. Claudia Schiffer was not as beautiful as Vendella. Christy Turlington was not as beautiful as Helena Christensen. The lesser beauties outsold and outearned the greater beauties because they had the power to arouse women's positive reactions to beauty while partially neutralizing women's negative reactions.
Cindy Crawford became one the most successful models of all time because she was the first supermodel who ever had a public image as a highly intelligent person. Others may have been just as bright or brighter, and she may not have been as bright as people thought she was, but in terms of image, regardless of reality, Cindy Crawford was the first very smart model. This made her enormously appealing to women looking for an alternative to the smart plain jane/beautiful bimbo dichotomy. And though Cindy's female fans perhaps envied her looks, that envy didn't rise to the level of the seriously hostile jealousy Stephanie provoked. Perfect combination.
Most women are not naive enough to believe that wearing the same clothes/jewelry as a certain model gives you some degree of the same status/appeal. "If I wear her dress then I'll be like her" is something you have to be 11 years old to believe. Adult women ask, Is my bone structure/coloring/body type/hair/whatever close enough to hers so that what looks good on her might look good on me? And that's a much more important question than, Is she beautiful?
MISS BREMEN IS REALLY BEAUTIFUL. I THOUGHT SHE WAS THAT UNREALISTIC COMPOSITE BEAUTY WHEN I WATCHED THAT DOCUMENTARY UNATTENTIVELY. SHE IS MUCH PRETTIER THAN COMPOSITE. ONLY HER EYES COULD BE A LITTLE WIDER APART.
Erik, The supermodels are not obviously heavier with a BMI higher than 17.57. All these women were very thin and I did say that they all had the typical high fashion model body of their era with the exception of Cindy Crawford. Unless you can prove that these women are heavier then I won't just take your word for it.
You cannot prove that there has been a tremendous change in the way society views homosexuals. More social organizations that are specifically focused on gay issues may have developed but that does not necessarily reflect a greater acceptance of homosexuality. There may be other reasons for the rise in social awareness in the gay community.
The differences between the looks of the most recent high fashion models and the high fashion models of the eighties and nineties are pretty drastic. I never said high fashion models became thin all of a sudden. They have always been thin.
I cannot believe that you are honestly trying to accuse me of posting small blurry pictures of models faces. My pictures are often much larger and clearer than yours. You post the tiniest pictures of these model's faces from various angles. You are the same dude who posted fuzzy ass black and white pictures of African tribeswomen as examples of black features and you are telling me that my pictures are misleading. STFU!
If my pictures are deceptive because they are showing the models at their softest then I can accuse you of showing them at their harshest. You often use photos from editorials as evidence so stfu about that.
I don't know why you criticize Dove's campaign for real beauty. You want "real feminine" women to be idolized in the media when that really helps no one. You feel duped when you find that these models do not live up to your unrealistic expectations. Don't worry you have no chance of ever hooking up with them. Even if the top models were as feminine as feminine gets, your fat, pimpled ass wouldn't stand a chance. Give up.
What year are you living in Eric? Amateur photography is easily photoshopped. These aren't Polaroids, Erik. I am sure they used digital photography. It is perfectly reasonable assume that they may have been tampered with. I am also sure that they picked the best pictures of a set to post on their websites. These women are either ugly or plain and you simply have no defense for that.
"This website has to do with physical appearance, not social class."
Physical attractiveness is correlated to social class. In all times and places throughout human history, beauty has been defined in part as the physical signs of higher socioeconomic status (SES).
For example, in the West, in the 19th century, most lower SES people worked outdoors at farmwork or other forms of physical labor, and so a suntan was a sign of lower SES, while higher SES people either did not work or worked at indoor professions, so pale skin was a sign of higher SES. The result is that women went to great lengths to keep their skin as pale as possible, staying out of the sun during the hottest midday hours if possible, using parasols, bonnets and gloves, and even swallowing small amounts of arsenic to get a deathly palor. Then, in the 20th century, the transition to a primarily industrial, primarily non-agrarian economy moved most of the labor jobs indoors into factories, sweatshops, and other indoor environments, so that pale skin ceased to signify higher SES, and only those who had enough money not to work, or to have reasonably limited work hours, had the luxury of spending significant time outdoors. The result is that white people now are so obsessed with suntans that they have spawned entire industries of suntan lotion, fake tanning products, and even tanning parlors where they literally microwave themselves, causing a tragic skyrocket in melanoma (skin cancer).
Lower-class looks are to some degree distasteful to anyone who is not from a lower-class background, depending on whether those looks are combined with other attractive attributes such as the physical signs of good health and fertility.
For instance, Marilyn Monroe, even more so before her nose job and chin implant, looked rather lower class, but at her peak she also looked extremely healthy and extremely fertile, so the effect was balanced out to create an overall attractive look. Gabrielle does not have that fertile look; her obviously fake, cartoonishly disproportional breast implants do not have the same effect as Marilyn Monroe's obviously real, gorgeously perfectly proportioned full breasts.
Oversized, disproportional breast implants are usually a sign of lesser fertility. The psychology of breast implants is that women who get absurdly oversized implants are almost always those whose natural breasts are A cups or very small B cups, so that they grew up hating their small breasts and idolizing huge breasts and lost all sense of perspective about how big is too big for a given frame, so laughably oversized implants are almost always a sign of naturally flat chests. Pamela Anderson is an example of this. I would bet money that Gabrielle has natural A cups. (To be clear, I am not suggesting that all small-breasted women hate having small breasts; just the ones who get the oversized implants.)
Oversized, disproportional breast implants are almost always a sign of lower socioeconomic background (not to be confused with lower current SES). Women with middle to high socioeconomic background, if they get implants, choose a size that is reasonably proportional to their frame. Pamela Anderson grew up in a trailer; though she's rich now, she still has the sexual/body image psychology of a girl from the lower class. I would bet money that Gabrielle grew up poor. It's not a coincidence that ridiculous cartoon-character breast implants are far more common among hard core porn stars, who are almost always from humble backgrounds, than among actresses and clothed models, who are from the whole spectrum of class status. Most porn stars have a year or five and then disappear; Pamela Anderson would have disappeared fast had it not been for her publicity-generating marriages to two rock stars and, now, her engagement to the leading man of the highest-selling porn flick ever. Lower class looks without the signs of good health and high fertility almost never hold the public's attention for more than a brief moment in the absence of extending their fifteen minutes by latching on to someone else's fame.
"How do the feminine women I have been showing look lower class/trailer trash? There is an inverse relation between obesity and socioeconomic class among white women, and I haven’t been featuring overweight/obese women, but slender/medically-normal-weight women."
There is an inverse relation between the *rate* of obesity and socioeconomic class among white women. This means the *rate* of obesity is higher among lower class white women; it does not mean that thinness automatically makes it impossible for a woman to look lower class. Gabrielle's face looks lower class, and would regardless of her weight. Also, her oversized implants indicate a lower-class background.
