i just wasted 20 minutes reading some people who spent quite a lot of time saying so and so is better looking than so and so. this is really a boat load of nonsense. some of these guys might be in graduate school because the terms that they used are those widely found in those losers departments like social science / cultural studies. people if you are fans / friends / relatives of these VS models, you don't need to feel offended by these people, they are educated losers most likely their thesis was trashed by their advisers. don't bother to comment on my comment. i will not read this blog anymore.
Elisabeth: Who has said that central and northern European women are generally masculine in build? These regions are filled with plenty of feminine-looking women. Northern, eastern and central European women are closer to each other than they are to southern European women (except for North Italians who are disproportionately of northern and central European descent). Whereas women north of southern Europe tend to be taller and heavier boned, they also, on average, have finer facial features, larger breasts and a higher incidence of your awesome waist-to-hip ratio.
One of the points of this entry is that Heidi Klum is described as a German beauty, but this is a disgrace to German beauty as you should very well know.
You've used the example of Afro scalp hair, but... "It should be noted that some features lying toward the derived extreme of the ancestral-to-derived discriminant are specialized features that characterize some populations but not others because of differential natural selection pressures, and thus there cannot be any objectiveness to designating one population average as more aesthetically appealing than another population average with respect to these specialized traits in so far as comparing the attractiveness of individuals across populations goes. Thus, there is nothing objectively better looking about curly Afro hair than the straight hair found in the Chinese or vice versa."
So this example, according to your Beauty Pageants page, can't be used in this context, where you're explaining how derived features (and not European features) are positively related to beauty -- because you've already said that whether specialised traits such as Afro hair are attractive or not is subjective. Is there another example you could provide?
If I've misunderstood... again... then you may need to dumb down you language a little.
Euopean women are generally masculine in build? How are they different from
Eastern European and southern European women?
I'm of Swedish,German-Austrian,Norwegian descent. I'm built just
the opposite of Heidi Klum. I'm tall and big boned like
a Germanic woman. But in large femminine boned. Not in Heidi Klum's way at all. My bust is 341/12-35- waist is 251/2 my hips are 42. I see al ot of central northern
European woman built like me.
Here are osme women in my opinion who are also beautiful feminine all way. Brigitte Bardot
Sarah: Feminine beauty is an unhealthy ideal? It corresponds to health (though it is not the only healthy configuration) and cannot be acquired by indulgence in negative health behaviors. Feminine beauty strongly contrasts with the typical skinny looks of high-fashion models, which can often only be acquired via unhealthy behaviors, and a number of high-fashion models are not in good health either. I have clearly explained that feminine looks do not lie in features such as large breasts since there are feminine-looking small-breasted women and masculine-looking large-breasted women. Therefore, I am not pushing large breasts or large backsides per se, but aiming to bring more women with overall feminine and attractive looks into the limelight. As far as “pushing white goes,” there is nothing unhealthy in general about being white, and I have already explained that this site is targeting people of European ancestry, i.e., it does not make any sense to address non-European women in detail. Something like this site is not needed for non-European populations, and if you disagree, feel free to come up with it.
Quit pretending that you were trying to show how much I can influence teenage girls by leaving your measurements under a pseudonym. I didn’t make any negative recommendation to you posting as teenage “S.H.” Besides, if you were playing around, you would have brought up the matter right away and called your bluff, but you didn’t for months, and called your measurements a bluff only in response to my reminding you that apart from the contents of your irate comments, your self-described measurements under an alias are also consistent with your not being feminine. Like I said elsewhere, time for you to stop commenting here.
8D: Nowhere have I used the expression “Nordic race.” I also did not brag about the “fine society” and noses of Nordics. The point of the entry was to drive home an important point, namely that some preferences are intrinsic, not a result of conditioning or the dominance of a specific group.
Joe: Are most humans under an illusion that beauty exists? What a remarkable illusion in that most see the same illusion (e.g., Table 2 above) and this illusion can be quantified to some extent and described anatomically in some detail! Anyway, this site does not delve into philosophy.
Alicia: Yes, most women don’t have trouble getting men to have sex with them, but not all women wait for their male partner to initiate lovemaking. There are times when some women feel the need to put a male partner in the mood when he would not normally be. This is when lingerie comes in handy. So the majority of women buy lingerie because they think it is “so pretty”? What do they plan on doing with the pretty stuff? Put it on for social gatherings? Hang it in the closet or on the wall? Put it on inside the home for relatives, guests, children, cooking food or gardening? You know the typical purpose. Your reference to the use of Zuzana as a lingerie model making men think of sex or porn is obviously supposed to be taken as a reference to sexual arousal of the male partner, which is the major goal of wearing lingerie. Therefore, what is the problem with using Zuzana?
What lingerie companies use feminine and attractive women as models? I am not aware of any. They all generally use masculinized women as far as I know, thanks to the gay domination of the fashion business (extends to lingerie business, too). Victoria’s Secret is the big one among them because its has the resources to pay big name fashion models to model for it; big names attract attention. In the absence of a feminine beauty alternative, Victoria’s Secret will do a decent job at sales. Don’t delude yourself into believing that the reason the likes of Karolina Kurkova are used is because most people find her hot. Show the entry above to most people and ask them how “hot” they think Karolina is. Karolina started out as a high-fashion model. Go through the top fashion models section of this site and ask yourself whether the top models are selected because they have the looks the public finds desirable in women. Read more of this site if you can’t answer this question.
Riann: Once again, I am not arguing that masculine looks in women are undesirable per se. Therefore, describing a masculine woman as masculine is not bashing or critiquing her looks as far as what I am writing is concerned, but if you consider very masculine looks in women undesirable to the point of it being a stigma, then you will perceive this woman being described as very masculine to constitute bashing. The problem is with your perception.
On the other hand, it seems that you would regard a more benign description of a woman’s masculinization more acceptable. I mostly use reasonable terminology. I counted the number of times I described a woman as looking like a drag queen within this site and came across two instances: Pamela Anderson 1 and Pamela Anderson 2; Heidi Klum. Take a good look at the pictures referenced. I beg thee; you simply have to let me use “drag queen” in these two instances because of the combination of masculine looks and extensive make-up to make the women look feminine or more attractive. In the absence of extensive make-up, a “drag queen” descriptor would be inappropriate. Therefore, in the two instances where I have used “drag queen,” I am not simply responding to the masculine looks, but also to the presence of make-up. I generally have no interest in describing the looks of ordinary women. I do not recall any instance of describing a woman as a “draq queen” in social company or in any of my other writings, but you simply have to let me use “draq queen” in the two instances above.
