1. how you can call a personal preference a fact in the first place is beyond me. "x is unattractive" is not a fact in any way, shape or form.
2. ah, so i'm not allowed to bring this guy's looks into the picture, but obviously my criticism reflects my deep-seated insecurities about how i am ugly and masculine! brilliant! for the record, i have no issue with myself not being 'feminine'. i have a vagina, i'm feminine.
3. how can he be objective when it is female bodies he takes to pieces, not male ones? maybe if he had his entire body reduced to the sum of its parts and then criticised in a way that not only deems him hideous and unattractive, but apparently makes him unworthy of his own GENDER, it would become a bit more clear that taking away a beauty standard for very thin fashion models and replacing it with one for slightly fatter soft-porn models makes no difference.
this entire thing is a statement of one person's personal preference and an attack on women, under the facade of a female-progressive, scientific viewpoint.
George: I know that some fashion models are naturally thin. I haven't argued that some fashion models but no glamour models possess breast implants. Easily half of Playboy centerfolds from the 1990s onward have sported breast implants. I usually avoid glamour models with breast implants.
I am not calling Alessandra a transvestite, but am saying that if you were to look at a Victoria's Secret lingerie show, it would be difficult to avoid the impression that a lot of male-to-female transsexuals are walking the runway. I am talking about looks, not what these models are, and I am using "transsexual," not "transvestite."
Dasha doesn't have the best skin -- a combination of the inability to tan and freckles, but the focus is on femininity of face and body. If her photo had been taken from a professional modeling shoot, all the freckles would have been airbrushed.
I am well aware that many of the "most beautiful women" in history have been masculinized, but all except one (Sophia Loren) you named have a fashion modeling background. The portrayal of these women as "great beauties" reflects the domination of the fashion business by homosexual men.
Sophia Loren does appear to have a masculine element to her face in some photos, but her body as a young adult was certainly not masculine. She just has massive cheekbones and other robust features that add a pseudo-masculine element to her face.
I don't need to see his photo, and his appearance is irrelevant to validity and objectiveness of his arguments.He, as far as I know doesn't take outrageous honorars for flaunting his ugliness or "beauty", he is not exposing his appearance and trying to convince audience, that he is pinnacle of masculine beauty and desirableness. If you are not feminine, eat yourself; he only stated the facts, and it is good thing, since the fashion world is outright evil.
Danielle: I haven't made the argument that the playmates shown above are "hideous, trashy trannies." Do you seriously believe that "jealous fatties" -- presumably jealous of skinny high-fashion models -- will be pleased by my featuring normal weight women, a number of whom have tiny waists?
I also have not argued that the women in the attractive women section are epitomes of femininity and attractiveness. This section makes it clear that some women shown are somewhat masculine but have compensatory elements such as fine facial features. Since this section primarily relies on nude models, and the best looking women do not pose nude, the women shown there cannot be epitomes of beauty. But if I am successful in the long run, you will see numerous epitomes of feminine beauty in this section and of course in the public limelight.
8D: The earlobes are indeed not important unless they are seriously misshapen, but you need to look at this article, the two preceding articles and the article that follows this one in light of your argument that Stephen Marquardt of beautyanalysis.com is right and I am wrong. Marquardt is wrong on multiple counts.
Tim: I am not sure about Jessica Alba being portrayed as the most beautiful girl in the world, but she is indeed being portrayed as very attractive. This may be a form of marketing to the Latino community, which has reached a sizeable number in the U.S.
I agree with several guys above.. whoever runs this site needs to get the sand out of their vagina and the guys who come here praising the site just can't get laid by the hot women.
