8D: This site is laying the groundwork for a significant public impact, which is not going to occur overnight.
Danielle: Whereas I agree that the more beautiful are not necessarily better people, beauty has some value. Speaking of illegal desires, desires are not illegal, but some behaviors are. Just because people continue to buy fashion merchandize notwithstanding the appearance of current models, it does not mean that models’ looks do not matter. Some people care about aesthetic issues, as in wanting to see feminine beauties among lingerie models and beauty pageant contestants. The current choice of models also has a negative impact on some young girls and women, prompting them to diet unnecessarily. Therefore, the looks of models and beauty pageant contestants matter.
I am not going to come up with additions to specifically offend people like you, but you will be offended as usual.
The subtlety of femininity and beauty need to be elaborated on because people are born with a basic aesthetic sense that is honed by experience. For instance, even infants prefer better looking to not so good looking faces, but experience limits what one finds to be highly appealing. Given the dearth of feminine beauty in the limelight, many individuals are not aware of the great examples of feminine beauty out there, which if brought to the limelight more often will prompt people to increasingly stop watching telecasts of beauty pageants and lingerie shows because the women shown are nowhere close to what most of them find highly appealing. This will prompt the organizers of beauty pageants/lingerie shows to select more feminine women. Just consider Miss America. Political correctness increasingly diminished its viewership and the pageant even got knocked off regular TV. The organization in charge has recently brought back the swimsuit round to check further viewership decline, but what it really needs is to primarily use feminine contestants. When masculine models are well-contrasted with feminine ones, the public will increasingly want to observe more feminine women among actresses and other celebrities, in accordance with its feminine-beauty-preferring central tendency, which will help bring more feminine women to the limelight. So you see how it is going to work?
Anil: If most jobs are indoor jobs, then chances are that whites will spend their leisure time outdoors, initially not to get a tan, but just to have a good time. Once a tan gets associated with high status, many will specifically spend time outside to get a tan to present a look of higher status. For tanning to signify higher socioeconomic status, you need to satisfy two requirements: the baseline color variation in the population should be low and most jobs, especially on the part of lower class individuals, should be indoor jobs. The first requirement is important; if the baseline variation is high, then it wouldn’t be possible to tell whether a darker individual is darker because of greater sun exposure or because the person is naturally darker. In white populations, a tan can signify higher socioeconomic status only if you know that the baseline skin is white. It is for this reason that you should not confuse a desire for a tan with a desire to not have naturally white skin.
Most of the girls on Models.com get a lot of work. I don't disagree with who is on the lists. I disagree with who is ranked above the other girls. I disagree with these models.com rankings because some of the girls at the top seem to do far less shows and are in far less editorials than the girls who are lower than them.
Malgosia Bela, Doutzen Kroes and Julia Stegner are just as heavy, if not more so, as Daria was in that picture and they are in the top spots on that models.com list right now. I guess that girls who are as "fat" as Daria was in that picture can be ranked at the top on that list.
I am thinking that you may be talking about Vouge's May 2007 issue when you mention Anna Wintour's picks as the next supermodels. I agree that most of the girls that she picked are getting a lot of work right now. With the exception of Chanel Iman, they are all very popular. She put Doutzen Kroes, Lily Donaldson, Hilary Rhoda, Sasha Pivovarova, Caroline Trentini, Chanel Iman, Raquel Zimmermann, Jessica Stam, Coco Rocha, and Agyness Deyn on the May cover.
I ask you to look at the cover of that issue and refer back to the models.com list. You will see that some girls like Iselin Steiro, Julia Stegner and Malgosia Bela are above them all. These womena are still more popular right now than most models will ever be, but their workload is far smaller than some of the girls that are ranked below them right now.
The popularity of models aren't always based on how anorexic or "boyish" they look. Model popularity and success is more based on having a good agent who can convince industry people that you're worth a damn, being at the right agency, schmoozing with the right industry people and just pure luck.
The fashion industry is made up of all kinds of people. "The homosexuals" don't run the industry like a dictatorship and only allow the the most "boyish" women in their company. There are many editors, photographers, socialites and fianancial backers (straight, white men. *GASP*) who are just as influential as "the homosexuals" themselves.
As I have said, time and tme again, at the end of the day all the models, "the homosexuals," the editors and the socialites have to answer to straight white men or in other words, the MONEY. Straight, white men own and finance the fashion labels, the fashion magazines, the modeling agencies and they put the money in the hands of their spoilt, socialite wives who buy and influence high fashion products. If you want to change the industry then take it up with them just like everyone else has to.
I admit, sometimes the top fashion models can look a little manly compared to other women but who cares? Just because Gisele doesn't have large breasts and curvier hips doesn't make her any less of a woman. If someone is going to hire her to model underwear, let them. If someone is going to buy the underwear she's wearing and call her beautiful, let them.
Maybe someday, the women who you think are more feminine will be doing all the Victoria Secret shows.