I have not described your argument in terms of feminine health/female health corresponding to being unhealthily thin and masculine. I simply pointed out what your reference to the female ideal/standard corresponds to today. What your graduate student friend appears to be studying isn’t adoption of a feminine ideal, but a female ideal that is not feminine. The notion of an ideal WHR of 0.7 has been debunked; some of this I addressed in an entry on various confounds regarding WHR and attractiveness and more can be found in this paper, which I have also addressed in a different context.
Regarding this site not being “necessarily open to the idea that women can still be healthy without having an hourglass figure,” this site has to do with attractiveness/aesthetics, not health. Where have I argued or implied that an hourglass figure represents health but deviation from it corresponds to diminished health? I have clearly mentioned that there are correlates of beauty that do not correspond to health. I also doubt that sanitizing my writing with respect to the uncommon indiscretions you/Brenda have mentioned will make poor-mannered pissed-off feminists/masculinized women behave better.
Brenda: I see your point. Most of your quotes are taken from a single page, and are in response to the irony of some models ending up as top-ranked “sexy” models; it is difficult to avoid sarcasm here given the irony and the big names involved. I mostly use neutral language, but occasionally get tired of it. I will try to keep it mostly neutral in further writings.
Jump: A preference for men among heterosexual women and a preference for men among homosexual men do not develop in a similar manner. In the case of heterosexual women, normal developmental processes are involved, whereas in the case of homosexual men, abnormal developmental processes -- prenatal developmental disturbances to be more precise -- are involved; see this model. Therefore, there is no reason to expect extensive similarities between the male partner preferences of heterosexual women and homosexual men.
Yes, overall placement along the ancestral-to-derived discriminant is a correlate of facial beauty among both men and women, and other things being equal, a somewhat more overall derived than average face shape, within limits, will generally be preferred. I have not used the expression “more evolved.” An aboriginal Australian woman may look better than another such woman if her overall face shape or an individual facial feature is somewhat shifted toward the more derived end of average for aborigines, but a derived feature will not necessarily look more European. For instance, Afro scalp hair is more derived than straight scalp hair, but it does not look more European. On the other hand, with respect to aesthetic judgments, the more attractive non-European face from the perspective of non-Europeans in general is overall (not necessarily on all counts) shifted toward the more derived end of the scale and also thereby closer to European norms given the considerable overlap between the overall facial ancestral-to-derived discriminant and Europeanization.
femininity may exist but to imply from that that iut is a correlate of beauty and so beauty exists is an assumption because one may agree someone looks or is feminine but it doesnt necesserily follow tjhat they believe that person looks beautifull, Beauty doesnt exist its merely an illusion.
I think that erik needs a "white power" logo on his website. this site would make an excellent addition to stormfront, or majorityrights. you know, the ones run by bitter, white, hicks.
he's already basically bragged about the fine society and noses of the nordic race. lol. nordic race. them future 'white' offspring are all gonna be browner in 50 years wiht wider noses. HAR.
What you're pushing (a big ass, big breasts, hourglass figure, youthful face, being white) as beautiful isn't an unhealthy ideal? Are you kidding me?
For once, please stop BSing yourself into thinking that you're any different than gay fashion designers who try to push their ideals of beauty onto younger women. You're exactly like them, and you know it. My attempt to try to show you how much you can influence teenaged girls by pretending to be one, you overlooked right away because you were too stupid to realize it. Are you really that blind?
"By the way, Ms. Johannson's eyes do notlook Asian in the pictures you posted."
First of all, smart ass, there is only one picture of Scarlett, and second, OF COURSE HER EYES DON'T LOOK ASIAN. My point was to show you that sometimes white women wear their makeup in ways that resemble Asian women, just like some Asian women put on makeup or get surgery to look like they have bigger eyes. I highly doubt Scarlett Johannson wants to be Asian; however, I also doubt Asian women want to look white (oh excuse me, "less ethnic").
Hello, Erik! Sorry I haven't been able to visit and respond this whole week; I've been too busy with school.
What I should've stated instead of "I never said I was pleased with this site," was that I never said I was pleased OR displeased with it. There is no point in bringing up my "pleasure" factor with this ridiculous blog of yours. I have already told you MANY times that your website is pure amusement to me, and it's pretty hilarious you would think people come here to "learn" from you and your bigoted, ludicrous assumptions about beauty. I know you would really like to think I come here and try to argue with you because I'm pissed off or something, but I'm really not. I don't get angry easily, actually. It's just fun to have arguments with people, especially older people, who are dumber than me. I can see that you're getting quite angry with ME, though, by the words and phrases you choose to use, and threatening to ban me from here (boo hoo). Despite my personal loathing of you, however, I just wanted to thank you for not banning me yet, so that I can come here every weekend and laugh at you for being such a gullible little puppy dog.
As for your ridiculous chart that you probably spent hours on........
1. White women have obviously the most variety of natural haircolors, while Asian women mostly just have naturally dark brown or black hair. If an Asian woman decides she wants to lighten her hair, it isn't to look less ethnic, dimwit. I have been coloring my hair for 8 years now, and have practically had every single natural haircolor out there. It isn't because I wanted to look like a certain ethnicity, but because I was just experimenting and wanted to change things up a little. But of course, you would NEVER consider than possiblity, now would you?
2. A lot of women from all different races get eye and nose surgery. What's your point? The fact is, in modern times, a big nose is considered unattractive. Rarely anyone ever gets surgery to make their nose bigger. Big noses usually do not occur in Asians - they mostly occur in Ashkenazi Jews. I don't consider Jewish people different than Caucasians, do you? So, no. You're wrong again. Nice try though.
3. Your "comments pertaining to Asians" and "Altering Ethnic looks" yes or no checkbox don't correlate. You might want to fix that.
