Der Führer, I meant to write African AMERICAN males have a lower incidence of obesity than Mexican American men. I assumed that my source (American Obesity Association) was using the term "mexican american" to describe americans of predominant mexican "indian" ancestry. I am not confused like you appear to be. Here is a link to the source: http://obesity1.tempdomainname.com/subs/fastfacts/Obesity_Minority_Pop.shtml.
> Eric, I don’t think genetic differences are the sole explanation for
> obesity levels in non-white populations. African American females have
> the highest rates of obesity in women but African males have lower
> obesity rates than Mexican American men.
I think that there's a fallacy lurking up there...
Eric, I don't think genetic differences are the sole explanation for obesity levels in non-white populations. African American females have the highest rates of obesity in women but African males have lower obesity rates than Mexican American men.
I think the sex symbols of a culture are a pretty good example of what people find attractive in that culture. I don't think an assessment of contemporary western culture would suggest that there is a preference for the extreme thinness seen in high fashion models. You don't seem to understand that most high fashion models are virtually unknown to the general population. Gemma Ward's popularity is not equivalent to the past poularity of Theda Bara. You would have to evaluate the looks of popular actors and celebrities.
I don't think that it is a coincidence that the most popular VS models are typically heavier than most high fashion models. They are closer to America's current preferred body fat levels than most of their high fashion counterparts.
There were other very popular silent screen actresses that wore things that were just as revealing as Theda Bara's costumes. Annette Kellermann was a major silent film star who appeared nude in one of the most expensive films of that decade. Other very popular silent film stars like Fay Wray, and Gloria Swanson did risque or nude scenes. Old Hollywood was not as repressed as people think it was before the Hays code was instituted in 1934.
I think the ideals of beauty are greatly influenced by culture. I think that youth is highly correlated with beauty in all cultures but everything else seems to be heavily culturally influenced.
Der Wanderer, I don't really think that my statements were difficult to decipher. Lillian Russel was obese by medical standards so its not just my opinion that she was fat.
My "beef" with Eric is that he tries to present his opinions as fact. I believe that most people would find the supermodels more attractive than the porn girls Eric compares them to. I also think that he is racist, homophobic and sexist.
The people at Victoria's Secret may have put Alessandra in their shows and commercials but the general public has put her on a pedestal. If the beauty of Alessandra had isolated appreciation in gay circles then she wouldn't be as popular as she is now. Are you saying that the public is so vapid that they will admire someone who is clearly unnattractive because gay men tell them to?
I know that beauty standards have changed that was my point. You haven't really challenged anything I said though you think you have. You are an idiot.
Pania Rose and Reka Ebergenyi aren't big names but they are very successful models. They have done a quite a bit of work. They have done more work than your examples of feminine models. Michelle Buswell WAS a big name. You won't see on the models.com top 50 list that you swear by now a days but she was very popular.
I think that more men will prefer the facial features of Michelle, Pania and Reka to your nude model's face. Your nude model is not beautiful. She is plain. I agree that Inguna's face lacks the "sexy" (sleazy) quality that your nude model has but you chose some small editorial pictures as examples of her features.Inguna is way more beautiful than your fugly model. Here are some bigger, clearer shots of Inguna:
Your model is not thinner than Pania. I don't see how those "warrior" (lol) pictures prove that she is. All those pictures prove is that your nude model does terrible poses and has no curves. Those aren't examples of someone looking great in clothes Eric. LOL! No wonder you think you have artistic images on this site. You are clueless and your taste is horrendous. The pock marks on her ass are indicators that she may not be healthy or disease free. I am sure most men would rather date an attractive fashion model than a STD infected soft-porn model. How is anyone supposed to bring your model home to mama?
You haven't proven that Heidi's tits are fake. You use pictures of someone wearing a push up bra that is probably padded as examples that someone's tits are fake. You are so clueless about every little thing. Heidi's breasts look pretty natural here: http://www.naughty36.com/topcelebs/sep/celebs/mrskin/heidi_klum/images/03.jpg
Her breasts don't look like grapefruit halves that were bolted onto her chest. They look fine to me.
