Dude, just stop. You obviously have a problem, sexual dimorphism has been shown to be a racist-sexist pseudo-scientific method. You don't like skinny girls, that's fine. Gays basically run the fashion industry, again, no argument, but saying women are masculine or eunuchs because you don't like their features is wrong and disingenuous. You like what you like, don't use fake logic to prove you are right and anyone who disagrees has the potential for being bisexual or gay.
I am saying will one physical charcteristic make a person look more masucline than another i.e a square jaw compared to broad shooulders even though both features may look masculine.
Sam: I am not sure what you are trying to say. In the same person, one body part can look more masculine than another because factors other than sex hormones are shaping the body, too. It is for this reason that overall looks need to be taken into account when it comes to how masculine or feminine someone is. This entry focuses on facial features for convenience...it is more time consuming to also find clear pictures of the physiques of these women.
Of course, the same configuration will be more or less pleasing to different individuals, though most will broadly agree with respect to what they like.
8D: This series is not complete yet. There are many more models to address. I haven't been saying that all VS models are masculine...just that a lot of them are. On the other hand, Miranda Kerr appears to have a masculine element in her, which can be clarified by pictures, but this will be in a separate entry.
Danielle: Your comment has already been addressed here. Designer clothing is highly desirable. Therefore, even if most buyers do not like the looks of fashion models, the buyers have no choice but to patronize the fashion designers. For instance, are you going to stop buying shoes if all of them came in packages with a repulsive picture on them?
I agree that high-fashion wear is beyond the reach of most people. However, what evidence is there that upper class individuals generally prefer skinny and masculinized women?
The aesthetics of the high-fashion industry definitely affects us in numerous negative ways. It prompts unnecessary dieting on the part of a number of girls and women, and the looks of high-fashion models trickle down to places where they don't belong as in beauty pageant contestants, lingerie models and the Sports Illustrated swimsuit magazine.
Regarding your statement...
Quote:
The designers aren’t trying to get rid of your slovenly dream women so why do you want to get of the girls they like?
The homosexuals are avoiding feminine women even where they are needed...just look around this site for examples of beauty pageant contestants, lingerie models, etc. I am not advocating that the skinny and masculine women the homosexuals are using should be gotten rid of; a long-term goal of mine is to work toward establishing an alternative fashion industry.
God god, these women you compare them to are DISGUSTING,FUGLY,FLABBY,FAT,SAGGING BREASTS!
PLEASE SENSOR THEIR PRIVATE AREA DOWN BELOW!!! THERE THE MOST DISGUSTING VAGINAS I'VE SEEN!
Erik: How do you decide if a face is masculine or feminine? Do you use an "I know it when I see it" system, or do you have objective criteria? On some parts of this website, you call a woman "obviously" masculine, but on other parts, you look at things like waist-to-hip ratio and various measurements related to the face. Do you use some kind of software to analyze a photograph, or do you just eyeball it? I know scientists have been investigating beauty by making direct measurements of people, or by photographing them under controlled conditions (fixed angles, facial expressions, and so on) but I can't see how to do it from a random photograph.
I ask because I'd like to be able to analyze some faces and bodies for myself. Is there some guide that defines what a "strong" jaw looks like, what "high" cheekbones look like, etc? I've heard that artists drawing human figures have manuals that tell them the size and shape of various body parts; do you use something like that?
I made my debut as a [beauty contestant] at 18 years old. Followed by part-time model for a designer in New York! Let me be perfectly clear ... were I a judge for the pageant based on the photos alone. A few of the contestants, among them Miss FRANCE, leaves much to be desired! For God's sake it's a bleedin' "BEAUTY CONTEST" those who wish to make a scene. Get a life!
Note: Yes, I did not win the contest! Causative factor: an ill-chosen outfit by my [well-meaning] sponsor. I'm not BITTER, regrets ... absolutely!
'but there is typically no need for assertive-looking women when it comes to a variety of modeling assignments, especially modeling swimsuits and lingerie'
....how boring. i bet your sex life sucks, sry2say.