Compared to the before pictures, the after pictures of the women who had double eyelid surgery don't look any less ethnic. Their eyes stand out more and are more attractive (mostly to do with the makeup they're wearing afterwards) but you could clearly tell that they are still Asian. Double eyelids are common in a lot of Asians, anyways, but that doesn't mean they are less ethnic looking than those who don't have double eyelids.
"Do you seriously believe that by posting the cut of an apparently feminine woman you will convince me that it's you?"
AHAHAHAHHAHA.. gee, I don't know whether to take this as a compliment or not. Erik of femininebeauty.info thinks I'm feminine looking..... nope. Sorry, it doesn't change my opinion about you and the fact that you're probably an ugly homo. Thanks for finally realizing that I'm more attractive than most of the women you have on this site, though ;)
30-23-31 wouldn't be unfeminine if it belongs to a girl who was 17 (like I pretended I was) and was 5'1, idiot. This is what those measurements would probably look like: http://i7.tinypic.com/6gye4if.jpg
Thin and kind of scrawny, but unfeminine? Definitely not, and especially not if her face was feminine as well. I know you're not into toned bodies and tiny wastes, but I doubt any other straight male out there, who is also 17, would reject a girl like that, providing that her face was also attractive.
Here is the full picture of her. I didn't think her face was feminine enough for her body but whatever; you like ugly faces anyways. http://store.delias.com/frontpage.do
The reason I choose to mess with you isn't because I feel offended about you ragging on fashion models/masculine women; after all, you already said yourself that my face is feminine according to your standards, and although my 34b-24-34 measurements are exactly the most curvy, I am happy and confident enough to consider myself attractive. You just need to accept the fact that I'm not the only one that thinks you're a pedophile and a racist bigot, ok puppy?
So there you go Erik. Feel free to block me whenever you wish :)
So, as an example, eyelid operations on East Asians to create a double eyelid make said East Asians' appearance deviate more from the East Asian norm. So this means that people of a certain ethnicity will regard people of the same ethnicity as themselves as more attractive the less they look like the average person of said ethnicity? Would this apply to modifying one's appearance towards any ethnicity other than one's own?
some women may buy lingerie to put a man in the mood, most women don't have trouble getting men to have sex with them...women buy lingerie for themselves because they like to have pretty things, i know this because i'm a girl who loves lingerie..and i work in a lingerie store. the majority of women that are buying the lingerie are buying because they think it's "so pretty" or "so cute"...most women know what their partners like yet women leave the store with very different things than when men buy lingerie. and NO most women do not want their partners thinking about porn when they are with them. porn is demeaning and vulgar, woman don't think of sex that way. i can tell you for sure women are the reason lingerie sells not men. and the main motivation for women buying lingerie is not to make men happy it's to make themselves happy, you obviously have no idea what you are talking about, or anything about women...why do you want to make everyone out to be homosexuals or almost homosexuals ("men who have narrowly escaped nonheterosexuality" )if they find any of these women attractive, which most men do. and if everything you are saying is true than why does victoria's secret do so much better than any other lingerie company. there are lingerie company's that use your taste in models, but they do the worst of them all. and victoria's secret marketing is the exact reason why they are successful, and the models they choose are automaticly successful. the majority of men and women think vs models are attractive and nice to look at in underwear, that's the only reason they are used...people like them and it moves merchandise period.
Jump: The reference to ethnicity here concerns itself with physical appearance. By deviating -- in a specific manner -- from the norms of physical appearance for one’s ethnic group, one could look less ethnic. For instance, with respect to aesthetic double eyelid surgery among East Asians, you observe many men and women undergoing this surgery, and the directionality is clear: creation of a double crease where a single one exists but hardly any reverse cases, i.e., operating on the upper eyelid of young adults for aesthetic reasons generally serves to reduce ethnic looks.
Pisham: The Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue is not about advertising swimsuits; it is supposed to function as eye candy for heterosexual men. The point of this entry is not to bash/criticize the models pointed out, but to critique the people/circumstances responsible for making the choice of SI models, which requires that the masculinization of SI models be pointed out.
This site is not arguing that women should fit a certain image. Haven’t you noticed that it is focusing on models and beauty pageant contestants? There are actresses, singers and other celebrity women whose looks are not addressed here except in rare cases in response to reader comments; I do not care how these women look. This site is about aesthetics. There are scenarios where feminine beauty is required, as in the SI swimsuit issue given its target population, and all I am saying is that feminine beauty should be used when it is required, not that feminine beauty should always be used or that women should look feminine. This site does not in any manner imply that women are here for men’s pleasure or that they should “be subservient to what men want.”
to erik: Whereas you may believe how women should look like, I don’t believe that women should have a particular look. See my reply to Pisham.
Pisham: The issue that you are responding to is not that “ordinary women would not be popular or attractive to men,” but that ordinary-looking women would not be appropriate for high-fashion modeling since their looks would not convey exclusivity. I do not believe that women should be there to please men. I am not telling others what I think “should be attractive in women,” but what most people find to be physically attractive in women. You have already commented on an entry summarizing evidence for the powerful effect of femininity on facial attractiveness; there is a lot more research cited within this site; please look around. It is not enough to be a woman to be feminine. The typical woman is feminine in comparison to men in general, but only some women are feminine in comparison to women in general. If you read carefully, you will observe that I am critiquing the people/circumstances responsible for putting up masculinized women where they don’t belong, not the looks of women, which would be a useless endeavor.
A website does not have to exist to make the world a better place. On the other hand, the long-term impact of my work remains to be seen. I believe that it will be more positive than negative. If feminine beauty could be made more prominent in the public sphere, you will see a drop in the incidence of anorexia, surely a big plus.
Pisham: What do you mean I am “taking women backwards”? I agree that a man in love with a woman doesn’t give a rat’s about her rib cage, and being attracted to a woman with a large rib cage doesn’t imply anything about the sexual orientation of a man. Yes, people do have their opinions and personal preferences regarding beauty, but in most cases these are similar. I also agree that being attracted to an athletic-looking woman does not imply that a man is gay or close. I disagree that “feminine and attractive” is not definable. Femininity can be assessed in detail (see the feminine vs. masculine page), and the numerical data above tell us about various correlates of beauty; more here. The latter does not imply that one could define feminine beauty with high precision, but it is not undefinable. Of course, women that I am not attracted to are not necessarily unattractive to others, and I have not implied that these women must be un-feminine.