Erik, I see your real motive behind creating this site quite clearly. You are trying to push forward your race superiorty agenda. I am sorry that you feel bad to discover that more and more white women are involved in interracial relationships these days in the US. What will happen to the white race? The offsprings of these relationships will no longer be white, what will we do with all these 'non-feminine' women?
You are a sad sad person, Erik. By the way, the Klan is recruiting again, you should join!
If your claim is true, your sweeping generalization is false. The 8 of the 9 guys behind me watching college football--who are all heterosexual men--prefer the looks of the "masculinized" female lingerie models you chose to compare. A second poll was taken and 9 of the 9 guys stated that if they worked in the modeling industry--replacing homosexual men that currently dominate it--they would choose the exact same women the homosexual men did--there is no difference here..based purely on sexual orientation (homo/bi or hetero). If you can offer a larger panel (than my 9) with contradicting evidence, then please do so. And if you do find something (unlikely), then I suppose we're all unaware of our homosexuality.
Who says that it is right thing to impose such rule, that for fashion model woman has to be 5'9. It is big fat lie, that they look better in clothes, I have eyes, and I can see, that clothes look just as good on smaller stature, if it is correspondingly slim with same proportions as a tall stature.It is so evident. In my life, I've seen more enviable mannequin ( mannequin etym.meaning: small man) figures in clothes among 5'3- 5'5 range than among 5'7 and up.That is such arrogance. Heightism.
erik, you are right when you tell tjhe the majority of models are 178 cm tall and over and I also see them but high fashion models are not only 178 cm tall...I want to tell that if a model is less than 175 cm (and I see very often these models)she seems very tall because she have bone skeleton structure and very slimm bones and very long legs that she appears very tall and she's select by fashion agencies and work also on the catwalk of high fashion designers.
I'm Italian from milan, the capital of world fashion. The models I see on the runway or in the street are high fashion models by the most important agencies of the world like woman,elite, ford and why not. and the majority of models that work in Italy are not italian!!!!I usually observ that these girls speack brasilian, russian and very often english.so your observations about etnical origins are not correct because the models in milan are not italian.they are very very slimm (for exemple they have very small buttock)but this depend to the bones that are very slimm in this girls.I tell you what are the high fashion models not also in Italy but in the world because the girls who can work in milan, probably work all over the world.
8D: The woman looks about normal/average with respect to masculinity-femininity, i.e. neither feminine nor masculine.
Ashley: Both actual size and how it compares to other body structures go into whether the rib cage looks small. The frontal width is also related to sideways/profile width.
Danielle: Who said anything about Ekaterina doing fashion modeling? I haven’t ignored your post on Reka Ebergenyi; just replied to it after some time because I was caught up with other things.
9D: Given the resources of the fashion business, it would be very easy to find feminine women who are 5-foot-9 and up. It definitely has to do with whether they are feminine or masculine.
Brian: I haven’t concentrated on why most people prefer feminine beauty, but have cited its relation to fertility and fecundity. The appeal of a smaller ribcage does not appear to be related to it suggesting “trim and fit,” but to it making a woman look more feminine. Athletic women look fitter than feminine women but tend to have broader ribcages.
Danielle: I haven’t argued that all high-fashion models are masculine, and from the very beginning shown some examples of feminine fashion models. Therefore, your question about how some of your examples got past the homosexuals is not applicable. The homosexual influence is clear in the central tendency among high-fashion models, not in every single high-fashion model. Except Inguna Butane, you haven’t cited any big names, but Ms. Butane’s face (yet another example) does not have the sexy element that Melisande does.
Melisande has finer facial features than all the women you cited. You also continue to post pictures where the features aren’t very clear. Here is a closer look at Michelle Buswell’s face. Do you believe that heterosexual men will generally prefer Ms. Buswell to Melisande?
I didn’t post Melisande’s pictures to show an example of a slender and “skinny-waisted” woman, but to show an example of a slender and masculinized woman that would appeal to heterosexual men a lot more than the typical high-fashion model. This is the reason why you are wasting your time citing Reka Ebergenyi’s physique (or Pania Rose) as better examples. Reka isn’t as slender as Melisande in the picture you posted either, and don’t assume that her face is necessarily more appealing than Melisande’s to heterosexual men (example 1, example 2, example 3).