"Attractive women are upwardly mobile (disproportionately taken by richer men), i.e., feminine beauty is associated with higher class in this sense."
Do you have any proof for your claim that the women who meet your definition of "feminine" are upwardly mobile or disproportionately taken by richer men?
Offhand most of the rich married men I can think of married or women who do not meet your definition of feminine: Donald Trump's wife Melania, Bill Gates' wife Melinda, Prince Charles' wife Camilla, Prince Edward's wife Sophie, Prince William's probable future wife Kate Middleton, Rupert Murdoch's wife Wendi Deng, Prince Maximilian of Luxembourg's wife Angela, U.S. President John F. Kennedy's wife Jackie.
It appears that many, perhaps most, rich men do not agree with your definitions of "feminine" and "attractive". I wonder if you will evade this issue by claiming that these men must have "narrowly escaped nonheterosexuality", a very convenient accusation since it is impossible to prove and impossible to disprove.
"Joey Heatherton and Amy Locane are not feminine and Traci Lords is an ex-porn star. You think I would be using such women in a mainstream movie if I needed feminine characters?"
Whom *you* would cast in a *mainstream* movie is beside the point.
Joey Heatherton, as seen in these pictures 1, 2, and http://www.angelfire.com/tv2/eccentric/jli1l1ij/joey-60s.jpg, and Amy Locane, as seen in pictures 1, 2, and 3, would be consired attractive by the vast majority of straight men, excepting men who are turned off by their coloring, an issue unrelated to femininity. Now I suppose you will inform me that their jaws are too wide or something of that nature. I submit that the vast majority of straight men couldn't care less.
As for Traci Lords being an ex-porn star, how is that relevant to her femininity?
Dear Danielle,
I too find strength attractive , but the one pertaining to character, and confidence, when stemming from integrity.
Also softness and tenderness as complementaries and fundamental.
But you don't find it attractive as facial quality:
Danielle:
Not a lot of women who look like Christy, but who share some of features with her,( ok, to be precise I know at least 5); if she has nose or lips like her, she doesn't look like her really. That is anecdotal? Then refuse it. Can't believe that some people where I live didn't have so much admiration for Claudia, since they see prettier girls on streets? Anecdotal? Ignore it. (I admit they had to be strong persons to defy the mass hysteria induced by media).
Another anecdotal thing for you to reject: there was in the 1990s even a live radio talk in my town and yes, beside those favourably disposed,many people voiced unfavourable opinions on their looks.
And Danielle, Claudia looks just the same on photos I posted as she looked in the 1990s. Only on a few of her earliest photos, she looks pretty. And how much closer could her eyes be? Are you serious?
Just compare the photos , mine and yours, and any of yours, when you are making the point, you always put such, that the model is looking much prettier, softer (??) than otherwise, to show how beautiful they are. That is how I know you lie. Obviously, you too know what is pretty, but then deny that certain components. That was all the lying I attributed to you; but then you went to call me liar, very sincere of you. I will not lie to conform to the world and say that they are pretty, to me they aren't. Repugnant, as Christy, yes, indeed.( one of the meaning of word is: averse, not that she makes me puke). And NO WAY am I the only and first person to say that, but how can I offer evidence of hearsay, it would be ANECDOTAL.
WHERE DO YOU PEOPLE LIVE? Look at the web, how furiously people are commenting upon the looks of current top models and other "beautiful" celebrities. Of course, the 1990s are past and internet was not so common household expedient then.
There was some suggestion on this site, that preference for some features are probably intrinsic, I think that stands for face too, there was a study that demonstrated that volunteers prefered women with small lower faces, and have marked rises in subconscious brain activity when looking at pictures of them.
For that reason I don't need to ask someone how pretty they think someone else is. ( they always come first with that subject). But their choices tell me how honest they are.
“Psychotic Shamans are responsible for extreme body modification”
The hypothesis that shamans are disproportionately psychotic or is quite within mainstream psychology. In fact, I've heard a prominent and famous biologist suggest it in a lecture.
Since the public strongly and overwhelmingly prefers feminine beauty, the appearance of numerous beauty pageant contestants and Hollywood actresses is at odds, not unusually strikingly so, with optimal public preferences. The most plausible explanation is the trickle-down effect of high-fashion models given that they are selected for their looks and also the involvement of homosexuals in beauty pageants.
I think this makes sense, but could there also be other reasons why so many actresses are masculine, other that the trickle-down effect or the preference of the public. Here are some possible hypotheses:
1. Somewhat masculinized women might be better actresses for some reason.
2. A certain level of masculinization helps a female actress in her career, either by making her more competitive, more driven, or willing to sleep with more people.
Personally, I remember in high school that the "drama kids" clique was disproportionately non-heterosexual (same with the artsy people and the orchestra kids). Many of the female actresses or drama students I've known have been slightly masculinized, and/or bisexual.
There is also the stereotype of actors as being messed up, and nonheterosexuals also exhibit elevated psychological morbidity. It's possible that actors are also more likely to be developmentally disturbed. Developmental disturbance might be correlated with elite acting skill, because of its ability to produce variability, similar to how nonheterosexuals seem to be disproportionately represented in certain areas of elite achievement.
Actually, masculine and hyper-masculine qualities are disproportionately found in high-achieving people. That fact, and its implications, is a whole different discussion.
Whipped honey: What do you mean by a big girl? Overweight? Tall? Mentally mature/wise?
Which of the following scenarios do you think makes more sense for marketing clothes to women? Use a woman whose looks remind women of a man (as in Alice Dellal, who reminds you of Prince William) or use a woman who looks good to the greatest number of women with sufficient money, prompting them to aspire to the looks of this woman and suggest that one can, in part, acquire this woman’s status/appeal by putting on her clothes/jewelry?
Whipped honey: This website has to do with physical appearance, not social class. How do the feminine women I have been showing look lower class/trailer trash? There is an inverse relation between obesity and socioeconomic class among white women, and I haven’t been featuring overweight/obese women, but slender/medically-normal-weight women. Attractive women are upwardly mobile (disproportionately taken by richer men), i.e., feminine beauty is associated with higher class in this sense. Of course, their daughters will tend to be not so attractive because of regression to the mean, two factors in particular: 1) richer men are not necessarily attractive and 2) there is a positive association between testosterone and dominance in men, and hence the daughters of these women will tend to be not so feminine in a number of cases. Overall, the feminine women I have been featuring would be the types you would predominantly see among middle class and higher socioeconomic groups.
Joey Heatherton and Amy Locane are not feminine and Traci Lords is an ex-porn star. You think I would be using such women in a mainstream movie if I needed feminine characters?
Danielle: Honey, you don’t present my arguments as they are. Compare your portrayal of my arguments to the actual arguments, the evidence for them and show how I have misrepresented data.
“Gay Designers are pederasts”
I said that pederastic interests are common among the dominant homosexual designers, which is easily inferred from their choice of female models.