It is in the eye of the beholder, all of my friends have different ideas of what they like in women.. it's normal. Some girls on tv and in magazines are hot.. others aren't.. some of us like butts... some of us like skinny girls... some of us like black girls.. some of us like hispanic girls..
you all need to get a flipping life instead of picking out one model with a pronounced facial structure-calling her manly .. then finding some chubby out of shape girl on a porn site and calling her the ideal.
alessandra looks like horse, hideous, beedy eyes and long face, and is wider in her lower hips (where legs are) than in upper (pelvis) , and nothing about her LONG legs is tasty. Man reckoning her beauty MUST be non-heterosexual. Nothing would convince me opposite. But the women above, have appealing bodies, I specially highly esteem their milky complexion, it looks so pure and soft and fresh
Oh, and about that "masculinization" issue, perhaps you are not able to understand the concept of beauty, but some of the most beautiful women in history, and in modern times, have some sort of boyish features or strong lines like lets say Brooke Shields, Sophia Loren, Heidi Klum, Liz Hurley. All of them could pass as men or boys if they had short hair and a fake mustache.
Of course to realize that, and fully comprehend the concept of beauty, you would require a greater intellectual capacity, and a bigger load of cultural baggage, along with some studies on human sexuality.
Well...I am a 30 year old male, heterosexual, with some experience working around models, and I happen to love the model look a look which, believe it or not, in many cases, comes from good genes.
Yes, the long legs, the flat belly, the tight but firm and abundant butts. Oh, and one more thing.. yes, some of them eat as much as they want, and somehow manage to keep slim. (and im not talking about the anorexic, heroin chic model look, which I find sick)
The most common modification you will see is the breast implants. But if you dare to say that only models are guilty of that, you are even more delusional than you appear at first glance.
I absolutely love Alessandra and I find it very funny to read your accusations of her being a transvestite. Id be worried if I thought you where serious about it, but cmon, this is the internet! the land of the wackos, so feel free.
On your first comparison with Dasha, I see 2 beautiful women, but personally the look on the skin on Dasha's legs and the texture of her butt, well I find it repellent. Its like you could see the blood under her skin. Looks almost painful. But then again, thats maybe due to her Caucasian genes, and the lack of sun, which Alessandra does enjoy, plus her healthy, rich mixture of European and American genes.
I agree that those playmates are hideous, trashy trannies but I loled at the sad plain janes you chose as better looking. The only attractive women in your attractive women section are Charlize Theron and Katherine Heigl. You have awful taste and that is why you will never succeed in convincing anyone other than jealous fatties and white supremacists that your women are the epitomes of femininity and attractiveness.
Is that Natasha Poly? I can't stand her, but she looks a million times better than the boring girls next door that this creepy guy likes. I prefer Anja Rubik, Cameron Russel, Diana Dondoe and Doutzen.
Erik, thanks for a provocative and very well-researched website.
To your comments about the homosexual designers influencing the fashion industry and therefore selecting androgynous models--I absolutely agree. However, I would add that the feminine women shown on your website are not the norm for American women, many of whom have a mix of multiple masculine characteristics such as small breasts, thick waists, large shoulders and rib cages, etc, in addition to some feminine features as well. Very feminine models, while clearly the optimal choice for fashion modeling, are relatively rare in terms of their representation in the overall population. Although more masculine women would vigorously deny this, many envy and hate feminine women because they represent an ideal that more masculinized women can only dream about.
Therefore, I would speculate that one reason the fashion industry gravitates toward more masculine models is to appease these more masculinized individuals and to increase sales. However, the fashion industry clearly has gone much too far, as the norm for masculinized models is now as far off the mark for the average woman as the very feminine women are. The truth, which represents most women, is somewhere in the range of women who fall between the two outlying extremes.
u r just pissed cause i am distilling down all your hard work into two words:
white power.
cause that's what ur site is. and im not crazy, u r- bb. and i bet ur ugly too.
sarika: yeah, I dont know anyone who wants to look like a fashion model either. so what if they're skinny? just let them be skinny- yeesh. most people dont give a shit about models or high fashion. and people who do get anorexia from looking at them, already have lots of problems.
and btw erik: u ignore the passage i posted. that makes you homophobic. bb.
what do you think of the other bollywood actress katrina kaif i think is of mixed heritage half british? is she masucline or feminign what do you think of her overall attractiveness?