DAGraphix: More of the line-up photos can be obtained here.
Yeah, "masculinized" is an awfully unappealing term for such a gorgeous girl. I found this page because I caught Melisande in a video and was looking for anything else I could find of her. She is the most beautiful model I've seen in years, and there ain't nothing masculine about her.
And Melisande, if you read this ... your body is not "unfortunate"! Don't change a thing. You don't look anorexic or drug-addled. You look healthy, lean and gorgeous. Perfect, IMHO. And with a lovely, open, charming face as well.
Okay, slipping out of fanboy mode now. But it needed to be said.
Alicia: Zuzana and Anna are not porn stars. There are also plenty of masculinized female porn stars, too. Yes, women buy lingerie, but what for? To put a male partner in the mood. Your response regarding Zuzana’s body, “i see her and it makes me think of sex or porn” is just the kind of response a lingerie-wearing woman would want to generate in her male partner. Therefore, Zuzana’s physique would be appropriate for lingerie modeling.
There is a lot more to beauty than symmetry. Yes, women do come in all shapes and sizes, but this site is not saying how women “should be.” This entry is specifically about lingerie models, and it is argued that they are expected to look feminine and attractive.
Harper: So one heterosexual photographer undermines my argument that the influence of homosexuals is seen behind the selection of Victoria’s Secret models? I have not said that every single person doing the selection is a homosexual. The fact is that homosexuals dominate the top ranks of the fashion business, and their influence is clear when you see the general trend among fashion models. For every Laetitia Casta used by Victoria’s Secret, there are multiple clearly masculinized women used by this company. Laetitia Casta would also have been unlikely to be picked up by Victoria’s Secret if it came across her when she was virtually unknown, but she already had a name as a model for ready made clothing and the company doesn’t have a policy against occasionally using more feminine models.
Laetitia Casta isn't close to a feminine ideal. I do plan on addressing her looks later. Compared to the prominence of her breasts, her buttocks are flattened, and her shoulder-torso-hip proportions are not on the feminine side. There is also an element of robusticity in her facial features, but she doesn’t look masculine.
I have not seen VS models in person, and I doubt they look better in real life than in their glamorous airbrushed pictures (they usually look worse in their candids). I have never described Adriana Lima as looking like a man, but it is clear that she is not feminine. You may like Alessandra Ambrosio, but she isn’t feminine, either.
As far as the measurements of Zuzana and Karolina go, I usually don’t bother with measurements because it is difficult to verify them, but the pictures speak for themselves, and if one sees multiple pictures, then a reasonable inference of physique shape can be made in spite of a posing confound in many pictures. Let us assume that your listed bust-waist-hip measurements are correct for both models. Both women have 34-inch hips, but Karolina is about 6 inches taller and has wide hips, i.e., her buttocks are flatter. Therefore, there is no way Karolina’s buttocks would appear to be as prominent/feminine as Zuzana’s even if they were matched for posing. In spite of Zuzana’s arching her back and sticking out her buttocks, in the first such picture notice her small rib cage, which is responsible for a dramatic feminine look as in making her hips look relatively wider, something that is impossible for Karolina to achieve. Of course, posing is making Zuzana’s physique look more dramatic, but Karolina’s pictures shown are not in anatomical position either. As far as photoshop is concerned, Zuzana’s photos are taken from a low profile publication and are part of a multiple pictures (say 100) per photo series collection, i.e., it is unlikely that someone went through the trouble of photoshop-ing all relevant pictures to make Zuzana look more feminine and consistently so through all the pictures. Karolina’s pictures, except the ones taken on stage, are, on the other hand, most likely photoshopped. Based on your stated measurements, their bust circumference is similar, but Karolina had an A-cup before she got implants and Zuzana has a DD cup. Therefore, Zuzana’s rib cage is a lot smaller, which gives her physique a much more dramatic hourglass look. Slender fashion models usually have a low circumferential waist measurement, but they generally have a noticeably broader rib cage than feminine glamour models, which stretches out their waist in front view.
There is no way that “if karolina was posing for an adult site and she had natural dd breast she probably would look even more feminine than zuzana.” Look at Karolina’s face, her broad ribcage, her broad shoulders and her picture from Vogue magazine. There is a front view comparison above where Karolina’s busts are large, yet she doesn’t look feminine, let alone anywhere as feminine as Zuzana looks.
So DD-cup breasts “are not appropriate for lingerie modeling because a lot of the bras they are selling don’t even come in dd”? Most women would be unable to fit in the clothing worn by the typical high-fashion model, but then the looks of high-fashion models are not supposed to reflect the availability of commonly used dress sizes. Similarly, whereas it is true that the models need to fit in clothes, there is no reason why designers couldn’t specify that their lingerie models be in the C-cup to DD-cup range if they had an interest in using very feminine looking lingerie models.
You left comments about a transvestite look, but this is not what I am talking about; I am talking about a transsexual look. It appears that you have a preference for somewhat masculinized women, especially since you call the women in the attractive women section as weak chinned. Your claim that I have “no polls or percentages of what heterosexual men prefer, no research even to back up anything you say” is abundantly refuted by a great deal of research cited within this site; just follow the links here.
i used to work for a very famous victoria's secret photographer(he also did men's magizine GQ, Maxim), he was very straight and loved woman maybe even alittle too much....he worked with vs to find models, and lots of times he even solely chose who he wanted to shoot. so your argument that homosexuals are choosing the models is not valid. also i just wonder if you've ever seen any of the vs models in person. i'm saying if you've ever seen adriana lima in person there would be no way you could say she looks anything like a man, i think she'd make your heart almost stop. Alessandra is pretty. marissa miller has a rockin bod but her face is not gorgeous. giselle is the only one that looks the least bit masculine, and she's still beautiful in person. karolina is stunning because of her height and her hair, but i would agree that she is not really appropriate for lingerie, maybe just fashion and runway(but she is not masculine). I have seen alot of these models in person i can assure you these girls look like girls. but i also think that some of the girls aren't necessarily the best of the bunch either. i loved helena christensen, laetitia casta, Daniela Pestova, stephanie seymour...but finding anyone built like laetitia casta with as stunning of a face as hers is almost impossible. but even so most of these models if you see them in person will leave anyone weak in the knees. and 90% of the girls on your "attractive women" page wouldn't even turn a head. most of thier faces are either average or less than... definitely not the apitame of feminine beauty.