Besides, you can't know what all people prefer. I visited a lot of sites on beauty. While you say these masculine models aren't right for this type of modeling, there's a lot of people who do.
Danielle: Models.com seems to be a good source of fashion model rankings. In a recent issue of Vogue, Anna Wintour talked about ten outstanding high-fashion models that deserve to be promoted like the supermodels of the 1990s, and models.com’s top picks are in excellent agreement with her picks. Models.com has said that its rankings are based on the selections of the clients, daily call sheets of big-name fashion photographers and campaigns and contracts with big brands, not mere hype. Its rankings may not agree 100% with those of others insiders, but there is bound to be good broad agreement.
Daria could have taken a temporary semi-break because she was tired of the dieting/couldn’t take it anymore, but she was at her modeling peak at her thinnest. Since you seem to know a few things about the fashion business, take a good look at the large picture posted by Darifan and tell me how likely would it be for a high-fashion model to remain at the very top among high-fashion models if she is as fat?
I think I should post the video excerpt that is the source of the snapshots shown above. This will do a better job of revealing the homosexuals’ mindset.
I don’t see the lips of Cindy; a patch of hair is covering it. Hence there is no need for me to censor her groin.
Erik said: If a man and woman with above average masculinity decide to mate in order to produce a very masculine son, not only could the results be negative from a health and fertility standpoint if a daughter is born, but exposure to testosterone beyond a threshold could developmentally disturb the male fetus, leading to a son with a strange mix of hypermasculine, normally masculine, hypomasculine and feminine characteristics.
If you have this mix of qualities, then who should you mate with?
Erik you cant blame people wanting to tan on leisure time there is plenty of other things they can do, they tan because they WANT to be DARKER intrinsic or not. As for lightness i have nothing against white or dark both are beautiful but from my observations of white girls white girls dont want to be white....
^ that first girl that erik thinks is hot is a total aryan goddess warrior! note the thin lips. that is a popular aryn trait- but not a biologically cute one. people like PLUMP lips. such is why lipstick and collagen exists.
You have made my case for me Eric. It doesn't matter what the general public likes because they still covet and line up to buy designer perfume, handbags and clothes and beauty pageants are still going on. Beauty has no intrinsic value, possessing beauty does not make you a better person and beauty does not need to be promoted objectively. Even if the looks of todays models and beauty contestants are the results of gay men's illegal desires (ITS NOT!) I would still think that your site is worthless.
I can't imagine what pages you could come up with that would be more offensive than the pages you have up now. Wait!! I know what you want to promote. Let me guess. You want "masculine" girls and all non-aryans to be kicked out of beauty pageants and lingerie runways. You want gay designers to be rounded up and put in camps so that they can't infect western society with their criminal aesthetic. What else do you want? A personal stable of white buttafaces?
You amuse me Eric. That's why I keep coming back. You're so wonderfully delusional. You think that your pathetic site will somehow make a difference in the fashion and beauty industries. Your site is aimed at getting caucasian lifetime exclusive heterosexuals will see the light and then they will... They will... They will do what exactly? Gaybash the designers? Burn Donald Trump at the stake? If their opinions have as little effect on the products that the gay mafia promotes then what will changing their minds achieve?
I also wonder why you need to educate the public on feminine beauty at all. If feminine beauty is the objective, biologically driven ideal of the masses then why do they need to be shown what it is? You don't need to tell people when they feel hungry or horny. You don't need to tell them that they feel anger or pain. Why do they need to be told what beauty is if its so damn obvious?
Gender is a different matter since it pertains to issues such as behavior, aptitude and personality, though gender is frequently confounded with sex. The majority of variation in sex differences on many behavioral/aptitude counts is explained by a bipolar factor, i.e., a dimension ranging from masculine on one end to feminine on the other, and it is not necessarily true that people lie along a continuum of this dimension (especially if the dimension accounts for the majority of the variation in a multi-item assessment of sex differences). You will see a tendency for people to cluster away from the mean along the dimension, and only a minority is somewhere in between or hardly classifiable. Feminists strongly dislike this notion, but this has been shown using sophisticated statistical tools. Addressing gender issues would require a separate specialized website since there is a lot of feminist literature that will need to be addressed.
I, at least, would be interested in hearing more about this; are there a couple studies I can get started with? I've been taking women's studies courses (out of interest, but not out of agreement), and I'm tired of the "gender/sexuality are socially constructed" party lines.
I really like this site; more comments on it later.
Pwnee: The supermodels are supposed to be using their bodies to promote the products, but they don’t have the requisite bodies. I don’t believe that Dana Benn is anywhere close to an ideal choice for lingerie modeling, but I wanted to contrast older/mommy Heidi with a woman with maternal but more feminine looks. Something like Maria’s physique would be a good choice.