Runway models are not meant to be sexy things for men/lesbians to look at. They are odd-looking statues that queer designers hang their fruity "art" on. I don't know any woman who looks to runway models as a physical ideal to aspire to. There is a small, mostly internet based "pro-ana" subculture based around it, but those are mostly mentally unstable teenage girls. High fashion is its own universe, it isn't supposed to make sense to outsiders.
nose and light colour, combined with features described by lena: bigger eyes, less distance between eyes and mouth, bigger distance between yes, more prominent cheekbones, smaller nose in the longitudinal view. I would add : the profile with at lest 90° nasolabial angle (I hope it is correct expression), and corners of lips winding slightly downwards (the last two features I've read it was greek and rennaissaince ideal of beauty: and also I always found them irresistible) But everything in one package is rare even among nordics. Of course , appearance has nothing to do with quality of person an lovableness.
erik, it is totally creepy of you to promote women's beauty, but not give a shit about women in terms of their humanity, btw.
fucking. creepy. you are no better than the fashion industry. both of you just strip away a person down to its aesthetics, and ignore anything on the inside. only the fashion industry does it better.
good news is that your site will never catch on, at least not for a looooong time.
1. how you can call a personal preference a fact in the first place is beyond me. "x is unattractive" is not a fact in any way, shape or form.
2. ah, so i'm not allowed to bring this guy's looks into the picture, but obviously my criticism reflects my deep-seated insecurities about how i am ugly and masculine! brilliant! for the record, i have no issue with myself not being 'feminine'. i have a vagina, i'm feminine.
3. how can he be objective when it is female bodies he takes to pieces, not male ones? maybe if he had his entire body reduced to the sum of its parts and then criticised in a way that not only deems him hideous and unattractive, but apparently makes him unworthy of his own GENDER, it would become a bit more clear that taking away a beauty standard for very thin fashion models and replacing it with one for slightly fatter soft-porn models makes no difference.
this entire thing is a statement of one person's personal preference and an attack on women, under the facade of a female-progressive, scientific viewpoint.
George: I know that some fashion models are naturally thin. I haven't argued that some fashion models but no glamour models possess breast implants. Easily half of Playboy centerfolds from the 1990s onward have sported breast implants. I usually avoid glamour models with breast implants.
I am not calling Alessandra a transvestite, but am saying that if you were to look at a Victoria's Secret lingerie show, it would be difficult to avoid the impression that a lot of male-to-female transsexuals are walking the runway. I am talking about looks, not what these models are, and I am using "transsexual," not "transvestite."
Dasha doesn't have the best skin -- a combination of the inability to tan and freckles, but the focus is on femininity of face and body. If her photo had been taken from a professional modeling shoot, all the freckles would have been airbrushed.
I am well aware that many of the "most beautiful women" in history have been masculinized, but all except one (Sophia Loren) you named have a fashion modeling background. The portrayal of these women as "great beauties" reflects the domination of the fashion business by homosexual men.
Sophia Loren does appear to have a masculine element to her face in some photos, but her body as a young adult was certainly not masculine. She just has massive cheekbones and other robust features that add a pseudo-masculine element to her face.
I don't need to see his photo, and his appearance is irrelevant to validity and objectiveness of his arguments.He, as far as I know doesn't take outrageous honorars for flaunting his ugliness or "beauty", he is not exposing his appearance and trying to convince audience, that he is pinnacle of masculine beauty and desirableness. If you are not feminine, eat yourself; he only stated the facts, and it is good thing, since the fashion world is outright evil.
Nic: It is true that people have their own preferences, but most people share the same preferences and people overwhelmingly prefer above average femininity and normal body fat levels in women. Besides, the "chubby" women that Gisele is compared to are not being portrayed as "ideal."
Danielle: I haven't made the argument that the playmates shown above are "hideous, trashy trannies." Do you seriously believe that "jealous fatties" -- presumably jealous of skinny high-fashion models -- will be pleased by my featuring normal weight women, a number of whom have tiny waists?