How many Versace gowns do you own? Have you purchased any Dior heels lately? Do these items appeal to you? Didn't think so. You know absolutely nothing about the high fashion industry so trying to apply your standards to their craft is useless and ridiculous. Fashion is first and foremost a business, if the runway models and the clothes were repulsive to the clientele then the designers would have to change or go bust. Maybe this is what the main fashion crowd likes. Young, lanky girls with low body fat percentages and striking facial features must be their preference just like you prefer frowzy, homely girls with vulgar bodies. You want to apply the aesthetics of the everyman to an industry that isn't interested in appealing to the everyman. The aesthetic preferences of the average man and woman is moot point because the average man and woman doesn't attend fashion shows. They can't afford $6,000 jackets or $12,000 trousers. Those who can afford these clothes (and are willing to shell out the dough) don't want to see your sloppy, trashy "glamour" models barreling down the runway in delicate meticulously made clothes. If these girls are admired and desired by the fashion crowd then let them be. The aesthetics of the high fashion industry don't and shouldn't affect you. The designers aren't trying to get rid of your slovenly dream women so why do you want to get of the girls they like?
This seems to me to be an objective and useful article. I don't understand the remark that it reveals a bad attitude toward women. It is only antagonistic to a male gay fashion elite who dictate the aesthetic standard in a way that clashes with natural heterosexual norms. It is well-known among heterosexual men and anyone else who cares to ask them that glamour models like Nicky Case are more sexually attractive.
The case is well made in this article. Eva's hands and feet are CLEARLY bigger. Fig.12 clearly shows that the rib-cage of Nicky Case nips in more at the bottom than Eva's. I don't think the remarks about the facial differences are pejorative or controversial; just objective.
An objective treatment of these matters can help general understanding. It's not about attacking masculine women or feminine men. There's no obvious thread of this in the article anyway. As a heterosexual man, I feel for women who appear to be comparing themselves to unnatural standards. Having said all this, I wouldn't kick Eva out of bed. Circa Wonderbra, anyway...
Given afew masculine features is there such a thing as one feature being more masculine than another. In other words is the masuclinity of features relative for example you have square jaw and broad shoulders so which would be seen as more masucline or does it just boil down to personal preference depending on which feature you prefer over the other
Angelina Jolie is probably the most beaiutiful women in the world, and she is very androgenous looking. I think the most beautiful people have traits of both sexes, which is more natural than being on the extreme side of the spectrum. Also, women have testosterone which gives them their sex drives and also virilizes them. A more "masculinized" woman flags a man that she has a very high sex drive...so go figure.
You have a very rigid view of what is considered beautiful and you are very presumptuous when you try to dictate what most people whould find attractive. In every society the elite class decides what is considered beautiful and they tend to fit the definitions of beauty more than the lower classes. If the women on top are generally tall, thin, tan european women with "masculine" features then are going to be considered more attractive then their shorter, thicker plebeian counterparts. Karolina is lithe, tan, blonde and her features are more striking and commanding than Zuzana's. Zuzana is a short thin, average girl with big boobs.
8D: I agree that convincing women that most people prefer above average femininity in the looks of women will make some women want to make themselves look more feminine, but this does not mean that I have come up with this site to push women in general to look more feminine. My intention is already stated above. I have already acknowledged and discussed some of the problems that will stem from a promotion of feminine beauty, but the impact of skinny fashion models is worse.
In addition, whereas gay fashion designers have made skinny looks appealing to some girls and women by using skinny models to sell highly desirable items such as designer clothing, I haven't done anything comparable. I am basically coming up with side by side comparisons and studies. These, by themselves, will not convince people unless most intrinsically harbor a feminine beauty ideal.
8D: Your comment confirms my suspicion about your sanity. How sane is someone expected to be if she posts "white power" all over the place?
In spite of the availability of plenty of food, most people prefer a subset of the medically normal weight range rather than skinny looks. In addition, Dan Savage equates convincing some girls that good looks lie in skinniness with changing sexual orientation!
Caterina: Feminization tends to make the face shape wider, which is what you seem to be referring to as wider cheekbones. As far as a square jaw is concerned, this issue came up previously, and you should read the discussion here. In a nutshell, a square jaw does not make a face feminine or masculine by itself. Regarding height, a greater proportion of women in the below average to average height range will be feminine compared to women in the average to above average height range, i.e., you will find plenty of tall and feminine women. In other words, tallness is not a masculine trait in women. For instance, see this 5-foot-11 woman and this comparison of a masculine model and a feminine woman, both 6-feet-tall.
Sam: I searched for pictures of Priyanka Chopra, and it seems that the woman is in the normal to somewhat masculinized range for South Asian norms...where exactly I can’t tell.
Dude, just stop. You obviously have a problem, sexual dimorphism has been shown to be a racist-sexist pseudo-scientific method. You don't like skinny girls, that's fine. Gays basically run the fashion industry, again, no argument, but saying women are masculine or eunuchs because you don't like their features is wrong and disingenuous. You like what you like, don't use fake logic to prove you are right and anyone who disagrees has the potential for being bisexual or gay.