“Gay designers have influenced the aesthetic of beauty pageants and Hollywood”
Since the public strongly and overwhelmingly prefers feminine beauty, the appearance of numerous beauty pageant contestants and Hollywood actresses is at odds, not unusually strikingly so, with optimal public preferences. The most plausible explanation is the trickle-down effect of high-fashion models given that they are selected for their looks and also the involvement of homosexuals in beauty pageants.
“The General public would prefer the looks of the slags in the “attractive women” section over Victoria’s Secret models”
“VS models look like boys/eunuchs/transsexuals/transvestites”
No dear, a good number of Victoria’s Secret models look like male-to-female transsexuals (transvestite looks are uncommon), and some are even feminine. This is backed up by a discussion on various big-name VS models; more to be added.
“Psychotic Shamans are responsible for extreme body modification”
I still have to respond to this issue elsewhere, but in a nutshell, a population doesn’t decide all of a sudden to subject itself to painful body modifications/rites of passage. Most people will also avoid pain by nature. However, shaman types are often schizophrenic/epileptic and have brain abnormalities in the temporal lobes that are associated with increased odds of religious experiences and also increased odds of an inclination toward sadism, masochism and sadomasochism. No wonder that religions throughout history have been full of rituals/practices designed to induce pain and suffering that are tied to salvation, warding off evil spirits and pleasing supreme beings. Note that in early societies there is basically no difference between religion and culture. So what factors are most likely responsible for bizarre and painful rituals/rites of passage? Most plausibly powerful/influential mentally ill shamans.
“The high fashion industry is a monopoly”
There is a single fashion industry and those who dominate it can get away with their choice of models since fashion merchandize has appeal by itself.
“High fashion models are getting skinnier because gay designers are making their presence more obvious”
There is a curvilinear trend in the femininity of high-fashion models from the 1920s to 1999; they were most feminine around mid-century. What is the most likely explanation? Based on biological correlates of optimal aesthetic preferences of the public, a shift in public preferences can be ruled out, especially since most such studies have coincided with high-fashion models close to being at their most masculine and also being sub-optimally thin. The curvilinear trend coincides with a parallel shift in the public tolerance of homosexuality: post-1920s worsening and increasing tolerance in the latter half of the century. Is this correlation spurious? Think about this in light of the fact that homosexuals are overrepresented among fashion designers, and that the designers get to pick their models.
“Lifetime exclusive heterosexuals would not find (insert model’s name) attractive”
If the female model doesn’t look like a woman or is very masculine, what are the odds?
There is a difference between a hypothesis based on conjecture and a hypothesis based on evidence or even extensive evidence such that it is effectively an explanation (theory), but discussing this matter with you is unlikely to be of help because you cannot even get my arguments straight. An explanation of complex phenomena, which is partly what this site is about, should not be seen in terms of “fact or not” but in terms of the soundness of the theoretical approach. The “fact or not” question applies to simple items such as “this championship was won by...,” “the international date line is located at...,” etc. You also pretend as if this website doesn’t cite facts.
Pink Flamingos was produced by a [borderline deranged?] homosexual (John Waters). Why would a woman like Gabrielle belong in something so filthy and freaky, and do you think he would want someone like her in this movie?
Erik: Gabrielle looks like she belongs in "Pink Flamingos" because she looks like TRAILER TRASH.
Your obsession with defining female beauty as the physical signs of high estrogen and low testosterone seems to blind you to other considerations. Erik, so many of the women you find attractive look revoltingly low class.
I believe John Waters would have wanted someone like Gabrielle in "Pink Flamingos" because "Pink Flamingos" is full of people who look like they would fit right in at Gabrielle's family reunion.
John Waters does want women who meet your definition of "feminine" in his movies; such as Traci Lords, Joey Heatherton and Amy Locane in "Cry Baby".
Erik: I am a big girl and I know who turns me on. That Vogue Paris, Sep. 2007 model on the left grabs my attention because of her shocking facial resemblance to a certain very sexy MAN.
Prince William is hot to me. This model is not hot to me. But she reminds me of a man who is hot to me. Get it?
Danielle: What do you mean that I am using your ‘“status” argument’? You didn’t read carefully enough the study cited at the link about the homosexual influence in the 20th century. In this study, the average BMI of high-fashion models in the 1990s was 17.8 and in another study of 300 fashion models published in 1997, the average BMI was 17.57. The 1990s supermodels were obviously heavier. Cindy Crawford was known for being quite muscular and “voluptuous” by high-fashion modeling standards.
The public didn’t become more tolerant of homosexuals all of a sudden. It has been a gradual process in the latter half of the twentieth century. Here are two references:
Quote:
Avery, A., Chase, J., Johansson, L., Litvak, S., Montero, D., & Wydra, M. (2007). America's changing attitudes toward homosexuality, civil unions, and same-gender marriage: 1977-2004. Social Work, 52(1), 71-79.
Hicks, G. R., & Lee, T. T. (2006). Public attitudes toward gays and lesbians: trends and predictors. Journal of Homosexuality, 51(2), 57-77.
Tolerance of homosexuals has improved in the past 10 years. How else would be you be seeing the mushrooming of GLBTQ groups over campuses, an increasing number of gay pride week/month celebrations, more vociferous demands for same-sex marriage, etc.? How else would you be seeing GLB groups (gay-lesbian-bisexual) transform to GLBT groups (gay-lesbian-bisexual-transgendered), then increasingly to GLBTQ groups (gay-lesbian-bisexual-transgendered-[gender] queer)?
Similarly, high-fashion models didn’t become thin all of a sudden. Over the second half of the twentieth century, they gradually became more masculine and thinner.
The pictures you posted of the 1990s supermodels are often small (with respect to the face), blurry, shot from angles that obscure masculine features, have parts of the face hidden by hair or are from professional photoshoots, where it is a safe bet that they have undergone some decent digital editing, a dramatic illustration of which has been featured in the evolution film by Dove. The close-ups I featured of the models make it clear that these women do not have feminine faces since no feminine faces could be made to look masculine at any angle. I am not calling them ugly. I personally do not know of anyone who feels that Christy Turlington and Claudia Schiffer were unattractive as young adults, and Bron is the first person that I have come across who has described Claudia Schiffer and Christy Turlington as looking pathetic/repugnant. My point is that the top-notch status achieved by these women is largely a consequence of the gay domination of the fashion business; the general public has been generally exposed to professional, airbrushed, enhanced-by-make-up photos of these women.
The pictures you took of the “sloppy hoes” shown by me are from effectively amateur photography with almost no likelihood of airbrushing; two of the women are taken from pages featuring somewhat masculinized women, and one of the pictures (Anna S., last picture) is not featured in the attractive women section (Anna S. looks much better: Pic 1, Pic 2.
Whipped honey: Pink Flamingos was produced by a [borderline deranged?] homosexual (John Waters). Why would a woman like Gabrielle belong in something so filthy and freaky, and do you think he would want someone like her in this movie?