I agree that somewhat defined cheekbones help in the attractiveness department, but just compare Heidi to Maria overall and ask yourself who’s looks are better suited to a lingerie model? Both Angelina Jolie and Keira Knightley have a masculine element to their face, but Heidi beats them both and ends up as a high-profile lingerie model!
Danielle: Straight men do not rule the fashion world. Many straight men have made their feelings known about the poor quality of beauty pageant contestants and models, but not in a manner that would attract as much attention as this site does. It would only be a matter of time before something like this site popped up. If I didn’t do it, somebody else would have.
One can find plenty of feminine women within sleazy magazines/websites, no doubt about it, but the problem is that these women are not the best looking ones. The typical person would have seen better examples of feminine beauty than the women featured within the attractive women section of this site. I have seen better looking women than the ones that I am showing, but their pictures will not be encountered in magazines/websites and they will not be seen in the limelight unless there are mainstream high-profile modeling opportunities for them or the possibility of participating in the better known beauty pageants.
You are asking the wrong question whether the women that I am showing have the requisite poise/elegance to be models and pageant contestants. It is not the particular women that I am showing that matter -- after all many of them are nude models and the typical nude model can forget about mainstream fame. What matters is that with the resources of big modeling agencies/major beauty pageant organizations, one could quickly line up a huge number of feminine beauties with the poise and elegance to model and participate in beauty pageants.
Don’t accuse me of arrogance. I am backing up my arguments with plenty of supporting evidence regarding the preferences of the general population (which you have mistakenly described as a clinical approach), whereas you are resorting to name calling and ignoring the evidence. So who is arrogant?
How can you say that the celebration of feminine beauty is not the point of beauty pageants? These contests are supposed to be primarily about beauty, and the ones aimed toward the general public are obviously expected to be about feminine beauty. Even if you were to insist on emphasizing personality/talents, one could easily find feminine beauties with the right personalities/talents. Similarly, given the typical purpose of buying/wearing lingerie, how aren’t feminine women the most appropriate choice for lingerie models?
I have made it clear that the looks of high-fashion models have nothing to do with maximizing sales and that sales will not diminish because the items they are selling are highly desirable. If you come across outstanding shoes in a pathetic package, are you going to decline buying them, especially if you find nothing that is comparable and with a pleasing packaging?
Anil: A preference for lightness was true of Europeans until around the 1920s. The Europeans generally wanted to be as white as possible rather than pink and especially brown. This was when whiteness symbolized higher status because the upper class people didn’t have to labor in the sun. The industrial revolution reversed the scenario -- most jobs moved indoors and richer whites ended up spending more leisure time outside and got tanned. So do you realize why there is a preference for a tan? There is no intrinsic preference for it among Europeans. Also note that more white women dye their hair a lighter than a darker shade.
Brenda: A site like this is bound to offend some people and it may become worse with future additions that I have in mind, but the curious thing is that Danielle and others like her keep coming back.
Hmm, it seems that you're still offending a lot of people, Erik. I haven't visited the comments page for so long that I have forgotten for awhile how fun it is reading the comments. ;)
You are so wrong Erik when you said "Tannint amongst whites is a less than ventuary old-phenomena......higher socioeconomic status rather than a preference for darker skin"
Darker skin and dark hair is the most sought after and no matter what you SAY erik the reality speaks for itself im sure you will agree.
I don't agree with your opinion on who is suited as a better lingerie model, I mean, these supermodels are promoting the product, not their bodies! if you use glamour models, everybody would be so distracted with their abnormally large boobs and crave over them rather than pay attention to the product which is why they spent millions for just a fashion show of it.
if they use supermodels like Heidi Klum, which, unlike that girl, who hasn't abnormally large boobs, they would be more alert on the product rather than her chest! ofcourse they would be distracted by the face in which "HEIDI KLUM!" is written all over it, but they would be more gladly buying the product!
plus, a high cheekbone means sophistication and beauty, if your face is just like some other girls, puffy, round and stuff, you'd just be normal, and, doesn't have much people to pay attention with (not that I'm saying other kinds of faces are ugly) but prominent high cheekbones, is just..... well, kind of nice isn't it? Angelina Jolie has high cheekbones, yet she doesn't look manly at all to me, Keira Knightely has, but she is just as femme as every girl.
lets just accept the taste of the one who picks.
Wow, Erik, your answers to comments are pretty belligerent.
I think that Appalled is referring to the fact that you are making assumptions about the preferences of all heterosexual males that you don't fully uncover and explain. Perhaps many men are attracted to thinness, tallness, androgyny, or have various preferences. Are you the representative of men across the planet? I remember making a theory about male standards being more uniform than female ones because I thought females have more secondary sex characteristics which my Cultural Studies teacher criticized for being specific to western ideals.
Also, I think that it is harder to say with certainty where these fashion standards are coming from and whether they in fact do come from gay men. Do you know who the tastemakers are? It's hard to uncover the think tank of fashion. Gay fashion industry is a simplifying, overarching term like "liberal media." I am certain that body measurement standards are the way they are because the dictated body type complements the couture clothing better. There is a reason a model is often called a clotheshorse.