Below you will see Melisande as a warrior Goddess and observe that she is more slender than even Pania Rose in your pictures (Melisande is usually very slender).
Melisande looks great in clothes.
Melisande also looks a woman; contrast her with manly Heidi Klum, whose fake breasts hardly help her in the femininity department (Click for larger image).
...and you are concerned with pock marks on the backside!
Joshua: The sexual appeal of a woman to heterosexual men is partly dependent on the inferred ease with which she is beddable. Starting from a feminine woman, an increase in masculinity suggests greater ease of beddability, but there is obviously an upper limit to the masculinization that will be appealing to heterosexual men. This is how slight masculinization is a correlate of sexiness.
Whereas Miss Colombia doesn’t have narrow-set eyes, she has a narrow face, regressed cheekbones and broad nasal bones, all contributing to a masculine look. Her overall face shape is masculinized though not greatly.
Emperorjvl: There is some resemblance between Karolina and Luis Miguel.
Danielle: Whereas your source posted Karolina’s topless pictures in April 2007, this does not mean that they are recent pictures. The source just mentions a photoshoot, not its date.
I don’t know how recent Karolina’s backside pictures in the article are, but she isn’t skinny in those pictures.
When you consider rich-looking, 5-foot-10 models wearing 6-inch heels and dressed in fine clothing, they are bound to be noticed wherever they go by people who don’t know who they are regardless of attractiveness.
Why do I need to assess the attractiveness of fashion models when most people have eyes and can see it for themselves? There are plenty of people who haven’t realized many things that I have been pointing out in spite of normal eyesight and normal vision, and some of them have left comments at this site about this site being an eye opener. I haven’t been working toward educating people about “intrinsic beauty ideals” but have cited literature on what most people find attractive to back up some of my arguments.
Whereas the homosexual designers prefer women who lean toward the looks of adolescent boys for fashion modeling, lingerie is not fashion, and modeling it requires more feminine looks, which forces the homosexuals to tolerate the minimum femininity that gets the job done. You still observe the homosexuals mostly avoiding feminine women for lingerie modeling and occasionally throwing in regular high-fashion models in the Victoria’s Secret show.
Karolina has mild cellulite, which won’t be visible in the VS show and in any professional pictures of her in lingerie, it would be airbrushed away. Homosexual designers will not give up on the masculine element of her face, broad rib cage, broad shoulders and other features that made her an appealing high-fashion model to them just because she has mild cellulite
I did not say that Karolina’s backside is “sunken.” I said that it isn’t sufficiently feminine for the job. Two pictures at a website linked by you clarify this (1, 2).
The following comparison, using another picture cited by you, also helps.
Other pictures of Karolina’s backside, where it looks better, were simply photographed at an opportune moment; don’t forget to see the VS show video clip I posted. You have focused on her backside. The fact remains that she has broad shoulders, a wide rib cage, large feet and other masculinized features. What is the bright idea of using her for lingerie modeling? I could see the point of using a feminine woman with a backside similar to Karolina’s because what matters is the overall look, but why Karolina?
Joe and McSushi: With faces like Mendes’ and Lopez’, it is unlikely that the physiques would be feminine. I haven’t seen clear pictures of Jennifer Lopez’ physique, but given examples like this, I don’t think her body is feminine. Eva Mendes appears to have an average physique that is made to look more feminine in pictures by special posing.
Dana: I have not maintained that all high-fashion models look masculine. I have emphasized the central tendency among high-fashion models. An occasional Cintia Dicker does not undermine the masculine central tendency, and Cintia isn’t as prominent or likely to become as big as Alessandra Ambrosio.
DWPittelli: The line drawings above look worse than what they did in the actual images used for the study. The line drawings by their very nature should not bias people to select the middle range as optimal. I have also cited studies that have used photographs of actual people and their manipulations, and the conclusions are similar.
Danielle: Indirect evidence for ethnic differences in proneness to obesity can be observed by differences in the prevalence of obesity after adjusting for various demographic/socioeconomic correlates in multiethnic societies. Anyway, there are known genetic differences between ethnic groups with respect to the likelihood of packing on excess body fat, an example of which is documented here (scroll down to the section on obesity).