Sarah: Don't waste your time understanding femininity. The woman does not have high cheekbones, period. Thinner lips will not look masculine if their width is reduced, too (men have wider lips). There is a masculine-looking feature in her face, not describable as masculine because of the overall face shape, but you haven't figured it out. Strange isn't it for a woman who knows femininity when she sees it? It is the long distance between the bottom of the nose and the upper lips (greater in men). If you have Photoshop or another image editing program, lengthen her nose and reduce this distance; it will improve her attractiveness in a notable manner, making her look more feminine, too.
Honey, you are light but not naturally ghostly pale because you are not white...duh! The typical white person is naturally pasty white; the exceptions would be pink or in rare cases other colors as in yellow if the liver isn't functioning properly.
Whipped honey: I didn't exactly twist your words; just misread them. You seriously need to reflect on whether you have a homosexual component to your attractions, directed toward the more masculine-looking women.
Danielle: Paul "perv" Reubens aka Pee-wee Herman is a homosexual who is into adolescent boys. Of course he wouldn't want Anna S.
Brenda: I will replace Anna's image with a better one.
Ivanos: Ethnicity is not an issue. Masculine and feminine women are found in all parts of Europe. There are numerous feminine Eastern European women shown within this website for contrast purposes. I am not confounding angular features with masculinization.
“Beefy muscles” are not required for a woman to be designated as masculine or having high testosterone levels. There are numerous skinny men who have much higher testosterone levels than the most naturally masculine women.
I am neither fat/curvy nor a woman. Judge an argument on its own merits rather than the assumed characteristics of the person making the arguments.
I'm European and the top models you have on this website are mostly eastern European or from the 'cold countries'. If u have ever traveled maybe you would see that the caucasian Scandinavian race tends to have women with very 'striking' features. That doesn't mean that they are masculine or androgenous.
Some people LOVE to say something is feminine and masculine because of the stupid hollywood 1940's ideal. Your idea of masculine and feminine is COMPLETELY subjective. You can't prove it. So what, these women have too much testostorone? Where are the beefy muscles then? Prove that they don't have enough estrogen. Show each model's estrogen levels compared to the average EASTERN EUROPEAN woman. Not to the american, not to the western european, not to the asian or the black. And compare it with a woman with these girl's age too. Otherwise it is biased.
Your website is biased. And your opinions are irrelevant and unsourceful. Based only in the fact that you are probably a fat 'curvy' woman yourself. If I was you, I would be embaressed to be talking about masculinity on runway models because it is PURE IGNORANCE. Just shows you how much you know about what people look like around the world.
Next thing I know they will say "Oh Asian men are feminine" because they have smaller jaws and longer hair than Caucasian men... it's ridiculous. The idea of what is masculine and what is feminine is different all over the world. Some Scottish men wear skirts, some African women shave their heads. Who says they are masculine or feminine? THEIR OWN DAMN CULTURE.
These fashion models are feminine in their own FASHION business. PERIOD.
LOL bron, I'm not lying to myself about anything. You keep bringing anecdotal "evidence" into your posts and expect that that will convince me. You are the one who is lying to yourself.
I did not post any candids of her because I could not find any candid pictures of her when she was in her prime during her early twenties. The candids you have shown are displaying a much older woman than the one in my photos. She's about 37 right now and if those pictures are recent then it would not be fair to use them. I am still not seeing any evidence of "Cyclops" eyes.
I am honestly supposed to believe that you know a whole lot of women who supposedly look like Christy and they all want to change their features. Whatever! I still believe that she is beautiful and you pictorial "evidence" did nothing to disprove that.
We clearly have a different aesthetic sense of what is beautiful. I don't think women should be "soft and tender". Women can look good when they are tall and strong. I don't think weakness is attractive in anyone. I find strength and confidence attractive.
Your arguments are very weak so you can't convince anyone of anything. I agree that you are wasting your time.
And Christy is just so plain repugnant, I know many girls, who just hate their features, which they share with Christy, not that they wouldn't want to be famous like her. But women who have such nose and lips, hate it, want to alter it. And that long face (distance between her eyes and tip of nose). Honestly, I would hate to look like her.
Woman should be soft and tender, not some android. I like to look weak, and it is very interesting to sooo many people, not men exclusively. If beautiful, the face is beyond being merely interesting, it is all the superlatives, cause it is rarity, gem.
Weak or fragile look takes nothing away from it's overall attractiveness.
If I stop replying, it won't be cause you changed my mind. You can't.It won't help you either if you keep on putting on sweetest airbrushed altered photos of theirs, but there won't be many more of them.
You are obviously determined to lie yourself, and I have more important things to do in my life.
Whipped honey: The formatting problem is fixed. You didn't close the underline formatting command, making everything below underlined. Preview before posting. The smiley problem was a coding fault by me. Sorry about it; the smileys should now work. I will reply later.
Erik, I want to respond further to your reply to me, but for some reason every time I open this page, the heading "Post a Comment" and and the links "Smileys" and "Comment formatting guidelines" are underlined and the result, as seen in my previous post, is that my entire post, even the by-line, is going to appear underlined. Please post and tell me how I can fix this. Thank you.
Women's Complex Reaction to Female Beauty Goes Beyond Aesthetics
"What do you mean by a big girl? Overweight? Tall? Mentally mature/wise?"
By big girl I mean I am an adult. I am not a child trying to figure out my sexuality. I know myself.
Alice Dellal (thanks for the name, I was getting tired of typing Vogue Paris, Sep. 2007 model on the left) is one of the very few women you call "masculinized" who actually does have a masculine face. Most of them range from androgynous to barely androgynous to not even androgynous.
I don't find Alice Dellal beautiful. I find Alice Dellal disconcerting and even a little distasteful because she has a man's face on a woman's body. (And yes, I can both feel negative about her manliness and positive about her resemblance to Prince William, because it's Prince William, not her, I'm feeling positive about.) My reaction to her was strong enough so that her outfits are now fixed in memory. I don't even like the tacky outfits, but I remember them. A woman with different taste in clothes from mine, perhaps from a different part of the country, might both remember and like her outfits, and might buy them, or something else by the same designer, as opposed to the outfits she merely likes but doesn't *remember*. Do you see what I'm getting at? This model's face forces your eyes to stop.
"Which of the following scenarios do you think makes more sense for marketing clothes to women? Use a woman whose looks remind women of a man (as in Alice Dellal, who reminds you of Prince William) or use a woman who looks good to the greatest number of women with sufficient money, prompting them to aspire to the looks of this woman and suggest that one can, in part, acquire this woman’s status/appeal by putting on her clothes/jewelry?"
Cindy Crawford, one of the most successful models of all time, said, and I am paraphrasing because I cannot remember or find the exact quote, but this is the exact meaning: "Let's face it, the most popular models are not always the most gorgeous. Women can relate to me."