I think that the photo of Marianne Berglund is well chosen to malign the fashion industry with. It is completely unflattering, her bones stick out like those of a Holocaust victim, and she almost has a camel toe. It is extreme. Shots of actual high fashion models often afford them more curves than that like this http://img.china.alibaba.com/news/upload/00apple/2007522103332157_1179901007795.jpg
or this http://www.monitorulexpres.ro/arhiva_foto/poze/tumb/Natalia%20Vodianova.jpg
picture of Natalia Vodianova. or Filippa Hamilton: http://www.wallpaperbase.com/wallpapers/celebs/filippahamilton/filippa_hamilton_1.jpg
Haute couture fashion models are chosen for their facial features, fitting the prescribed height and body measurements is a requirement. The trend is for the face to be interesting or exotic as in the case of Gemma Ward (who I think looks like an alien) and Alek Wek. Sometimes a big long nose like in Carolina Kurkova's face is what makes it memorable. The standard is different than for face/makeup models who I believe are chosen for their more regular features,
Marianne Berglund represents the fashion trend of androgyny and is sort of ripping off Twiggy with her pixie like look on the picture. Some fashion houses like Prada tend more toward using androgyny I think, while in Calvin Klein ads, Natalia Vodianova's femininity (long hair, exposed breasts, lying on top of a large man) is emphasized. You have to take that into account too.
I think that Victoria's Secret, Maxim, and Playboy represent male preferences better, but the women on their covers are still toned though they have a more easily identifiable hourglass figure and are of average height. They are also predominantly actresses and not haute couture models. I think that women get their beauty standards more from actresses than from models (especially haute couture models) because they proliferate various types of media from tabloids to entertainment television. Or else the idea of being thin while having big breasts or implants is a non-issue.
Eric, you are a self-centered pig. The world already caters to what straight men want. They rule the fricken world, if they gave a damn about what gay fashion designers and pageant judges are looking for in their models and contetants then they would make their feelings known and the looks of the women chosen would change. Most straight men don't give a damn about either of these things. Their tastes don't need to be catered to. So you are stuck looking at these women.
What you don't seem to understand is that lingerie shows and beauty pageants are not meat markets for "feminine" flesh. Plain featured, big busted caucasion women are easy to find in sleaze magazines and websites. If men want to see these women they know where to look. You obviously found women who you think outrank these models and pageant contestants in looks and sex appeal on amateur porn sites. You don't know if they have the poise or elegance to be a model, you don't know if they can answer questions or are as accomplished as the pageant contestants. Your reasoning is circular and shallow.
You seem to think that you are a better judge of beauty and who will look good in beautiful clothes than designers who have worked in the industry for decades. You think you are a better judge of who should be beauty pageant contestants than people who have been in pageants for years and people who have invested their money in them. Your arrogance is astounding. A clinical approach cannot be taken to industries that are as subjective, fickle and image obsessed as the pageant and fahion business. The celebration of "feminine" beauty is not the point of lingerie shows and beauty pageants. Money is ALWAYS the point and the bottom line of EVERY business. If "feminine" beauty is the essential ingrediant to great success then a lot of people would be dead broke in these industries. You are chasing windmills here because people will do whatever will help them make money. If skinny, masculine girls sell magazines, movies, clothes and perfume then they wll be utilized. It doesn't matter if its the halo effect, or the gay mafia effect. It matters that they make money.
Sionnach: The existence of two sexes among humans is unambiguous. People who don't fit in either group (less than 0.02% of the population) can be sexual as in having sexual desire toward one or both sexes, but they don't have a biological sex.
Gender is a different matter since it pertains to issues such as behavior, aptitude and personality, though gender is frequently confounded with sex. The majority of variation in sex differences on many behavioral/aptitude counts is explained by a bipolar factor, i.e., a dimension ranging from masculine on one end to feminine on the other, and it is not necessarily true that people lie along a continuum of this dimension (especially if the dimension accounts for the majority of the variation in a multi-item assessment of sex differences). You will see a tendency for people to cluster away from the mean along the dimension, and only a minority is somewhere in between or hardly classifiable. Feminists strongly dislike this notion, but this has been shown using sophisticated statistical tools. Addressing gender issues would require a separate specialized website since there is a lot of feminist literature that will need to be addressed.
8D: This site is laying the groundwork for a significant public impact, which is not going to occur overnight.
Danielle: Whereas I agree that the more beautiful are not necessarily better people, beauty has some value. Speaking of illegal desires, desires are not illegal, but some behaviors are. Just because people continue to buy fashion merchandize notwithstanding the appearance of current models, it does not mean that models’ looks do not matter. Some people care about aesthetic issues, as in wanting to see feminine beauties among lingerie models and beauty pageant contestants. The current choice of models also has a negative impact on some young girls and women, prompting them to diet unnecessarily. Therefore, the looks of models and beauty pageant contestants matter.