Regarding your reference to past standards in Western societies, the fundamental flaw in your approach is using some famous examples to infer the general preference of the population. A similar assessment of contemporary Western societies would suggest that most Westerners prefer the typical thinness and masculinization of high-fashion models given that these women occupy the highest status among models, make a lot of money and are portrayed very admirably in advertisements. The reality is revealed in controlled laboratory studies, one example of which is the study discussed in the article above. These studies reveal that Westerners overwhelmingly prefer, in women, above average femininity and body fat levels higher than what is typically observed in high-fashion models.
The problem is that there are no comparable controlled laboratory studies from the era your pictures date to. An additional problem is that back then few women would be willing to expose themselves in the risqué dresses worn by Theda Bara, i.e., a woman with sub-optimal looks could end up popular with men because of the dearth of women with closer to optimal looks that were willing to expose themselves in a similar manner. Yet another problem is that the likes of Lillian Russell were admired for non-looks factors such as singing and acting. Even in the current era, you can observe a number of women that initially came to the limelight for reasons apart from looks and ended up being admired by many men because they looked better than most of their peers, not because they were very good looking per se (e.g., Anna Kournikova). In other words, you have not established that “desired body fat levels have changed throughout western history.”
I am not insisting that there has been no change, but your examples remind me of the social constructionist argument coming from feminist circles, and it is very inadequate.
Whilom: When people refer to patriarchy, they have heterosexual men in mind, and this is why some describe it more specifically as heteropatriarchy, which is what you are referring to. Heterosexual men clearly have a preference for feminine-looking women. So why would heterosexual men adopt masculinized women as the epitome of beauty when it comes to modeling? Your answer is because it would be more successful for business given that businesses favor men or the masculine. There are problems with this notion.
I am sure you would agree that wearing women’s clothing and being photographed in them is not a male-typical activity. Why would patriarchy desire that something so unmasculine be performed by masculinized women?
Elle MacPherson and numerous masculinized women like her have been used to pose provocatively for heterosexual men. Is this supposed to increase sales?
You have stated that the more masculine or men are treated preferentially in business, and also that the goal of business is to make money. Therefore, if men are treated preferentially, then it needs to square with the need for making the most money, i.e., this choice must maximize profit. But if this choice maximizes profit, then something about masculinization should be intrinsically related to greater odds of success with most businesses. To back up your argument, you must show that the male domination of the top ranks of businesses is explained by preferential treatment of men that is not related to an intrinsic advantage that accompanies masculinization, and also explain why men dominate the bottom rung of society -- homeless people, people working the worst and most dangerous jobs, prisoners, drug addicts, etc. If patriarchy favors men, why are men overrepresented at the bottom?
The male domination of the fashion business is not explained by patriarchy or else you would see the industry dominated by heterosexual men, not homosexual men.
Are designers being less creative with men’s fashion because “patriarchal business attitudes are infused with the patriarchal notion that we aren’t supposed to make men look fancy”? Well, generally speaking, it is acceptable for women to wear pants, but not for men to wear skirts. Women thereby have a greater choice of clothing and the designs available to them will be more diverse than those available to men. But why would patriarchy restrict male choice and allow greater choice to women when it comes to clothes?
Elle’s appreciation by many is not exactly an example of people allowing their sense of what is attractive to be altered by marketing forces, but an example of how some people can be duped by high-profile marketing, posing tricks and airbrushing, especially if there is a dearth of feminine beauty in the media.
8D: Which Playboy model are you talking about? I have shown a bunch, and if this model matched the shape of Marquardt’s mask, then she wouldn’t be in the attractive women section.
Anna S has the perfect figure.
Der Führer, I meant to write African AMERICAN males have a lower incidence of obesity than Mexican American men. I assumed that my source (American Obesity Association) was using the term "mexican american" to describe americans of predominant mexican "indian" ancestry. I am not confused like you appear to be. Here is a link to the source: http://obesity1.tempdomainname.com/subs/fastfacts/Obesity_Minority_Pop.shtml.
> You are trying to push forward your race superiorty agenda.
Huh?
> I am sorry that you feel bad to discover that more and more white
> women are involved in interracial relationships these days in the US
And what would you call that ?