You have to understand women's complex reaction to female beauty: aesthetic pleasure, arousal, identification, envy, insecurity, resentment of the priveleges accorded to the beautiful, awareness that beauty is a double-edged sword and beautiful women pay a heavy price.
You suggest that women's reaction to female beauty is supposed to begin and end with aesthetic pleasure, and erase the entire rest of that sentence.
The "super six" most successful supermodels of the 1990's were all in some way less attractive than their most physically similar competitors in modeling's highest echelon. Cindy Crawford was not as beautiful as Stephanie Seymour. Claudia Schiffer was not as beautiful as Vendella. Christy Turlington was not as beautiful as Helena Christensen. The lesser beauties outsold and outearned the greater beauties because they had the power to arouse women's positive reactions to beauty while partially neutralizing women's negative reactions.
Cindy Crawford became one the most successful models of all time because she was the first supermodel who ever had a public image as a highly intelligent person. Others may have been just as bright or brighter, and she may not have been as bright as people thought she was, but in terms of image, regardless of reality, Cindy Crawford was the first very smart model. This made her enormously appealing to women looking for an alternative to the smart plain jane/beautiful bimbo dichotomy. And though Cindy's female fans perhaps envied her looks, that envy didn't rise to the level of the seriously hostile jealousy Stephanie provoked. Perfect combination.
Most women are not naive enough to believe that wearing the same clothes/jewelry as a certain model gives you some degree of the same status/appeal. "If I wear her dress then I'll be like her" is something you have to be 11 years old to believe. Adult women ask, Is my bone structure/coloring/body type/hair/whatever close enough to hers so that what looks good on her might look good on me? And that's a much more important question than, Is she beautiful?
MISS BREMEN IS REALLY BEAUTIFUL. I THOUGHT SHE WAS THAT UNREALISTIC COMPOSITE BEAUTY WHEN I WATCHED THAT DOCUMENTARY UNATTENTIVELY. SHE IS MUCH PRETTIER THAN COMPOSITE. ONLY HER EYES COULD BE A LITTLE WIDER APART.
Erik, The supermodels are not obviously heavier with a BMI higher than 17.57. All these women were very thin and I did say that they all had the typical high fashion model body of their era with the exception of Cindy Crawford. Unless you can prove that these women are heavier then I won't just take your word for it.
You cannot prove that there has been a tremendous change in the way society views homosexuals. More social organizations that are specifically focused on gay issues may have developed but that does not necessarily reflect a greater acceptance of homosexuality. There may be other reasons for the rise in social awareness in the gay community.
The differences between the looks of the most recent high fashion models and the high fashion models of the eighties and nineties are pretty drastic. I never said high fashion models became thin all of a sudden. They have always been thin.
I cannot believe that you are honestly trying to accuse me of posting small blurry pictures of models faces. My pictures are often much larger and clearer than yours. You post the tiniest pictures of these model's faces from various angles. You are the same dude who posted fuzzy ass black and white pictures of African tribeswomen as examples of black features and you are telling me that my pictures are misleading. STFU!
If my pictures are deceptive because they are showing the models at their softest then I can accuse you of showing them at their harshest. You often use photos from editorials as evidence so stfu about that.
I don't know why you criticize Dove's campaign for real beauty. You want "real feminine" women to be idolized in the media when that really helps no one. You feel duped when you find that these models do not live up to your unrealistic expectations. Don't worry you have no chance of ever hooking up with them. Even if the top models were as feminine as feminine gets, your fat, pimpled ass wouldn't stand a chance. Give up.
What year are you living in Eric? Amateur photography is easily photoshopped. These aren't Polaroids, Erik. I am sure they used digital photography. It is perfectly reasonable assume that they may have been tampered with. I am also sure that they picked the best pictures of a set to post on their websites. These women are either ugly or plain and you simply have no defense for that.
"This website has to do with physical appearance, not social class."
Physical attractiveness is correlated to social class. In all times and places throughout human history, beauty has been defined in part as the physical signs of higher socioeconomic status (SES).
For example, in the West, in the 19th century, most lower SES people worked outdoors at farmwork or other forms of physical labor, and so a suntan was a sign of lower SES, while higher SES people either did not work or worked at indoor professions, so pale skin was a sign of higher SES. The result is that women went to great lengths to keep their skin as pale as possible, staying out of the sun during the hottest midday hours if possible, using parasols, bonnets and gloves, and even swallowing small amounts of arsenic to get a deathly palor. Then, in the 20th century, the transition to a primarily industrial, primarily non-agrarian economy moved most of the labor jobs indoors into factories, sweatshops, and other indoor environments, so that pale skin ceased to signify higher SES, and only those who had enough money not to work, or to have reasonably limited work hours, had the luxury of spending significant time outdoors. The result is that white people now are so obsessed with suntans that they have spawned entire industries of suntan lotion, fake tanning products, and even tanning parlors where they literally microwave themselves, causing a tragic skyrocket in melanoma (skin cancer).
Lower-class looks are to some degree distasteful to anyone who is not from a lower-class background, depending on whether those looks are combined with other attractive attributes such as the physical signs of good health and fertility.
For instance, Marilyn Monroe, even more so before her nose job and chin implant, looked rather lower class, but at her peak she also looked extremely healthy and extremely fertile, so the effect was balanced out to create an overall attractive look. Gabrielle does not have that fertile look; her obviously fake, cartoonishly disproportional breast implants do not have the same effect as Marilyn Monroe's obviously real, gorgeously perfectly proportioned full breasts.
Oversized, disproportional breast implants are usually a sign of lesser fertility. The psychology of breast implants is that women who get absurdly oversized implants are almost always those whose natural breasts are A cups or very small B cups, so that they grew up hating their small breasts and idolizing huge breasts and lost all sense of perspective about how big is too big for a given frame, so laughably oversized implants are almost always a sign of naturally flat chests. Pamela Anderson is an example of this. I would bet money that Gabrielle has natural A cups. (To be clear, I am not suggesting that all small-breasted women hate having small breasts; just the ones who get the oversized implants.)
Oversized, disproportional breast implants are almost always a sign of lower socioeconomic background (not to be confused with lower current SES). Women with middle to high socioeconomic background, if they get implants, choose a size that is reasonably proportional to their frame. Pamela Anderson grew up in a trailer; though she's rich now, she still has the sexual/body image psychology of a girl from the lower class. I would bet money that Gabrielle grew up poor. It's not a coincidence that ridiculous cartoon-character breast implants are far more common among hard core porn stars, who are almost always from humble backgrounds, than among actresses and clothed models, who are from the whole spectrum of class status. Most porn stars have a year or five and then disappear; Pamela Anderson would have disappeared fast had it not been for her publicity-generating marriages to two rock stars and, now, her engagement to the leading man of the highest-selling porn flick ever. Lower class looks without the signs of good health and high fertility almost never hold the public's attention for more than a brief moment in the absence of extending their fifteen minutes by latching on to someone else's fame.