comparing zuzana to karolina is kinda of funny, knowing the ways of photography i can tell you that karolina's measurements are not that far from zuzana's if you took off her DD breasts (C's are actually the perfered size by the majority men). the differences between karolina's body and zuzana's are zuzana's obviously shorter, her legs are shorter..so they look a bit rounder. but their waist to hip ratio is about the same. karolina measurements are 33.5-23-34.5(i know this because i've seen it on her modeling card and they can't lie on those things, we use them for fittings) zuzana's is 34-25-34(and they wouldn't lie about that to make her waist bigger, smaller waists are always more desirable). and zuzana's butt is actually about the same size as karolina's, but the way she's posing makes it look bigger. she's arching her back and sticking out her butt with her legs spread, which is a very common pose with adult photography because it accentuates the butt and makes the waist look smaller. zuzana's giant breasts make her shoulders and waist look smaller than they actually are. you better believe that zuzana's pictures are using photoshop and posing to exagerate her feminine figure. if karolina was posing for an adult site and she had natural dd breast she probably would look even more feminine than zuzana. DD are not appropriate for lingerie modeling because alot of the bras they are selling don't even come in dd and the most common cup size is B (the girls gotta all be able to fit in the clothes). the only girls that look like transvestites are the ones that get so much plastic surgery and wear a ton of makeup like fergie for example(she's trying to exagerate her feminine sex appeal, which is also what transvestites do). when karolina is completely done up maybe she could look like a transvestite(that would be the makeup artists fault), but when she's natural and hanging around she just looks like a really pretty girl. also you pretty much have no sources(except your own opinion) for any of your claims..you have no polls or percentages of what heterosexual men prefer, no research even to back up anything you say. and i don't think the girls you find attractive look anymore feminine at all. from what i see what the girls you like have in common is not ultra feminine features but they all look very anglo-saxon, narrower faces, smaller eyes, pointy noses, thin lips, weak chins, and less than prominent cheek bones. i will say that laetitia casta is the ideal of feminine form and beauty.
i just wasted 20 minutes reading some people who spent quite a lot of time saying so and so is better looking than so and so. this is really a boat load of nonsense. some of these guys might be in graduate school because the terms that they used are those widely found in those losers departments like social science / cultural studies. people if you are fans / friends / relatives of these VS models, you don't need to feel offended by these people, they are educated losers most likely their thesis was trashed by their advisers. don't bother to comment on my comment. i will not read this blog anymore.
Elisabeth: Who has said that central and northern European women are generally masculine in build? These regions are filled with plenty of feminine-looking women. Northern, eastern and central European women are closer to each other than they are to southern European women (except for North Italians who are disproportionately of northern and central European descent). Whereas women north of southern Europe tend to be taller and heavier boned, they also, on average, have finer facial features, larger breasts and a higher incidence of your awesome waist-to-hip ratio.
One of the points of this entry is that Heidi Klum is described as a German beauty, but this is a disgrace to German beauty as you should very well know.
You've used the example of Afro scalp hair, but... "It should be noted that some features lying toward the derived extreme of the ancestral-to-derived discriminant are specialized features that characterize some populations but not others because of differential natural selection pressures, and thus there cannot be any objectiveness to designating one population average as more aesthetically appealing than another population average with respect to these specialized traits in so far as comparing the attractiveness of individuals across populations goes. Thus, there is nothing objectively better looking about curly Afro hair than the straight hair found in the Chinese or vice versa."
So this example, according to your Beauty Pageants page, can't be used in this context, where you're explaining how derived features (and not European features) are positively related to beauty -- because you've already said that whether specialised traits such as Afro hair are attractive or not is subjective. Is there another example you could provide?
If I've misunderstood... again... then you may need to dumb down you language a little.
So central and northern
Euopean women are generally masculine in build? How are they different from
Eastern European and southern European women?
I'm of Swedish,German-Austrian,Norwegian descent. I'm built just
the opposite of Heidi Klum. I'm tall and big boned like
a Germanic woman. But in large femminine boned. Not in Heidi Klum's way at all. My bust is 341/12-35- waist is 251/2 my hips are 42. I see al ot of central northern
European woman built like me.
Here are osme women in my opinion who are also beautiful feminine all way. Brigitte Bardot
Hedy Lamarr
http://images.google.com/images?svnum=10&um=1&hl=en&ie=ISO-8859-1&safe=active&q=hedy+lamarr&btnG=Search+Images
Grace Kelly
http://images.google.com/images?svnum=10&um=1&hl=en&ie=ISO-8859-1&safe=active&q=grace+kelly&btnG=Search+Images
Audrey Hepburn
http://images.google.com/images?svnum=10&um=1&hl=en&ie=ISO-8859-1&safe=active&q=audrey+hepburn&btnG=Search+Images
http://midnighttosix.typepad.com/midnight_to_six_rare_vide/images/bardot_sings.jpg
http://www.leninimports.com/bardot_gallery_21.jpg
http://www.leninimports.com/brigitte_bardot_gallery_37.jpg
http://www.thegoldenyears.org/bardot.jpg
Elizabeth Taylor
http://images.google.com/images?um=1&tab=wi&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&q=elizabeth+taylor
Sarah: Feminine beauty is an unhealthy ideal? It corresponds to health (though it is not the only healthy configuration) and cannot be acquired by indulgence in negative health behaviors. Feminine beauty strongly contrasts with the typical skinny looks of high-fashion models, which can often only be acquired via unhealthy behaviors, and a number of high-fashion models are not in good health either. I have clearly explained that feminine looks do not lie in features such as large breasts since there are feminine-looking small-breasted women and masculine-looking large-breasted women. Therefore, I am not pushing large breasts or large backsides per se, but aiming to bring more women with overall feminine and attractive looks into the limelight. As far as “pushing white goes,” there is nothing unhealthy in general about being white, and I have already explained that this site is targeting people of European ancestry, i.e., it does not make any sense to address non-European women in detail. Something like this site is not needed for non-European populations, and if you disagree, feel free to come up with it.