A "race inferiority agenda" ?
What a genius.
STFU, OJ Simpson.
You are guilty and we know it.
In fact, there's more to it than just "Apples & Oranges"
This genius is mixing up several issues like:
- Nationality
- Ethnicity
- Genetics
- Politics
- Culture
- Gender
What a genius, this Danielle guy ...
> Eric, I don’t think genetic differences are the sole explanation for
> obesity levels in non-white populations. African American females have
> the highest rates of obesity in women but African males have lower
> obesity rates than Mexican American men.
I think that there's a fallacy lurking up there...
http://www.fallacyfiles.org/
Try to find out which one.
Hint #1: All (so-called) non-whites aren't equal
Hint #2: Apples & Oranges
Eric, I don't think genetic differences are the sole explanation for obesity levels in non-white populations. African American females have the highest rates of obesity in women but African males have lower obesity rates than Mexican American men.
I think the sex symbols of a culture are a pretty good example of what people find attractive in that culture. I don't think an assessment of contemporary western culture would suggest that there is a preference for the extreme thinness seen in high fashion models. You don't seem to understand that most high fashion models are virtually unknown to the general population. Gemma Ward's popularity is not equivalent to the past poularity of Theda Bara. You would have to evaluate the looks of popular actors and celebrities.
I don't think that it is a coincidence that the most popular VS models are typically heavier than most high fashion models. They are closer to America's current preferred body fat levels than most of their high fashion counterparts.
There were other very popular silent screen actresses that wore things that were just as revealing as Theda Bara's costumes. Annette Kellermann was a major silent film star who appeared nude in one of the most expensive films of that decade. Other very popular silent film stars like Fay Wray, and Gloria Swanson did risque or nude scenes. Old Hollywood was not as repressed as people think it was before the Hays code was instituted in 1934.
I think the ideals of beauty are greatly influenced by culture. I think that youth is highly correlated with beauty in all cultures but everything else seems to be heavily culturally influenced.
Der Wanderer, I don't really think that my statements were difficult to decipher. Lillian Russel was obese by medical standards so its not just my opinion that she was fat.
My "beef" with Eric is that he tries to present his opinions as fact. I believe that most people would find the supermodels more attractive than the porn girls Eric compares them to. I also think that he is racist, homophobic and sexist.
The people at Victoria's Secret may have put Alessandra in their shows and commercials but the general public has put her on a pedestal. If the beauty of Alessandra had isolated appreciation in gay circles then she wouldn't be as popular as she is now. Are you saying that the public is so vapid that they will admire someone who is clearly unnattractive because gay men tell them to?
I know that beauty standards have changed that was my point. You haven't really challenged anything I said though you think you have. You are an idiot.
Pania Rose and Reka Ebergenyi aren't big names but they are very successful models. They have done a quite a bit of work. They have done more work than your examples of feminine models. Michelle Buswell WAS a big name. You won't see on the models.com top 50 list that you swear by now a days but she was very popular.
I think that more men will prefer the facial features of Michelle, Pania and Reka to your nude model's face. Your nude model is not beautiful. She is plain. I agree that Inguna's face lacks the "sexy" (sleazy) quality that your nude model has but you chose some small editorial pictures as examples of her features.Inguna is way more beautiful than your fugly model. Here are some bigger, clearer shots of Inguna:
Your model is not thinner than Pania. I don't see how those "warrior" (lol) pictures prove that she is. All those pictures prove is that your nude model does terrible poses and has no curves. Those aren't examples of someone looking great in clothes Eric. LOL! No wonder you think you have artistic images on this site. You are clueless and your taste is horrendous. The pock marks on her ass are indicators that she may not be healthy or disease free. I am sure most men would rather date an attractive fashion model than a STD infected soft-porn model. How is anyone supposed to bring your model home to mama?
You haven't proven that Heidi's tits are fake. You use pictures of someone wearing a push up bra that is probably padded as examples that someone's tits are fake. You are so clueless about every little thing. Heidi's breasts look pretty natural here:
http://www.naughty36.com/topcelebs/sep/celebs/mrskin/heidi_klum/images/03.jpg
Her breasts don't look like grapefruit halves that were bolted onto her chest. They look fine to me.