"How do the feminine women I have been showing look lower class/trailer trash? There is an inverse relation between obesity and socioeconomic class among white women, and I haven’t been featuring overweight/obese women, but slender/medically-normal-weight women."
There is an inverse relation between the *rate* of obesity and socioeconomic class among white women. This means the *rate* of obesity is higher among lower class white women; it does not mean that thinness automatically makes it impossible for a woman to look lower class. Gabrielle's face looks lower class, and would regardless of her weight. Also, her oversized implants indicate a lower-class background.
"Attractive women are upwardly mobile (disproportionately taken by richer men), i.e., feminine beauty is associated with higher class in this sense."
Do you have any proof for your claim that the women who meet your definition of "feminine" are upwardly mobile or disproportionately taken by richer men?
Offhand most of the rich married men I can think of married or women who do not meet your definition of feminine: Donald Trump's wife Melania, Bill Gates' wife Melinda, Prince Charles' wife Camilla, Prince Edward's wife Sophie, Prince William's probable future wife Kate Middleton, Rupert Murdoch's wife Wendi Deng, Prince Maximilian of Luxembourg's wife Angela, U.S. President John F. Kennedy's wife Jackie.
It appears that many, perhaps most, rich men do not agree with your definitions of "feminine" and "attractive". I wonder if you will evade this issue by claiming that these men must have "narrowly escaped nonheterosexuality", a very convenient accusation since it is impossible to prove and impossible to disprove.
"Joey Heatherton and Amy Locane are not feminine and Traci Lords is an ex-porn star. You think I would be using such women in a mainstream movie if I needed feminine characters?"
Whom *you* would cast in a *mainstream* movie is beside the point.
Joey Heatherton, as seen in these pictures 1, 2, and
http://www.angelfire.com/tv2/eccentric/jli1l1ij/joey-60s.jpg, and Amy Locane, as seen in pictures 1, 2, and 3, would be consired attractive by the vast majority of straight men, excepting men who are turned off by their coloring, an issue unrelated to femininity. Now I suppose you will inform me that their jaws are too wide or something of that nature. I submit that the vast majority of straight men couldn't care less.
As for Traci Lords being an ex-porn star, how is that relevant to her femininity?
Dear Danielle,
I too find strength attractive , but the one pertaining to character, and confidence, when stemming from integrity.
Also softness and tenderness as complementaries and fundamental.
But you don't find it attractive as facial quality:
http://www.zabra.si/tmp_web/freaks/soft.jpg
Danielle:
Not a lot of women who look like Christy, but who share some of features with her,( ok, to be precise I know at least 5); if she has nose or lips like her, she doesn't look like her really. That is anecdotal? Then refuse it. Can't believe that some people where I live didn't have so much admiration for Claudia, since they see prettier girls on streets? Anecdotal? Ignore it. (I admit they had to be strong persons to defy the mass hysteria induced by media).
Another anecdotal thing for you to reject: there was in the 1990s even a live radio talk in my town and yes, beside those favourably disposed,many people voiced unfavourable opinions on their looks.
And Danielle, Claudia looks just the same on photos I posted as she looked in the 1990s. Only on a few of her earliest photos, she looks pretty. And how much closer could her eyes be? Are you serious?
Just compare the photos , mine and yours, and any of yours, when you are making the point, you always put such, that the model is looking much prettier, softer (??) than otherwise, to show how beautiful they are. That is how I know you lie. Obviously, you too know what is pretty, but then deny that certain components. That was all the lying I attributed to you; but then you went to call me liar, very sincere of you. I will not lie to conform to the world and say that they are pretty, to me they aren't. Repugnant, as Christy, yes, indeed.( one of the meaning of word is: averse, not that she makes me puke). And NO WAY am I the only and first person to say that, but how can I offer evidence of hearsay, it would be ANECDOTAL.
WHERE DO YOU PEOPLE LIVE? Look at the web, how furiously people are commenting upon the looks of current top models and other "beautiful" celebrities. Of course, the 1990s are past and internet was not so common household expedient then.
There was some suggestion on this site, that preference for some features are probably intrinsic, I think that stands for face too, there was a study that demonstrated that volunteers prefered women with small lower faces, and have marked rises in subconscious brain activity when looking at pictures of them.
For that reason I don't need to ask someone how pretty they think someone else is. ( they always come first with that subject). But their choices tell me how honest they are.
“Psychotic Shamans are responsible for extreme body modification”
The hypothesis that shamans are disproportionately psychotic or is quite within mainstream psychology. In fact, I've heard a prominent and famous biologist suggest it in a lecture.
I think this makes sense, but could there also be other reasons why so many actresses are masculine, other that the trickle-down effect or the preference of the public. Here are some possible hypotheses:
1. Somewhat masculinized women might be better actresses for some reason.
2. A certain level of masculinization helps a female actress in her career, either by making her more competitive, more driven, or willing to sleep with more people.
Personally, I remember in high school that the "drama kids" clique was disproportionately non-heterosexual (same with the artsy people and the orchestra kids). Many of the female actresses or drama students I've known have been slightly masculinized, and/or bisexual.
There is also the stereotype of actors as being messed up, and nonheterosexuals also exhibit elevated psychological morbidity. It's possible that actors are also more likely to be developmentally disturbed. Developmental disturbance might be correlated with elite acting skill, because of its ability to produce variability, similar to how nonheterosexuals seem to be disproportionately represented in certain areas of elite achievement.
Actually, masculine and hyper-masculine qualities are disproportionately found in high-achieving people. That fact, and its implications, is a whole different discussion.
Whipped honey: What do you mean by a big girl? Overweight? Tall? Mentally mature/wise?
Which of the following scenarios do you think makes more sense for marketing clothes to women? Use a woman whose looks remind women of a man (as in Alice Dellal, who reminds you of Prince William) or use a woman who looks good to the greatest number of women with sufficient money, prompting them to aspire to the looks of this woman and suggest that one can, in part, acquire this woman’s status/appeal by putting on her clothes/jewelry?
Whipped honey: This website has to do with physical appearance, not social class. How do the feminine women I have been showing look lower class/trailer trash? There is an inverse relation between obesity and socioeconomic class among white women, and I haven’t been featuring overweight/obese women, but slender/medically-normal-weight women. Attractive women are upwardly mobile (disproportionately taken by richer men), i.e., feminine beauty is associated with higher class in this sense. Of course, their daughters will tend to be not so attractive because of regression to the mean, two factors in particular: 1) richer men are not necessarily attractive and 2) there is a positive association between testosterone and dominance in men, and hence the daughters of these women will tend to be not so feminine in a number of cases. Overall, the feminine women I have been featuring would be the types you would predominantly see among middle class and higher socioeconomic groups.
Joey Heatherton and Amy Locane are not feminine and Traci Lords is an ex-porn star. You think I would be using such women in a mainstream movie if I needed feminine characters?