Quit pretending that you were trying to show how much I can influence teenage girls by leaving your measurements under a pseudonym. I didn’t make any negative recommendation to you posting as teenage “S.H.” Besides, if you were playing around, you would have brought up the matter right away and called your bluff, but you didn’t for months, and called your measurements a bluff only in response to my reminding you that apart from the contents of your irate comments, your self-described measurements under an alias are also consistent with your not being feminine. Like I said elsewhere, time for you to stop commenting here.
8D: Nowhere have I used the expression “Nordic race.” I also did not brag about the “fine society” and noses of Nordics. The point of the entry was to drive home an important point, namely that some preferences are intrinsic, not a result of conditioning or the dominance of a specific group.
Joe: Are most humans under an illusion that beauty exists? What a remarkable illusion in that most see the same illusion (e.g., Table 2 above) and this illusion can be quantified to some extent and described anatomically in some detail! Anyway, this site does not delve into philosophy.
Alicia: Yes, most women don’t have trouble getting men to have sex with them, but not all women wait for their male partner to initiate lovemaking. There are times when some women feel the need to put a male partner in the mood when he would not normally be. This is when lingerie comes in handy. So the majority of women buy lingerie because they think it is “so pretty”? What do they plan on doing with the pretty stuff? Put it on for social gatherings? Hang it in the closet or on the wall? Put it on inside the home for relatives, guests, children, cooking food or gardening? You know the typical purpose. Your reference to the use of Zuzana as a lingerie model making men think of sex or porn is obviously supposed to be taken as a reference to sexual arousal of the male partner, which is the major goal of wearing lingerie. Therefore, what is the problem with using Zuzana?
What lingerie companies use feminine and attractive women as models? I am not aware of any. They all generally use masculinized women as far as I know, thanks to the gay domination of the fashion business (extends to lingerie business, too). Victoria’s Secret is the big one among them because its has the resources to pay big name fashion models to model for it; big names attract attention. In the absence of a feminine beauty alternative, Victoria’s Secret will do a decent job at sales. Don’t delude yourself into believing that the reason the likes of Karolina Kurkova are used is because most people find her hot. Show the entry above to most people and ask them how “hot” they think Karolina is. Karolina started out as a high-fashion model. Go through the top fashion models section of this site and ask yourself whether the top models are selected because they have the looks the public finds desirable in women. Read more of this site if you can’t answer this question.
Riann: Once again, I am not arguing that masculine looks in women are undesirable per se. Therefore, describing a masculine woman as masculine is not bashing or critiquing her looks as far as what I am writing is concerned, but if you consider very masculine looks in women undesirable to the point of it being a stigma, then you will perceive this woman being described as very masculine to constitute bashing. The problem is with your perception.
On the other hand, it seems that you would regard a more benign description of a woman’s masculinization more acceptable. I mostly use reasonable terminology. I counted the number of times I described a woman as looking like a drag queen within this site and came across two instances: Pamela Anderson 1 and Pamela Anderson 2; Heidi Klum. Take a good look at the pictures referenced. I beg thee; you simply have to let me use “drag queen” in these two instances because of the combination of masculine looks and extensive make-up to make the women look feminine or more attractive. In the absence of extensive make-up, a “drag queen” descriptor would be inappropriate. Therefore, in the two instances where I have used “drag queen,” I am not simply responding to the masculine looks, but also to the presence of make-up. I generally have no interest in describing the looks of ordinary women. I do not recall any instance of describing a woman as a “draq queen” in social company or in any of my other writings, but you simply have to let me use “draq queen” in the two instances above.
I have not described your argument in terms of feminine health/female health corresponding to being unhealthily thin and masculine. I simply pointed out what your reference to the female ideal/standard corresponds to today. What your graduate student friend appears to be studying isn’t adoption of a feminine ideal, but a female ideal that is not feminine. The notion of an ideal WHR of 0.7 has been debunked; some of this I addressed in an entry on various confounds regarding WHR and attractiveness and more can be found in this paper, which I have also addressed in a different context.
Regarding this site not being “necessarily open to the idea that women can still be healthy without having an hourglass figure,” this site has to do with attractiveness/aesthetics, not health. Where have I argued or implied that an hourglass figure represents health but deviation from it corresponds to diminished health? I have clearly mentioned that there are correlates of beauty that do not correspond to health. I also doubt that sanitizing my writing with respect to the uncommon indiscretions you/Brenda have mentioned will make poor-mannered pissed-off feminists/masculinized women behave better.
Brenda: I see your point. Most of your quotes are taken from a single page, and are in response to the irony of some models ending up as top-ranked “sexy” models; it is difficult to avoid sarcasm here given the irony and the big names involved. I mostly use neutral language, but occasionally get tired of it. I will try to keep it mostly neutral in further writings.
Jump: A preference for men among heterosexual women and a preference for men among homosexual men do not develop in a similar manner. In the case of heterosexual women, normal developmental processes are involved, whereas in the case of homosexual men, abnormal developmental processes -- prenatal developmental disturbances to be more precise -- are involved; see this model. Therefore, there is no reason to expect extensive similarities between the male partner preferences of heterosexual women and homosexual men.
Yes, overall placement along the ancestral-to-derived discriminant is a correlate of facial beauty among both men and women, and other things being equal, a somewhat more overall derived than average face shape, within limits, will generally be preferred. I have not used the expression “more evolved.” An aboriginal Australian woman may look better than another such woman if her overall face shape or an individual facial feature is somewhat shifted toward the more derived end of average for aborigines, but a derived feature will not necessarily look more European. For instance, Afro scalp hair is more derived than straight scalp hair, but it does not look more European. On the other hand, with respect to aesthetic judgments, the more attractive non-European face from the perspective of non-Europeans in general is overall (not necessarily on all counts) shifted toward the more derived end of the scale and also thereby closer to European norms given the considerable overlap between the overall facial ancestral-to-derived discriminant and Europeanization.
femininity may exist but to imply from that that iut is a correlate of beauty and so beauty exists is an assumption because one may agree someone looks or is feminine but it doesnt necesserily follow tjhat they believe that person looks beautifull, Beauty doesnt exist its merely an illusion.