Erik, I see your real motive behind creating this site quite clearly. You are trying to push forward your race superiorty agenda. I am sorry that you feel bad to discover that more and more white women are involved in interracial relationships these days in the US. What will happen to the white race? The offsprings of these relationships will no longer be white, what will we do with all these 'non-feminine' women?
You are a sad sad person, Erik. By the way, the Klan is recruiting again, you should join!
oh, and along with the female masculinized lingerie models we'd like to get with are these fine ladies...
If your claim is true, your sweeping generalization is false. The 8 of the 9 guys behind me watching college football--who are all heterosexual men--prefer the looks of the "masculinized" female lingerie models you chose to compare. A second poll was taken and 9 of the 9 guys stated that if they worked in the modeling industry--replacing homosexual men that currently dominate it--they would choose the exact same women the homosexual men did--there is no difference here..based purely on sexual orientation (homo/bi or hetero). If you can offer a larger panel (than my 9) with contradicting evidence, then please do so. And if you do find something (unlikely), then I suppose we're all unaware of our homosexuality.
Go USC!!!
Devon Aoki is 5'5 and did these runways, tiny , but I don't remember whether she had also tinier bones than other models or very feminine ribcage.
BLAH BLAH!!!!1
Who says that it is right thing to impose such rule, that for fashion model woman has to be 5'9. It is big fat lie, that they look better in clothes, I have eyes, and I can see, that clothes look just as good on smaller stature, if it is correspondingly slim with same proportions as a tall stature.It is so evident. In my life, I've seen more enviable mannequin ( mannequin etym.meaning: small man) figures in clothes among 5'3- 5'5 range than among 5'7 and up.That is such arrogance. Heightism.
erik, you are right when you tell tjhe the majority of models are 178 cm tall and over and I also see them but high fashion models are not only 178 cm tall...I want to tell that if a model is less than 175 cm (and I see very often these models)she seems very tall because she have bone skeleton structure and very slimm bones and very long legs that she appears very tall and she's select by fashion agencies and work also on the catwalk of high fashion designers.
Noooooo Erik,
I'm Italian from milan, the capital of world fashion. The models I see on the runway or in the street are high fashion models by the most important agencies of the world like woman,elite, ford and why not. and the majority of models that work in Italy are not italian!!!!I usually observ that these girls speack brasilian, russian and very often english.so your observations about etnical origins are not correct because the models in milan are not italian.they are very very slimm (for exemple they have very small buttock)but this depend to the bones that are very slimm in this girls.I tell you what are the high fashion models not also in Italy but in the world because the girls who can work in milan, probably work all over the world.
The Horror, the Horror ...
This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
Not with a bang but a whimper.
8D: The woman looks about normal/average with respect to masculinity-femininity, i.e. neither feminine nor masculine.
Ashley: Both actual size and how it compares to other body structures go into whether the rib cage looks small. The frontal width is also related to sideways/profile width.
Danielle: Who said anything about Ekaterina doing fashion modeling? I haven’t ignored your post on Reka Ebergenyi; just replied to it after some time because I was caught up with other things.
9D: Given the resources of the fashion business, it would be very easy to find feminine women who are 5-foot-9 and up. It definitely has to do with whether they are feminine or masculine.
Brian: I haven’t concentrated on why most people prefer feminine beauty, but have cited its relation to fertility and fecundity. The appeal of a smaller ribcage does not appear to be related to it suggesting “trim and fit,” but to it making a woman look more feminine. Athletic women look fitter than feminine women but tend to have broader ribcages.
Danielle: I haven’t argued that all high-fashion models are masculine, and from the very beginning shown some examples of feminine fashion models. Therefore, your question about how some of your examples got past the homosexuals is not applicable. The homosexual influence is clear in the central tendency among high-fashion models, not in every single high-fashion model. Except Inguna Butane, you haven’t cited any big names, but Ms. Butane’s face (yet another example) does not have the sexy element that Melisande does.
Melisande has finer facial features than all the women you cited. You also continue to post pictures where the features aren’t very clear. Here is a closer look at Michelle Buswell’s face. Do you believe that heterosexual men will generally prefer Ms. Buswell to Melisande?