Danielle: Honey, you don’t present my arguments as they are. Compare your portrayal of my arguments to the actual arguments, the evidence for them and show how I have misrepresented data.
“Gay Designers are pederasts”
I said that pederastic interests are common among the dominant homosexual designers, which is easily inferred from their choice of female models.
“Gay designers have influenced the aesthetic of beauty pageants and Hollywood”
Since the public strongly and overwhelmingly prefers feminine beauty, the appearance of numerous beauty pageant contestants and Hollywood actresses is at odds, not unusually strikingly so, with optimal public preferences. The most plausible explanation is the trickle-down effect of high-fashion models given that they are selected for their looks and also the involvement of homosexuals in beauty pageants.
“The General public would prefer the looks of the slags in the “attractive women” section over Victoria’s Secret models”
What does an effect size correlation of 0.64 between femininity and attractiveness (meta-analysis) suggest?
“VS models look like boys/eunuchs/transsexuals/transvestites”
No dear, a good number of Victoria’s Secret models look like male-to-female transsexuals (transvestite looks are uncommon), and some are even feminine. This is backed up by a discussion on various big-name VS models; more to be added.
“Psychotic Shamans are responsible for extreme body modification”
I still have to respond to this issue elsewhere, but in a nutshell, a population doesn’t decide all of a sudden to subject itself to painful body modifications/rites of passage. Most people will also avoid pain by nature. However, shaman types are often schizophrenic/epileptic and have brain abnormalities in the temporal lobes that are associated with increased odds of religious experiences and also increased odds of an inclination toward sadism, masochism and sadomasochism. No wonder that religions throughout history have been full of rituals/practices designed to induce pain and suffering that are tied to salvation, warding off evil spirits and pleasing supreme beings. Note that in early societies there is basically no difference between religion and culture. So what factors are most likely responsible for bizarre and painful rituals/rites of passage? Most plausibly powerful/influential mentally ill shamans.
“The high fashion industry is a monopoly”
There is a single fashion industry and those who dominate it can get away with their choice of models since fashion merchandize has appeal by itself.
“High fashion models are getting skinnier because gay designers are making their presence more obvious”
There is a curvilinear trend in the femininity of high-fashion models from the 1920s to 1999; they were most feminine around mid-century. What is the most likely explanation? Based on biological correlates of optimal aesthetic preferences of the public, a shift in public preferences can be ruled out, especially since most such studies have coincided with high-fashion models close to being at their most masculine and also being sub-optimally thin. The curvilinear trend coincides with a parallel shift in the public tolerance of homosexuality: post-1920s worsening and increasing tolerance in the latter half of the century. Is this correlation spurious? Think about this in light of the fact that homosexuals are overrepresented among fashion designers, and that the designers get to pick their models.
“Lifetime exclusive heterosexuals would not find (insert model’s name) attractive”
If the female model doesn’t look like a woman or is very masculine, what are the odds?
There is a difference between a hypothesis based on conjecture and a hypothesis based on evidence or even extensive evidence such that it is effectively an explanation (theory), but discussing this matter with you is unlikely to be of help because you cannot even get my arguments straight. An explanation of complex phenomena, which is partly what this site is about, should not be seen in terms of “fact or not” but in terms of the soundness of the theoretical approach. The “fact or not” question applies to simple items such as “this championship was won by...,” “the international date line is located at...,” etc. You also pretend as if this website doesn’t cite facts.
Pink Flamingos was produced by a [borderline deranged?] homosexual (John Waters). Why would a woman like Gabrielle belong in something so filthy and freaky, and do you think he would want someone like her in this movie?
Erik: Gabrielle looks like she belongs in "Pink Flamingos" because she looks like TRAILER TRASH.
Your obsession with defining female beauty as the physical signs of high estrogen and low testosterone seems to blind you to other considerations. Erik, so many of the women you find attractive look revoltingly low class.
I believe John Waters would have wanted someone like Gabrielle in "Pink Flamingos" because "Pink Flamingos" is full of people who look like they would fit right in at Gabrielle's family reunion.
John Waters does want women who meet your definition of "feminine" in his movies; such as Traci Lords, Joey Heatherton and Amy Locane in "Cry Baby".
Erik: I am a big girl and I know who turns me on. That Vogue Paris, Sep. 2007 model on the left grabs my attention because of her shocking facial resemblance to a certain very sexy MAN.
Prince William is hot to me. This model is not hot to me. But she reminds me of a man who is hot to me. Get it?
You are sick Danielle.
Danielle: What do you mean that I am using your ‘“status” argument’? You didn’t read carefully enough the study cited at the link about the homosexual influence in the 20th century. In this study, the average BMI of high-fashion models in the 1990s was 17.8 and in another study of 300 fashion models published in 1997, the average BMI was 17.57. The 1990s supermodels were obviously heavier. Cindy Crawford was known for being quite muscular and “voluptuous” by high-fashion modeling standards.
The public didn’t become more tolerant of homosexuals all of a sudden. It has been a gradual process in the latter half of the twentieth century. Here are two references:
Quote:
Tolerance of homosexuals has improved in the past 10 years. How else would be you be seeing the mushrooming of GLBTQ groups over campuses, an increasing number of gay pride week/month celebrations, more vociferous demands for same-sex marriage, etc.? How else would you be seeing GLB groups (gay-lesbian-bisexual) transform to GLBT groups (gay-lesbian-bisexual-transgendered), then increasingly to GLBTQ groups (gay-lesbian-bisexual-transgendered-[gender] queer)?
Similarly, high-fashion models didn’t become thin all of a sudden. Over the second half of the twentieth century, they gradually became more masculine and thinner.
The pictures you posted of the 1990s supermodels are often small (with respect to the face), blurry, shot from angles that obscure masculine features, have parts of the face hidden by hair or are from professional photoshoots, where it is a safe bet that they have undergone some decent digital editing, a dramatic illustration of which has been featured in the evolution film by Dove. The close-ups I featured of the models make it clear that these women do not have feminine faces since no feminine faces could be made to look masculine at any angle. I am not calling them ugly. I personally do not know of anyone who feels that Christy Turlington and Claudia Schiffer were unattractive as young adults, and Bron is the first person that I have come across who has described Claudia Schiffer and Christy Turlington as looking pathetic/repugnant. My point is that the top-notch status achieved by these women is largely a consequence of the gay domination of the fashion business; the general public has been generally exposed to professional, airbrushed, enhanced-by-make-up photos of these women.
The pictures you took of the “sloppy hoes” shown by me are from effectively amateur photography with almost no likelihood of airbrushing; two of the women are taken from pages featuring somewhat masculinized women, and one of the pictures (Anna S., last picture) is not featured in the attractive women section (Anna S. looks much better: Pic 1, Pic 2.
Would this be more appropriate? Anna S makes blood gush out of people's eyes.