I am not going to come up with additions to specifically offend people like you, but you will be offended as usual.
The subtlety of femininity and beauty need to be elaborated on because people are born with a basic aesthetic sense that is honed by experience. For instance, even infants prefer better looking to not so good looking faces, but experience limits what one finds to be highly appealing. Given the dearth of feminine beauty in the limelight, many individuals are not aware of the great examples of feminine beauty out there, which if brought to the limelight more often will prompt people to increasingly stop watching telecasts of beauty pageants and lingerie shows because the women shown are nowhere close to what most of them find highly appealing. This will prompt the organizers of beauty pageants/lingerie shows to select more feminine women. Just consider Miss America. Political correctness increasingly diminished its viewership and the pageant even got knocked off regular TV. The organization in charge has recently brought back the swimsuit round to check further viewership decline, but what it really needs is to primarily use feminine contestants. When masculine models are well-contrasted with feminine ones, the public will increasingly want to observe more feminine women among actresses and other celebrities, in accordance with its feminine-beauty-preferring central tendency, which will help bring more feminine women to the limelight. So you see how it is going to work?
Anil: If most jobs are indoor jobs, then chances are that whites will spend their leisure time outdoors, initially not to get a tan, but just to have a good time. Once a tan gets associated with high status, many will specifically spend time outside to get a tan to present a look of higher status. For tanning to signify higher socioeconomic status, you need to satisfy two requirements: the baseline color variation in the population should be low and most jobs, especially on the part of lower class individuals, should be indoor jobs. The first requirement is important; if the baseline variation is high, then it wouldn’t be possible to tell whether a darker individual is darker because of greater sun exposure or because the person is naturally darker. In white populations, a tan can signify higher socioeconomic status only if you know that the baseline skin is white. It is for this reason that you should not confuse a desire for a tan with a desire to not have naturally white skin.
Most of the girls on Models.com get a lot of work. I don't disagree with who is on the lists. I disagree with who is ranked above the other girls. I disagree with these models.com rankings because some of the girls at the top seem to do far less shows and are in far less editorials than the girls who are lower than them.
Malgosia Bela, Doutzen Kroes and Julia Stegner are just as heavy, if not more so, as Daria was in that picture and they are in the top spots on that models.com list right now. I guess that girls who are as "fat" as Daria was in that picture can be ranked at the top on that list.
I am thinking that you may be talking about Vouge's May 2007 issue when you mention Anna Wintour's picks as the next supermodels. I agree that most of the girls that she picked are getting a lot of work right now. With the exception of Chanel Iman, they are all very popular. She put Doutzen Kroes, Lily Donaldson, Hilary Rhoda, Sasha Pivovarova, Caroline Trentini, Chanel Iman, Raquel Zimmermann, Jessica Stam, Coco Rocha, and Agyness Deyn on the May cover.
I ask you to look at the cover of that issue and refer back to the models.com list. You will see that some girls like Iselin Steiro, Julia Stegner and Malgosia Bela are above them all. These womena are still more popular right now than most models will ever be, but their workload is far smaller than some of the girls that are ranked below them right now.
The popularity of models aren't always based on how anorexic or "boyish" they look. Model popularity and success is more based on having a good agent who can convince industry people that you're worth a damn, being at the right agency, schmoozing with the right industry people and just pure luck.
The fashion industry is made up of all kinds of people. "The homosexuals" don't run the industry like a dictatorship and only allow the the most "boyish" women in their company. There are many editors, photographers, socialites and fianancial backers (straight, white men. *GASP*) who are just as influential as "the homosexuals" themselves.
As I have said, time and tme again, at the end of the day all the models, "the homosexuals," the editors and the socialites have to answer to straight white men or in other words, the MONEY. Straight, white men own and finance the fashion labels, the fashion magazines, the modeling agencies and they put the money in the hands of their spoilt, socialite wives who buy and influence high fashion products. If you want to change the industry then take it up with them just like everyone else has to.
I admit, sometimes the top fashion models can look a little manly compared to other women but who cares? Just because Gisele doesn't have large breasts and curvier hips doesn't make her any less of a woman. If someone is going to hire her to model underwear, let them. If someone is going to buy the underwear she's wearing and call her beautiful, let them.
Maybe someday, the women who you think are more feminine will be doing all the Victoria Secret shows.
Besides, you can't know what all people prefer. I visited a lot of sites on beauty. While you say these masculine models aren't right for this type of modeling, there's a lot of people who do.
Danielle: Models.com seems to be a good source of fashion model rankings. In a recent issue of Vogue, Anna Wintour talked about ten outstanding high-fashion models that deserve to be promoted like the supermodels of the 1990s, and models.com’s top picks are in excellent agreement with her picks. Models.com has said that its rankings are based on the selections of the clients, daily call sheets of big-name fashion photographers and campaigns and contracts with big brands, not mere hype. Its rankings may not agree 100% with those of others insiders, but there is bound to be good broad agreement.