Peace.
Erik I think you protest to much. Are you still in the closet?
Erik
I am saying will one physical charcteristic make a person look more masucline than another i.e a square jaw compared to broad shooulders even though both features may look masculine.
lol @ "south asian norms"
Sam: Yes, Priyanka is anywhere from normal to somewhat masculine.
Sam: I am not sure what you are trying to say. In the same person, one body part can look more masculine than another because factors other than sex hormones are shaping the body, too. It is for this reason that overall looks need to be taken into account when it comes to how masculine or feminine someone is. This entry focuses on facial features for convenience...it is more time consuming to also find clear pictures of the physiques of these women.
Of course, the same configuration will be more or less pleasing to different individuals, though most will broadly agree with respect to what they like.
8D: This series is not complete yet. There are many more models to address. I haven't been saying that all VS models are masculine...just that a lot of them are. On the other hand, Miranda Kerr appears to have a masculine element in her, which can be clarified by pictures, but this will be in a separate entry.
Emilie: The woman's vag is not being shown.
8D: There is indeed no need to convey assertiveness in various modeling scenarios, and the desirability of assertiveness in bed is a separate matter.
Danielle: Your comment has already been addressed here. Designer clothing is highly desirable. Therefore, even if most buyers do not like the looks of fashion models, the buyers have no choice but to patronize the fashion designers. For instance, are you going to stop buying shoes if all of them came in packages with a repulsive picture on them?
I agree that high-fashion wear is beyond the reach of most people. However, what evidence is there that upper class individuals generally prefer skinny and masculinized women?
The aesthetics of the high-fashion industry definitely affects us in numerous negative ways. It prompts unnecessary dieting on the part of a number of girls and women, and the looks of high-fashion models trickle down to places where they don't belong as in beauty pageant contestants, lingerie models and the Sports Illustrated swimsuit magazine.
Regarding your statement...
Quote:
The homosexuals are avoiding feminine women even where they are needed...just look around this site for examples of beauty pageant contestants, lingerie models, etc. I am not advocating that the skinny and masculine women the homosexuals are using should be gotten rid of; a long-term goal of mine is to work toward establishing an alternative fashion industry.
God god, these women you compare them to are DISGUSTING,FUGLY,FLABBY,FAT,SAGGING BREASTS!
PLEASE SENSOR THEIR PRIVATE AREA DOWN BELOW!!! THERE THE MOST DISGUSTING VAGINAS I'VE SEEN!
Erik: How do you decide if a face is masculine or feminine? Do you use an "I know it when I see it" system, or do you have objective criteria? On some parts of this website, you call a woman "obviously" masculine, but on other parts, you look at things like waist-to-hip ratio and various measurements related to the face. Do you use some kind of software to analyze a photograph, or do you just eyeball it? I know scientists have been investigating beauty by making direct measurements of people, or by photographing them under controlled conditions (fixed angles, facial expressions, and so on) but I can't see how to do it from a random photograph.
I ask because I'd like to be able to analyze some faces and bodies for myself. Is there some guide that defines what a "strong" jaw looks like, what "high" cheekbones look like, etc? I've heard that artists drawing human figures have manuals that tell them the size and shape of various body parts; do you use something like that?
I made my debut as a [beauty contestant] at 18 years old. Followed by part-time model for a designer in New York! Let me be perfectly clear ... were I a judge for the pageant based on the photos alone. A few of the contestants, among them Miss FRANCE, leaves much to be desired! For God's sake it's a bleedin' "BEAUTY CONTEST" those who wish to make a scene. Get a life!
Note: Yes, I did not win the contest! Causative factor: an ill-chosen outfit by my [well-meaning] sponsor. I'm not BITTER, regrets ... absolutely!
PS:
you're missing miranda kerr. that girl ain't close to being masculine, she looks like a little girl. with a botched nose job, but still a little girl.
'but there is typically no need for assertive-looking women when it comes to a variety of modeling assignments, especially modeling swimsuits and lingerie'
....how boring. i bet your sex life sucks, sry2say.
Please censor this fugbeast's rancid vag. I almost lost my lunch.