Whipped honey: Pink Flamingos was produced by a [borderline deranged?] homosexual (John Waters). Why would a woman like Gabrielle belong in something so filthy and freaky, and do you think he would want someone like her in this movie?
Sarah: Don't waste your time understanding femininity. The woman does not have high cheekbones, period. Thinner lips will not look masculine if their width is reduced, too (men have wider lips). There is a masculine-looking feature in her face, not describable as masculine because of the overall face shape, but you haven't figured it out. Strange isn't it for a woman who knows femininity when she sees it? It is the long distance between the bottom of the nose and the upper lips (greater in men). If you have Photoshop or another image editing program, lengthen her nose and reduce this distance; it will improve her attractiveness in a notable manner, making her look more feminine, too.
Honey, you are light but not naturally ghostly pale because you are not white...duh! The typical white person is naturally pasty white; the exceptions would be pink or in rare cases other colors as in yellow if the liver isn't functioning properly.
Whipped honey: I didn't exactly twist your words; just misread them. You seriously need to reflect on whether you have a homosexual component to your attractions, directed toward the more masculine-looking women.
Danielle: Paul "perv" Reubens aka Pee-wee Herman is a homosexual who is into adolescent boys. Of course he wouldn't want Anna S.
Brenda: I will replace Anna's image with a better one.
Ivanos: Ethnicity is not an issue. Masculine and feminine women are found in all parts of Europe. There are numerous feminine Eastern European women shown within this website for contrast purposes. I am not confounding angular features with masculinization.
Masculine vs. feminine as described within this site isn’t subjective: you are looking at evidence from physical anthropology and hormonal evidence related to facial features, bust-waist proportions, etc. Shaving one’s head, wearing skirts or equivalent are non-issues.
“Beefy muscles” are not required for a woman to be designated as masculine or having high testosterone levels. There are numerous skinny men who have much higher testosterone levels than the most naturally masculine women.
I am neither fat/curvy nor a woman. Judge an argument on its own merits rather than the assumed characteristics of the person making the arguments.
I'm European and the top models you have on this website are mostly eastern European or from the 'cold countries'. If u have ever traveled maybe you would see that the caucasian Scandinavian race tends to have women with very 'striking' features. That doesn't mean that they are masculine or androgenous.
Some people LOVE to say something is feminine and masculine because of the stupid hollywood 1940's ideal. Your idea of masculine and feminine is COMPLETELY subjective. You can't prove it. So what, these women have too much testostorone? Where are the beefy muscles then? Prove that they don't have enough estrogen. Show each model's estrogen levels compared to the average EASTERN EUROPEAN woman. Not to the american, not to the western european, not to the asian or the black. And compare it with a woman with these girl's age too. Otherwise it is biased.
Your website is biased. And your opinions are irrelevant and unsourceful. Based only in the fact that you are probably a fat 'curvy' woman yourself. If I was you, I would be embaressed to be talking about masculinity on runway models because it is PURE IGNORANCE. Just shows you how much you know about what people look like around the world.
Next thing I know they will say "Oh Asian men are feminine" because they have smaller jaws and longer hair than Caucasian men... it's ridiculous. The idea of what is masculine and what is feminine is different all over the world. Some Scottish men wear skirts, some African women shave their heads. Who says they are masculine or feminine? THEIR OWN DAMN CULTURE.
These fashion models are feminine in their own FASHION business. PERIOD.
shannon says hi!!
LOL bron, I'm not lying to myself about anything. You keep bringing anecdotal "evidence" into your posts and expect that that will convince me. You are the one who is lying to yourself.
I did not post any candids of her because I could not find any candid pictures of her when she was in her prime during her early twenties. The candids you have shown are displaying a much older woman than the one in my photos. She's about 37 right now and if those pictures are recent then it would not be fair to use them. I am still not seeing any evidence of "Cyclops" eyes.
I am honestly supposed to believe that you know a whole lot of women who supposedly look like Christy and they all want to change their features. Whatever! I still believe that she is beautiful and you pictorial "evidence" did nothing to disprove that.
We clearly have a different aesthetic sense of what is beautiful. I don't think women should be "soft and tender". Women can look good when they are tall and strong. I don't think weakness is attractive in anyone. I find strength and confidence attractive.
Your arguments are very weak so you can't convince anyone of anything. I agree that you are wasting your time.
Oh yeah, these photos I posted are also very kind to her, it is not like she just happened to wake up and was photographed.
Danielle
The photos I posted show the reality, yours don't. I've seen a lot of them in motion/videos and many photos, they have such shortcomings and repulsiveness. But you won't admit it. Claudia's photos you always post are so unrealistic, sure she looks good when she is made to look like somebody else, angles of posing to shorten her face, maybe stretching horizontaly, whatever the technique, softening the angles; how could she change so much in 10 years, to evolve in such creature?
http://www.zabra.si/tmp_web/freaks/str.jpg
http://www.zabra.si/tmp_web/freaks/stern.jpg
http://www.zabra.si/tmp_web/freaks/claudia22006.jpg
http://www.zabra.si/tmp_web/freaks/LTgw.jpg
Proportions don't change so much. She is not even old chronologicaly in this moment as we speak. If you wanted, you could see evidence of her cyclopes eyes, it is visible. Maybe some comparison with average unattractive people would help:
http://www.zabra.si/tmp_web/freaks/LOrealgirls255031497.jpg
http://www.zabra.si/tmp_web/freaks/052107.jpg
http://www.zabra.si/tmp_web/freaks/claudia1.jpg
http://www.zabra.si/tmp_web/freaks/claudia1_big.jpg
http://www.zabra.si/tmp_web/freaks/claudia2.jpg
And Christy is just so plain repugnant, I know many girls, who just hate their features, which they share with Christy, not that they wouldn't want to be famous like her. But women who have such nose and lips, hate it, want to alter it. And that long face (distance between her eyes and tip of nose). Honestly, I would hate to look like her.
Woman should be soft and tender, not some android. I like to look weak, and it is very interesting to sooo many people, not men exclusively. If beautiful, the face is beyond being merely interesting, it is all the superlatives, cause it is rarity, gem.
Weak or fragile look takes nothing away from it's overall attractiveness.
If I stop replying, it won't be cause you changed my mind. You can't.It won't help you either if you keep on putting on sweetest airbrushed altered photos of theirs, but there won't be many more of them.
You are obviously determined to lie yourself, and I have more important things to do in my life.
Whipped honey: The formatting problem is fixed. You didn't close the underline formatting command, making everything below underlined. Preview before posting. The smiley problem was a coding fault by me. Sorry about it; the smileys should now work. I will reply later.
Erik, I want to respond further to your reply to me, but for some reason every time I open this page, the heading "Post a Comment" and and the links "Smileys" and "Comment formatting guidelines" are underlined and the result, as seen in my previous post, is that my entire post, even the by-line, is going to appear underlined. Please post and tell me how I can fix this. Thank you.
Pages