Daria could have taken a temporary semi-break because she was tired of the dieting/couldn’t take it anymore, but she was at her modeling peak at her thinnest. Since you seem to know a few things about the fashion business, take a good look at the large picture posted by Darifan and tell me how likely would it be for a high-fashion model to remain at the very top among high-fashion models if she is as fat?
I think I should post the video excerpt that is the source of the snapshots shown above. This will do a better job of revealing the homosexuals’ mindset.
I don’t see the lips of Cindy; a patch of hair is covering it. Hence there is no need for me to censor her groin.
Erik said:
If a man and woman with above average masculinity decide to mate in order to produce a very masculine son, not only could the results be negative from a health and fertility standpoint if a daughter is born, but exposure to testosterone beyond a threshold could developmentally disturb the male fetus, leading to a son with a strange mix of hypermasculine, normally masculine, hypomasculine and feminine characteristics.
If you have this mix of qualities, then who should you mate with?
Erik you cant blame people wanting to tan on leisure time there is plenty of other things they can do, they tan because they WANT to be DARKER intrinsic or not. As for lightness i have nothing against white or dark both are beautiful but from my observations of white girls white girls dont want to be white....
^ that first girl that erik thinks is hot is a total aryan goddess warrior! note the thin lips. that is a popular aryn trait- but not a biologically cute one. people like PLUMP lips. such is why lipstick and collagen exists.
not feminists. just people who dun hate gays and non-aryns.
erik is like: white powah! hate the gays! possibly also the jews!
'n' everyon' else's lyke nah stfu.
Of course, feminists are unlikely to take the lesson of the page that you want them to; they will see that art as a prime example of heteropatriarchy.
Be completely honest. Do you believe that most people would prefer the looks of her:
To her looks:
or to hers:
or even hers:
Be really honest now.
You have made my case for me Eric. It doesn't matter what the general public likes because they still covet and line up to buy designer perfume, handbags and clothes and beauty pageants are still going on. Beauty has no intrinsic value, possessing beauty does not make you a better person and beauty does not need to be promoted objectively. Even if the looks of todays models and beauty contestants are the results of gay men's illegal desires (ITS NOT!) I would still think that your site is worthless.
I can't imagine what pages you could come up with that would be more offensive than the pages you have up now. Wait!! I know what you want to promote. Let me guess. You want "masculine" girls and all non-aryans to be kicked out of beauty pageants and lingerie runways. You want gay designers to be rounded up and put in camps so that they can't infect western society with their criminal aesthetic. What else do you want? A personal stable of white buttafaces?
You amuse me Eric. That's why I keep coming back. You're so wonderfully delusional. You think that your pathetic site will somehow make a difference in the fashion and beauty industries. Your site is aimed at getting caucasian lifetime exclusive heterosexuals will see the light and then they will... They will... They will do what exactly? Gaybash the designers? Burn Donald Trump at the stake? If their opinions have as little effect on the products that the gay mafia promotes then what will changing their minds achieve?
I also wonder why you need to educate the public on feminine beauty at all. If feminine beauty is the objective, biologically driven ideal of the masses then why do they need to be shown what it is? You don't need to tell people when they feel hungry or horny. You don't need to tell them that they feel anger or pain. Why do they need to be told what beauty is if its so damn obvious?
erik if ur so smart then why arent u runing the fashion wrold or acutaly making an impact instead of being an itnernet laugh stock? jsut wondering.
we come to laff at chu cause ur liek this gay hating cracker who thinks that you actually have taste. kind of like trainwreck.
Erik said:
Gender is a different matter since it pertains to issues such as behavior, aptitude and personality, though gender is frequently confounded with sex. The majority of variation in sex differences on many behavioral/aptitude counts is explained by a bipolar factor, i.e., a dimension ranging from masculine on one end to feminine on the other, and it is not necessarily true that people lie along a continuum of this dimension (especially if the dimension accounts for the majority of the variation in a multi-item assessment of sex differences). You will see a tendency for people to cluster away from the mean along the dimension, and only a minority is somewhere in between or hardly classifiable. Feminists strongly dislike this notion, but this has been shown using sophisticated statistical tools. Addressing gender issues would require a separate specialized website since there is a lot of feminist literature that will need to be addressed.
I, at least, would be interested in hearing more about this; are there a couple studies I can get started with? I've been taking women's studies courses (out of interest, but not out of agreement), and I'm tired of the "gender/sexuality are socially constructed" party lines.
I really like this site; more comments on it later.
Pwnee: The supermodels are supposed to be using their bodies to promote the products, but they don’t have the requisite bodies. I don’t believe that Dana Benn is anywhere close to an ideal choice for lingerie modeling, but I wanted to contrast older/mommy Heidi with a woman with maternal but more feminine looks. Something like Maria’s physique would be a good choice.