@ sarah:
I think that erik needs a "white power" logo on his website. this site would make an excellent addition to stormfront, or majorityrights. you know, the ones run by bitter, white, hicks.
he's already basically bragged about the fine society and noses of the nordic race. lol. nordic race. them future 'white' offspring are all gonna be browner in 50 years wiht wider noses. HAR.
What you're pushing (a big ass, big breasts, hourglass figure, youthful face, being white) as beautiful isn't an unhealthy ideal? Are you kidding me?
For once, please stop BSing yourself into thinking that you're any different than gay fashion designers who try to push their ideals of beauty onto younger women. You're exactly like them, and you know it. My attempt to try to show you how much you can influence teenaged girls by pretending to be one, you overlooked right away because you were too stupid to realize it. Are you really that blind?
"By the way, Ms. Johannson's eyes do notlook Asian in the pictures you posted."
First of all, smart ass, there is only one picture of Scarlett, and second, OF COURSE HER EYES DON'T LOOK ASIAN. My point was to show you that sometimes white women wear their makeup in ways that resemble Asian women, just like some Asian women put on makeup or get surgery to look like they have bigger eyes. I highly doubt Scarlett Johannson wants to be Asian; however, I also doubt Asian women want to look white (oh excuse me, "less ethnic").
8D: yea I would say Erik probably has steam coming out of his ears right now ahahahaha
Hello, Erik! Sorry I haven't been able to visit and respond this whole week; I've been too busy with school.
What I should've stated instead of "I never said I was pleased with this site," was that I never said I was pleased OR displeased with it. There is no point in bringing up my "pleasure" factor with this ridiculous blog of yours. I have already told you MANY times that your website is pure amusement to me, and it's pretty hilarious you would think people come here to "learn" from you and your bigoted, ludicrous assumptions about beauty. I know you would really like to think I come here and try to argue with you because I'm pissed off or something, but I'm really not. I don't get angry easily, actually. It's just fun to have arguments with people, especially older people, who are dumber than me. I can see that you're getting quite angry with ME, though, by the words and phrases you choose to use, and threatening to ban me from here (boo hoo). Despite my personal loathing of you, however, I just wanted to thank you for not banning me yet, so that I can come here every weekend and laugh at you for being such a gullible little puppy dog.
As for your ridiculous chart that you probably spent hours on........
1. White women have obviously the most variety of natural haircolors, while Asian women mostly just have naturally dark brown or black hair. If an Asian woman decides she wants to lighten her hair, it isn't to look less ethnic, dimwit. I have been coloring my hair for 8 years now, and have practically had every single natural haircolor out there. It isn't because I wanted to look like a certain ethnicity, but because I was just experimenting and wanted to change things up a little. But of course, you would NEVER consider than possiblity, now would you?
2. A lot of women from all different races get eye and nose surgery. What's your point? The fact is, in modern times, a big nose is considered unattractive. Rarely anyone ever gets surgery to make their nose bigger. Big noses usually do not occur in Asians - they mostly occur in Ashkenazi Jews. I don't consider Jewish people different than Caucasians, do you? So, no. You're wrong again. Nice try though.
3. Your "comments pertaining to Asians" and "Altering Ethnic looks" yes or no checkbox don't correlate. You might want to fix that.
Compared to the before pictures, the after pictures of the women who had double eyelid surgery don't look any less ethnic. Their eyes stand out more and are more attractive (mostly to do with the makeup they're wearing afterwards) but you could clearly tell that they are still Asian. Double eyelids are common in a lot of Asians, anyways, but that doesn't mean they are less ethnic looking than those who don't have double eyelids.
"Do you seriously believe that by posting the cut of an apparently feminine woman you will convince me that it's you?"
AHAHAHAHHAHA.. gee, I don't know whether to take this as a compliment or not. Erik of femininebeauty.info thinks I'm feminine looking..... nope. Sorry, it doesn't change my opinion about you and the fact that you're probably an ugly homo. Thanks for finally realizing that I'm more attractive than most of the women you have on this site, though ;)
30-23-31 wouldn't be unfeminine if it belongs to a girl who was 17 (like I pretended I was) and was 5'1, idiot. This is what those measurements would probably look like:
http://i7.tinypic.com/6gye4if.jpg
Thin and kind of scrawny, but unfeminine? Definitely not, and especially not if her face was feminine as well. I know you're not into toned bodies and tiny wastes, but I doubt any other straight male out there, who is also 17, would reject a girl like that, providing that her face was also attractive.
Here is the full picture of her. I didn't think her face was feminine enough for her body but whatever; you like ugly faces anyways.
http://store.delias.com/frontpage.do
The reason I choose to mess with you isn't because I feel offended about you ragging on fashion models/masculine women; after all, you already said yourself that my face is feminine according to your standards, and although my 34b-24-34 measurements are exactly the most curvy, I am happy and confident enough to consider myself attractive. You just need to accept the fact that I'm not the only one that thinks you're a pedophile and a racist bigot, ok puppy?
So there you go Erik. Feel free to block me whenever you wish :)
lolz @ erik totally loosing it.
So, as an example, eyelid operations on East Asians to create a double eyelid make said East Asians' appearance deviate more from the East Asian norm. So this means that people of a certain ethnicity will regard people of the same ethnicity as themselves as more attractive the less they look like the average person of said ethnicity? Would this apply to modifying one's appearance towards any ethnicity other than one's own?
some women may buy lingerie to put a man in the mood, most women don't have trouble getting men to have sex with them...women buy lingerie for themselves because they like to have pretty things, i know this because i'm a girl who loves lingerie..and i work in a lingerie store. the majority of women that are buying the lingerie are buying because they think it's "so pretty" or "so cute"...most women know what their partners like yet women leave the store with very different things than when men buy lingerie. and NO most women do not want their partners thinking about porn when they are with them. porn is demeaning and vulgar, woman don't think of sex that way. i can tell you for sure women are the reason lingerie sells not men. and the main motivation for women buying lingerie is not to make men happy it's to make themselves happy, you obviously have no idea what you are talking about, or anything about women...why do you want to make everyone out to be homosexuals or almost homosexuals ("men who have narrowly escaped nonheterosexuality" )if they find any of these women attractive, which most men do. and if everything you are saying is true than why does victoria's secret do so much better than any other lingerie company. there are lingerie company's that use your taste in models, but they do the worst of them all. and victoria's secret marketing is the exact reason why they are successful, and the models they choose are automaticly successful. the majority of men and women think vs models are attractive and nice to look at in underwear, that's the only reason they are used...people like them and it moves merchandise period.