I also have not argued that the women in the attractive women section are epitomes of femininity and attractiveness. This section makes it clear that some women shown are somewhat masculine but have compensatory elements such as fine facial features. Since this section primarily relies on nude models, and the best looking women do not pose nude, the women shown there cannot be epitomes of beauty. But if I am successful in the long run, you will see numerous epitomes of feminine beauty in this section and of course in the public limelight.
8D: The earlobes are indeed not important unless they are seriously misshapen, but you need to look at this article, the two preceding articles and the article that follows this one in light of your argument that Stephen Marquardt of beautyanalysis.com is right and I am wrong. Marquardt is wrong on multiple counts.
Tim: I am not sure about Jessica Alba being portrayed as the most beautiful girl in the world, but she is indeed being portrayed as very attractive. This may be a form of marketing to the Latino community, which has reached a sizeable number in the U.S.
Arfan: Katrina Kaif appears to be slightly masculine. She also appears to be in the attractive range of South Asians.
8D: You forgot to add Nazi jewelry!
8D: If "this site is meant for neo-nazis," then why do you -- apparently not one yourself -- keep coming back? Begone!
8D: Thinner lips are only responsible to a small extent. The bone/teeth structure is playing a greater role.
does nobody else want to see a picture of "erik holland" and rip apart his lack of "masculine beauty"?
seriously, bring it on!
I agree with several guys above.. whoever runs this site needs to get the sand out of their vagina and the guys who come here praising the site just can't get laid by the hot women.
It is in the eye of the beholder, all of my friends have different ideas of what they like in women.. it's normal. Some girls on tv and in magazines are hot.. others aren't.. some of us like butts... some of us like skinny girls... some of us like black girls.. some of us like hispanic girls..
you all need to get a flipping life instead of picking out one model with a pronounced facial structure-calling her manly .. then finding some chubby out of shape girl on a porn site and calling her the ideal.
alessandra looks like horse, hideous, beedy eyes and long face, and is wider in her lower hips (where legs are) than in upper (pelvis) , and nothing about her LONG legs is tasty. Man reckoning her beauty MUST be non-heterosexual. Nothing would convince me opposite. But the women above, have appealing bodies, I specially highly esteem their milky complexion, it looks so pure and soft and fresh
Oh, and about that "masculinization" issue, perhaps you are not able to understand the concept of beauty, but some of the most beautiful women in history, and in modern times, have some sort of boyish features or strong lines like lets say Brooke Shields, Sophia Loren, Heidi Klum, Liz Hurley. All of them could pass as men or boys if they had short hair and a fake mustache.
Of course to realize that, and fully comprehend the concept of beauty, you would require a greater intellectual capacity, and a bigger load of cultural baggage, along with some studies on human sexuality.
Well...I am a 30 year old male, heterosexual, with some experience working around models, and I happen to love the model look a look which, believe it or not, in many cases, comes from good genes.
Yes, the long legs, the flat belly, the tight but firm and abundant butts. Oh, and one more thing.. yes, some of them eat as much as they want, and somehow manage to keep slim. (and im not talking about the anorexic, heroin chic model look, which I find sick)
The most common modification you will see is the breast implants. But if you dare to say that only models are guilty of that, you are even more delusional than you appear at first glance.
I absolutely love Alessandra and I find it very funny to read your accusations of her being a transvestite. Id be worried if I thought you where serious about it, but cmon, this is the internet! the land of the wackos, so feel free.
On your first comparison with Dasha, I see 2 beautiful women, but personally the look on the skin on Dasha's legs and the texture of her butt, well I find it repellent. Its like you could see the blood under her skin. Looks almost painful. But then again, thats maybe due to her Caucasian genes, and the lack of sun, which Alessandra does enjoy, plus her healthy, rich mixture of European and American genes.