I didn’t post Melisande’s pictures to show an example of a slender and “skinny-waisted” woman, but to show an example of a slender and masculinized woman that would appeal to heterosexual men a lot more than the typical high-fashion model. This is the reason why you are wasting your time citing Reka Ebergenyi’s physique (or Pania Rose) as better examples. Reka isn’t as slender as Melisande in the picture you posted either, and don’t assume that her face is necessarily more appealing than Melisande’s to heterosexual men (example 1, example 2, example 3).
Below you will see Melisande as a warrior Goddess and observe that she is more slender than even Pania Rose in your pictures (Melisande is usually very slender).
Melisande looks great in clothes.
Melisande also looks a woman; contrast her with manly Heidi Klum, whose fake breasts hardly help her in the femininity department (Click for larger image).
...and you are concerned with pock marks on the backside!
Joshua: The sexual appeal of a woman to heterosexual men is partly dependent on the inferred ease with which she is beddable. Starting from a feminine woman, an increase in masculinity suggests greater ease of beddability, but there is obviously an upper limit to the masculinization that will be appealing to heterosexual men. This is how slight masculinization is a correlate of sexiness.
Whereas Miss Colombia doesn’t have narrow-set eyes, she has a narrow face, regressed cheekbones and broad nasal bones, all contributing to a masculine look. Her overall face shape is masculinized though not greatly.
Emperorjvl: There is some resemblance between Karolina and Luis Miguel.
Danielle: Whereas your source posted Karolina’s topless pictures in April 2007, this does not mean that they are recent pictures. The source just mentions a photoshoot, not its date.
I don’t know how recent Karolina’s backside pictures in the article are, but she isn’t skinny in those pictures.
When you consider rich-looking, 5-foot-10 models wearing 6-inch heels and dressed in fine clothing, they are bound to be noticed wherever they go by people who don’t know who they are regardless of attractiveness.
Why do I need to assess the attractiveness of fashion models when most people have eyes and can see it for themselves? There are plenty of people who haven’t realized many things that I have been pointing out in spite of normal eyesight and normal vision, and some of them have left comments at this site about this site being an eye opener. I haven’t been working toward educating people about “intrinsic beauty ideals” but have cited literature on what most people find attractive to back up some of my arguments.
Whereas the homosexual designers prefer women who lean toward the looks of adolescent boys for fashion modeling, lingerie is not fashion, and modeling it requires more feminine looks, which forces the homosexuals to tolerate the minimum femininity that gets the job done. You still observe the homosexuals mostly avoiding feminine women for lingerie modeling and occasionally throwing in regular high-fashion models in the Victoria’s Secret show.
Karolina has mild cellulite, which won’t be visible in the VS show and in any professional pictures of her in lingerie, it would be airbrushed away. Homosexual designers will not give up on the masculine element of her face, broad rib cage, broad shoulders and other features that made her an appealing high-fashion model to them just because she has mild cellulite
I did not say that Karolina’s backside is “sunken.” I said that it isn’t sufficiently feminine for the job. Two pictures at a website linked by you clarify this (1, 2).
The following comparison, using another picture cited by you, also helps.
Other pictures of Karolina’s backside, where it looks better, were simply photographed at an opportune moment; don’t forget to see the VS show video clip I posted. You have focused on her backside. The fact remains that she has broad shoulders, a wide rib cage, large feet and other masculinized features. What is the bright idea of using her for lingerie modeling? I could see the point of using a feminine woman with a backside similar to Karolina’s because what matters is the overall look, but why Karolina?
Joe and McSushi: With faces like Mendes’ and Lopez’, it is unlikely that the physiques would be feminine. I haven’t seen clear pictures of Jennifer Lopez’ physique, but given examples like this, I don’t think her body is feminine. Eva Mendes appears to have an average physique that is made to look more feminine in pictures by special posing.
Dana: I have not maintained that all high-fashion models look masculine. I have emphasized the central tendency among high-fashion models. An occasional Cintia Dicker does not undermine the masculine central tendency, and Cintia isn’t as prominent or likely to become as big as Alessandra Ambrosio.
DWPittelli: The line drawings above look worse than what they did in the actual images used for the study. The line drawings by their very nature should not bias people to select the middle range as optimal. I have also cited studies that have used photographs of actual people and their manipulations, and the conclusions are similar.