How many Versace gowns do you own? Have you purchased any Dior heels lately? Do these items appeal to you? Didn't think so. You know absolutely nothing about the high fashion industry so trying to apply your standards to their craft is useless and ridiculous. Fashion is first and foremost a business, if the runway models and the clothes were repulsive to the clientele then the designers would have to change or go bust. Maybe this is what the main fashion crowd likes. Young, lanky girls with low body fat percentages and striking facial features must be their preference just like you prefer frowzy, homely girls with vulgar bodies. You want to apply the aesthetics of the everyman to an industry that isn't interested in appealing to the everyman. The aesthetic preferences of the average man and woman is moot point because the average man and woman doesn't attend fashion shows. They can't afford $6,000 jackets or $12,000 trousers. Those who can afford these clothes (and are willing to shell out the dough) don't want to see your sloppy, trashy "glamour" models barreling down the runway in delicate meticulously made clothes. If these girls are admired and desired by the fashion crowd then let them be. The aesthetics of the high fashion industry don't and shouldn't affect you. The designers aren't trying to get rid of your slovenly dream women so why do you want to get of the girls they like?
This seems to me to be an objective and useful article. I don't understand the remark that it reveals a bad attitude toward women. It is only antagonistic to a male gay fashion elite who dictate the aesthetic standard in a way that clashes with natural heterosexual norms. It is well-known among heterosexual men and anyone else who cares to ask them that glamour models like Nicky Case are more sexually attractive.
The case is well made in this article. Eva's hands and feet are CLEARLY bigger. Fig.12 clearly shows that the rib-cage of Nicky Case nips in more at the bottom than Eva's. I don't think the remarks about the facial differences are pejorative or controversial; just objective.
An objective treatment of these matters can help general understanding. It's not about attacking masculine women or feminine men. There's no obvious thread of this in the article anyway. As a heterosexual man, I feel for women who appear to be comparing themselves to unnatural standards. Having said all this, I wouldn't kick Eva out of bed. Circa Wonderbra, anyway...
Erik,
Given afew masculine features is there such a thing as one feature being more masculine than another. In other words is the masuclinity of features relative for example you have square jaw and broad shoulders so which would be seen as more masucline or does it just boil down to personal preference depending on which feature you prefer over the other
Angelina Jolie is probably the most beaiutiful women in the world, and she is very androgenous looking. I think the most beautiful people have traits of both sexes, which is more natural than being on the extreme side of the spectrum. Also, women have testosterone which gives them their sex drives and also virilizes them. A more "masculinized" woman flags a man that she has a very high sex drive...so go figure.
You have a very rigid view of what is considered beautiful and you are very presumptuous when you try to dictate what most people whould find attractive. In every society the elite class decides what is considered beautiful and they tend to fit the definitions of beauty more than the lower classes. If the women on top are generally tall, thin, tan european women with "masculine" features then are going to be considered more attractive then their shorter, thicker plebeian counterparts. Karolina is lithe, tan, blonde and her features are more striking and commanding than Zuzana's. Zuzana is a short thin, average girl with big boobs.
Erik
so priyanka is more on the masucline scale than the feminine is what your saying
8D: I agree that convincing women that most people prefer above average femininity in the looks of women will make some women want to make themselves look more feminine, but this does not mean that I have come up with this site to push women in general to look more feminine. My intention is already stated above. I have already acknowledged and discussed some of the problems that will stem from a promotion of feminine beauty, but the impact of skinny fashion models is worse.
In addition, whereas gay fashion designers have made skinny looks appealing to some girls and women by using skinny models to sell highly desirable items such as designer clothing, I haven't done anything comparable. I am basically coming up with side by side comparisons and studies. These, by themselves, will not convince people unless most intrinsically harbor a feminine beauty ideal.
8D: Your comment confirms my suspicion about your sanity. How sane is someone expected to be if she posts "white power" all over the place?
In spite of the availability of plenty of food, most people prefer a subset of the medically normal weight range rather than skinny looks. In addition, Dan Savage equates convincing some girls that good looks lie in skinniness with changing sexual orientation!
Tim: I did get your email and responded a short while ago. It usually takes me a while to respond because I am typically involved in a lot of things.
8D: Quit posting "white power" all over the blog.
Caterina: Feminization tends to make the face shape wider, which is what you seem to be referring to as wider cheekbones. As far as a square jaw is concerned, this issue came up previously, and you should read the discussion here. In a nutshell, a square jaw does not make a face feminine or masculine by itself. Regarding height, a greater proportion of women in the below average to average height range will be feminine compared to women in the average to above average height range, i.e., you will find plenty of tall and feminine women. In other words, tallness is not a masculine trait in women. For instance, see this 5-foot-11 woman and this comparison of a masculine model and a feminine woman, both 6-feet-tall.
Sam: I searched for pictures of Priyanka Chopra, and it seems that the woman is in the normal to somewhat masculinized range for South Asian norms...where exactly I can’t tell.
Pages