I agree that somewhat defined cheekbones help in the attractiveness department, but just compare Heidi to Maria overall and ask yourself who’s looks are better suited to a lingerie model? Both Angelina Jolie and Keira Knightley have a masculine element to their face, but Heidi beats them both and ends up as a high-profile lingerie model!
Danielle: Straight men do not rule the fashion world. Many straight men have made their feelings known about the poor quality of beauty pageant contestants and models, but not in a manner that would attract as much attention as this site does. It would only be a matter of time before something like this site popped up. If I didn’t do it, somebody else would have.
One can find plenty of feminine women within sleazy magazines/websites, no doubt about it, but the problem is that these women are not the best looking ones. The typical person would have seen better examples of feminine beauty than the women featured within the attractive women section of this site. I have seen better looking women than the ones that I am showing, but their pictures will not be encountered in magazines/websites and they will not be seen in the limelight unless there are mainstream high-profile modeling opportunities for them or the possibility of participating in the better known beauty pageants.
You are asking the wrong question whether the women that I am showing have the requisite poise/elegance to be models and pageant contestants. It is not the particular women that I am showing that matter -- after all many of them are nude models and the typical nude model can forget about mainstream fame. What matters is that with the resources of big modeling agencies/major beauty pageant organizations, one could quickly line up a huge number of feminine beauties with the poise and elegance to model and participate in beauty pageants.
Don’t accuse me of arrogance. I am backing up my arguments with plenty of supporting evidence regarding the preferences of the general population (which you have mistakenly described as a clinical approach), whereas you are resorting to name calling and ignoring the evidence. So who is arrogant?
How can you say that the celebration of feminine beauty is not the point of beauty pageants? These contests are supposed to be primarily about beauty, and the ones aimed toward the general public are obviously expected to be about feminine beauty. Even if you were to insist on emphasizing personality/talents, one could easily find feminine beauties with the right personalities/talents. Similarly, given the typical purpose of buying/wearing lingerie, how aren’t feminine women the most appropriate choice for lingerie models?
I have made it clear that the looks of high-fashion models have nothing to do with maximizing sales and that sales will not diminish because the items they are selling are highly desirable. If you come across outstanding shoes in a pathetic package, are you going to decline buying them, especially if you find nothing that is comparable and with a pleasing packaging?
Anil: A preference for lightness was true of Europeans until around the 1920s. The Europeans generally wanted to be as white as possible rather than pink and especially brown. This was when whiteness symbolized higher status because the upper class people didn’t have to labor in the sun. The industrial revolution reversed the scenario -- most jobs moved indoors and richer whites ended up spending more leisure time outside and got tanned. So do you realize why there is a preference for a tan? There is no intrinsic preference for it among Europeans. Also note that more white women dye their hair a lighter than a darker shade.
Brenda: A site like this is bound to offend some people and it may become worse with future additions that I have in mind, but the curious thing is that Danielle and others like her keep coming back.
Hmm, it seems that you're still offending a lot of people, Erik. I haven't visited the comments page for so long that I have forgotten for awhile how fun it is reading the comments. ;)
Tanning*
You are so wrong Erik when you said "Tannint amongst whites is a less than ventuary old-phenomena......higher socioeconomic status rather than a preference for darker skin"
Darker skin and dark hair is the most sought after and no matter what you SAY erik the reality speaks for itself im sure you will agree.
photo sexy
I don't agree with your opinion on who is suited as a better lingerie model, I mean, these supermodels are promoting the product, not their bodies! if you use glamour models, everybody would be so distracted with their abnormally large boobs and crave over them rather than pay attention to the product which is why they spent millions for just a fashion show of it.
if they use supermodels like Heidi Klum, which, unlike that girl, who hasn't abnormally large boobs, they would be more alert on the product rather than her chest! ofcourse they would be distracted by the face in which "HEIDI KLUM!" is written all over it, but they would be more gladly buying the product!
plus, a high cheekbone means sophistication and beauty, if your face is just like some other girls, puffy, round and stuff, you'd just be normal, and, doesn't have much people to pay attention with (not that I'm saying other kinds of faces are ugly) but prominent high cheekbones, is just..... well, kind of nice isn't it? Angelina Jolie has high cheekbones, yet she doesn't look manly at all to me, Keira Knightely has, but she is just as femme as every girl.
lets just accept the taste of the one who picks.
On a sidenote, this post on Jennifer Love Hewitt and the comments attached to it disgust me: http://thesuperficial.com/2007/07/jennifer_love_hewitt_is_explod.php
Wow, Erik, your answers to comments are pretty belligerent.