So anyway, conclusion.. you are wrong. :)
I agree that those playmates are hideous, trashy trannies but I loled at the sad plain janes you chose as better looking. The only attractive women in your attractive women section are Charlize Theron and Katherine Heigl. You have awful taste and that is why you will never succeed in convincing anyone other than jealous fatties and white supremacists that your women are the epitomes of femininity and attractiveness.
Is that Natasha Poly? I can't stand her, but she looks a million times better than the boring girls next door that this creepy guy likes. I prefer Anja Rubik, Cameron Russel, Diana Dondoe and Doutzen.
Erik, thanks for a provocative and very well-researched website.
To your comments about the homosexual designers influencing the fashion industry and therefore selecting androgynous models--I absolutely agree. However, I would add that the feminine women shown on your website are not the norm for American women, many of whom have a mix of multiple masculine characteristics such as small breasts, thick waists, large shoulders and rib cages, etc, in addition to some feminine features as well. Very feminine models, while clearly the optimal choice for fashion modeling, are relatively rare in terms of their representation in the overall population. Although more masculine women would vigorously deny this, many envy and hate feminine women because they represent an ideal that more masculinized women can only dream about.
Therefore, I would speculate that one reason the fashion industry gravitates toward more masculine models is to appease these more masculinized individuals and to increase sales. However, the fashion industry clearly has gone much too far, as the norm for masculinized models is now as far off the mark for the average woman as the very feminine women are. The truth, which represents most women, is somewhere in the range of women who fall between the two outlying extremes.
this is probably what erik wants in high fashion:
http://m1.2mdn.net/viewad/1289772/Adamo_Macri300x250man.jpg
men. in female clothing. hahahahahahah.
u r just pissed cause i am distilling down all your hard work into two words:
white power.
cause that's what ur site is. and im not crazy, u r- bb. and i bet ur ugly too.
sarika: yeah, I dont know anyone who wants to look like a fashion model either. so what if they're skinny? just let them be skinny- yeesh. most people dont give a shit about models or high fashion. and people who do get anorexia from looking at them, already have lots of problems.
and btw erik: u ignore the passage i posted. that makes you homophobic. bb.
white power,
8D
Erik
what do you think of the other bollywood actress katrina kaif i think is of mixed heritage half british? is she masucline or feminign what do you think of her overall attractiveness?
Runway models are not meant to be sexy things for men/lesbians to look at. They are odd-looking statues that queer designers hang their fruity "art" on. I don't know any woman who looks to runway models as a physical ideal to aspire to. There is a small, mostly internet based "pro-ana" subculture based around it, but those are mostly mentally unstable teenage girls. High fashion is its own universe, it isn't supposed to make sense to outsiders.
nose and light colour, combined with features described by lena: bigger eyes, less distance between eyes and mouth, bigger distance between yes, more prominent cheekbones, smaller nose in the longitudinal view. I would add : the profile with at lest 90° nasolabial angle (I hope it is correct expression), and corners of lips winding slightly downwards (the last two features I've read it was greek and rennaissaince ideal of beauty: and also I always found them irresistible) But everything in one package is rare even among nordics. Of course , appearance has nothing to do with quality of person an lovableness.
wait, jk, i take it back.
at least the fashion industry publicizes a model's biographical information and tries to make models seem somewhat human.
ps:
white power! the fine nordic nose rules all!
erik, it is totally creepy of you to promote women's beauty, but not give a shit about women in terms of their humanity, btw.
fucking. creepy. you are no better than the fashion industry. both of you just strip away a person down to its aesthetics, and ignore anything on the inside. only the fashion industry does it better.
good news is that your site will never catch on, at least not for a looooong time.
your other posts also clearly show a white bias.
N E WAYZ,
i'd like to say that these fashion models look like shit compared to this:
http://www.supermodels.nl/ModelPics/natashapoly/22.jpg
http://www.style.com/slideshows/fashionshows/F2007RTW/HERMES/RUNWAY/00150m.jpg
Pages