Danielle: Indirect evidence for ethnic differences in proneness to obesity can be observed by differences in the prevalence of obesity after adjusting for various demographic/socioeconomic correlates in multiethnic societies. Anyway, there are known genetic differences between ethnic groups with respect to the likelihood of packing on excess body fat, an example of which is documented here (scroll down to the section on obesity).
Regarding your reference to past standards in Western societies, the fundamental flaw in your approach is using some famous examples to infer the general preference of the population. A similar assessment of contemporary Western societies would suggest that most Westerners prefer the typical thinness and masculinization of high-fashion models given that these women occupy the highest status among models, make a lot of money and are portrayed very admirably in advertisements. The reality is revealed in controlled laboratory studies, one example of which is the study discussed in the article above. These studies reveal that Westerners overwhelmingly prefer, in women, above average femininity and body fat levels higher than what is typically observed in high-fashion models.
The problem is that there are no comparable controlled laboratory studies from the era your pictures date to. An additional problem is that back then few women would be willing to expose themselves in the risqué dresses worn by Theda Bara, i.e., a woman with sub-optimal looks could end up popular with men because of the dearth of women with closer to optimal looks that were willing to expose themselves in a similar manner. Yet another problem is that the likes of Lillian Russell were admired for non-looks factors such as singing and acting. Even in the current era, you can observe a number of women that initially came to the limelight for reasons apart from looks and ended up being admired by many men because they looked better than most of their peers, not because they were very good looking per se (e.g., Anna Kournikova). In other words, you have not established that “desired body fat levels have changed throughout western history.”
I am not insisting that there has been no change, but your examples remind me of the social constructionist argument coming from feminist circles, and it is very inadequate.
Whilom: When people refer to patriarchy, they have heterosexual men in mind, and this is why some describe it more specifically as heteropatriarchy, which is what you are referring to. Heterosexual men clearly have a preference for feminine-looking women. So why would heterosexual men adopt masculinized women as the epitome of beauty when it comes to modeling? Your answer is because it would be more successful for business given that businesses favor men or the masculine. There are problems with this notion.
I am sure you would agree that wearing women’s clothing and being photographed in them is not a male-typical activity. Why would patriarchy desire that something so unmasculine be performed by masculinized women?
Elle MacPherson and numerous masculinized women like her have been used to pose provocatively for heterosexual men. Is this supposed to increase sales?
You have stated that the more masculine or men are treated preferentially in business, and also that the goal of business is to make money. Therefore, if men are treated preferentially, then it needs to square with the need for making the most money, i.e., this choice must maximize profit. But if this choice maximizes profit, then something about masculinization should be intrinsically related to greater odds of success with most businesses. To back up your argument, you must show that the male domination of the top ranks of businesses is explained by preferential treatment of men that is not related to an intrinsic advantage that accompanies masculinization, and also explain why men dominate the bottom rung of society -- homeless people, people working the worst and most dangerous jobs, prisoners, drug addicts, etc. If patriarchy favors men, why are men overrepresented at the bottom?
The male domination of the fashion business is not explained by patriarchy or else you would see the industry dominated by heterosexual men, not homosexual men.
Are designers being less creative with men’s fashion because “patriarchal business attitudes are infused with the patriarchal notion that we aren’t supposed to make men look fancy”? Well, generally speaking, it is acceptable for women to wear pants, but not for men to wear skirts. Women thereby have a greater choice of clothing and the designs available to them will be more diverse than those available to men. But why would patriarchy restrict male choice and allow greater choice to women when it comes to clothes?
Elle’s appreciation by many is not exactly an example of people allowing their sense of what is attractive to be altered by marketing forces, but an example of how some people can be duped by high-profile marketing, posing tricks and airbrushing, especially if there is a dearth of feminine beauty in the media.
8D: Which Playboy model are you talking about? I have shown a bunch, and if this model matched the shape of Marquardt’s mask, then she wouldn’t be in the attractive women section.
Anil: Aishwarya Rai’s physique is normal with respect to masculinity-femininity in the sense that it is about average, neither feminine nor masculine.
Pages