I think that Appalled is referring to the fact that you are making assumptions about the preferences of all heterosexual males that you don't fully uncover and explain. Perhaps many men are attracted to thinness, tallness, androgyny, or have various preferences. Are you the representative of men across the planet? I remember making a theory about male standards being more uniform than female ones because I thought females have more secondary sex characteristics which my Cultural Studies teacher criticized for being specific to western ideals.
Also, I think that it is harder to say with certainty where these fashion standards are coming from and whether they in fact do come from gay men. Do you know who the tastemakers are? It's hard to uncover the think tank of fashion. Gay fashion industry is a simplifying, overarching term like "liberal media." I am certain that body measurement standards are the way they are because the dictated body type complements the couture clothing better. There is a reason a model is often called a clotheshorse.
I think that the photo of Marianne Berglund is well chosen to malign the fashion industry with. It is completely unflattering, her bones stick out like those of a Holocaust victim, and she almost has a camel toe. It is extreme. Shots of actual high fashion models often afford them more curves than that like this http://img.china.alibaba.com/news/upload/00apple/2007522103332157_1179901007795.jpg
or this http://www.monitorulexpres.ro/arhiva_foto/poze/tumb/Natalia%20Vodianova.jpg
picture of Natalia Vodianova. or Filippa Hamilton:
http://www.wallpaperbase.com/wallpapers/celebs/filippahamilton/filippa_hamilton_1.jpg
Haute couture fashion models are chosen for their facial features, fitting the prescribed height and body measurements is a requirement. The trend is for the face to be interesting or exotic as in the case of Gemma Ward (who I think looks like an alien) and Alek Wek. Sometimes a big long nose like in Carolina Kurkova's face is what makes it memorable. The standard is different than for face/makeup models who I believe are chosen for their more regular features,
Marianne Berglund represents the fashion trend of androgyny and is sort of ripping off Twiggy with her pixie like look on the picture. Some fashion houses like Prada tend more toward using androgyny I think, while in Calvin Klein ads, Natalia Vodianova's femininity (long hair, exposed breasts, lying on top of a large man) is emphasized. You have to take that into account too.
I think that Victoria's Secret, Maxim, and Playboy represent male preferences better, but the women on their covers are still toned though they have a more easily identifiable hourglass figure and are of average height. They are also predominantly actresses and not haute couture models. I think that women get their beauty standards more from actresses than from models (especially haute couture models) because they proliferate various types of media from tabloids to entertainment television. Or else the idea of being thin while having big breasts or implants is a non-issue.
Eric, you are a self-centered pig. The world already caters to what straight men want. They rule the fricken world, if they gave a damn about what gay fashion designers and pageant judges are looking for in their models and contetants then they would make their feelings known and the looks of the women chosen would change. Most straight men don't give a damn about either of these things. Their tastes don't need to be catered to. So you are stuck looking at these women.
What you don't seem to understand is that lingerie shows and beauty pageants are not meat markets for "feminine" flesh. Plain featured, big busted caucasion women are easy to find in sleaze magazines and websites. If men want to see these women they know where to look. You obviously found women who you think outrank these models and pageant contestants in looks and sex appeal on amateur porn sites. You don't know if they have the poise or elegance to be a model, you don't know if they can answer questions or are as accomplished as the pageant contestants. Your reasoning is circular and shallow.
You seem to think that you are a better judge of beauty and who will look good in beautiful clothes than designers who have worked in the industry for decades. You think you are a better judge of who should be beauty pageant contestants than people who have been in pageants for years and people who have invested their money in them. Your arrogance is astounding. A clinical approach cannot be taken to industries that are as subjective, fickle and image obsessed as the pageant and fahion business. The celebration of "feminine" beauty is not the point of lingerie shows and beauty pageants. Money is ALWAYS the point and the bottom line of EVERY business. If "feminine" beauty is the essential ingrediant to great success then a lot of people would be dead broke in these industries. You are chasing windmills here because people will do whatever will help them make money. If skinny, masculine girls sell magazines, movies, clothes and perfume then they wll be utilized. It doesn't matter if its the halo effect, or the gay mafia effect. It matters that they make money.
Sionnach: The existence of two sexes among humans is unambiguous. People who don't fit in either group (less than 0.02% of the population) can be sexual as in having sexual desire toward one or both sexes, but they don't have a biological sex.
Gender is a different matter since it pertains to issues such as behavior, aptitude and personality, though gender is frequently confounded with sex. The majority of variation in sex differences on many behavioral/aptitude counts is explained by a bipolar factor, i.e., a dimension ranging from masculine on one end to feminine on the other, and it is not necessarily true that people lie along a continuum of this dimension (especially if the dimension accounts for the majority of the variation in a multi-item assessment of sex differences). You will see a tendency for people to cluster away from the mean along the dimension, and only a minority is somewhere in between or hardly classifiable. Feminists strongly dislike this notion, but this has been shown using sophisticated statistical tools. Addressing gender issues would require a separate specialized website since there is a lot of feminist literature that will need to be addressed.
Pages