Jump: The reference to ethnicity here concerns itself with physical appearance. By deviating -- in a specific manner -- from the norms of physical appearance for one’s ethnic group, one could look less ethnic. For instance, with respect to aesthetic double eyelid surgery among East Asians, you observe many men and women undergoing this surgery, and the directionality is clear: creation of a double crease where a single one exists but hardly any reverse cases, i.e., operating on the upper eyelid of young adults for aesthetic reasons generally serves to reduce ethnic looks.
Pisham: The Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue is not about advertising swimsuits; it is supposed to function as eye candy for heterosexual men. The point of this entry is not to bash/criticize the models pointed out, but to critique the people/circumstances responsible for making the choice of SI models, which requires that the masculinization of SI models be pointed out.
This site is not arguing that women should fit a certain image. Haven’t you noticed that it is focusing on models and beauty pageant contestants? There are actresses, singers and other celebrity women whose looks are not addressed here except in rare cases in response to reader comments; I do not care how these women look. This site is about aesthetics. There are scenarios where feminine beauty is required, as in the SI swimsuit issue given its target population, and all I am saying is that feminine beauty should be used when it is required, not that feminine beauty should always be used or that women should look feminine. This site does not in any manner imply that women are here for men’s pleasure or that they should “be subservient to what men want.”
to erik: Whereas you may believe how women should look like, I don’t believe that women should have a particular look. See my reply to Pisham.
Pisham: The issue that you are responding to is not that “ordinary women would not be popular or attractive to men,” but that ordinary-looking women would not be appropriate for high-fashion modeling since their looks would not convey exclusivity. I do not believe that women should be there to please men. I am not telling others what I think “should be attractive in women,” but what most people find to be physically attractive in women. You have already commented on an entry summarizing evidence for the powerful effect of femininity on facial attractiveness; there is a lot more research cited within this site; please look around. It is not enough to be a woman to be feminine. The typical woman is feminine in comparison to men in general, but only some women are feminine in comparison to women in general. If you read carefully, you will observe that I am critiquing the people/circumstances responsible for putting up masculinized women where they don’t belong, not the looks of women, which would be a useless endeavor.
A website does not have to exist to make the world a better place. On the other hand, the long-term impact of my work remains to be seen. I believe that it will be more positive than negative. If feminine beauty could be made more prominent in the public sphere, you will see a drop in the incidence of anorexia, surely a big plus.
Pisham: What do you mean I am “taking women backwards”? I agree that a man in love with a woman doesn’t give a rat’s about her rib cage, and being attracted to a woman with a large rib cage doesn’t imply anything about the sexual orientation of a man. Yes, people do have their opinions and personal preferences regarding beauty, but in most cases these are similar. I also agree that being attracted to an athletic-looking woman does not imply that a man is gay or close. I disagree that “feminine and attractive” is not definable. Femininity can be assessed in detail (see the feminine vs. masculine page), and the numerical data above tell us about various correlates of beauty; more here. The latter does not imply that one could define feminine beauty with high precision, but it is not undefinable. Of course, women that I am not attracted to are not necessarily unattractive to others, and I have not implied that these women must be un-feminine.
DAGraphix: More of the line-up photos can be obtained here.
Yeah, "masculinized" is an awfully unappealing term for such a gorgeous girl. I found this page because I caught Melisande in a video and was looking for anything else I could find of her. She is the most beautiful model I've seen in years, and there ain't nothing masculine about her.
And Melisande, if you read this ... your body is not "unfortunate"! Don't change a thing. You don't look anorexic or drug-addled. You look healthy, lean and gorgeous. Perfect, IMHO. And with a lovely, open, charming face as well.
Okay, slipping out of fanboy mode now. But it needed to be said.
Alicia: Zuzana and Anna are not porn stars. There are also plenty of masculinized female porn stars, too. Yes, women buy lingerie, but what for? To put a male partner in the mood. Your response regarding Zuzana’s body, “i see her and it makes me think of sex or porn” is just the kind of response a lingerie-wearing woman would want to generate in her male partner. Therefore, Zuzana’s physique would be appropriate for lingerie modeling.
There is a lot more to beauty than symmetry. Yes, women do come in all shapes and sizes, but this site is not saying how women “should be.” This entry is specifically about lingerie models, and it is argued that they are expected to look feminine and attractive.
Harper: So one heterosexual photographer undermines my argument that the influence of homosexuals is seen behind the selection of Victoria’s Secret models? I have not said that every single person doing the selection is a homosexual. The fact is that homosexuals dominate the top ranks of the fashion business, and their influence is clear when you see the general trend among fashion models. For every Laetitia Casta used by Victoria’s Secret, there are multiple clearly masculinized women used by this company. Laetitia Casta would also have been unlikely to be picked up by Victoria’s Secret if it came across her when she was virtually unknown, but she already had a name as a model for ready made clothing and the company doesn’t have a policy against occasionally using more feminine models.
Laetitia Casta isn't close to a feminine ideal. I do plan on addressing her looks later. Compared to the prominence of her breasts, her buttocks are flattened, and her shoulder-torso-hip proportions are not on the feminine side. There is also an element of robusticity in her facial features, but she doesn’t look masculine.
I have not seen VS models in person, and I doubt they look better in real life than in their glamorous airbrushed pictures (they usually look worse in their candids). I have never described Adriana Lima as looking like a man, but it is clear that she is not feminine. You may like Alessandra Ambrosio, but she isn’t feminine, either.
As far as the measurements of Zuzana and Karolina go, I usually don’t bother with measurements because it is difficult to verify them, but the pictures speak for themselves, and if one sees multiple pictures, then a reasonable inference of physique shape can be made in spite of a posing confound in many pictures. Let us assume that your listed bust-waist-hip measurements are correct for both models. Both women have 34-inch hips, but Karolina is about 6 inches taller and has wide hips, i.e., her buttocks are flatter. Therefore, there is no way Karolina’s buttocks would appear to be as prominent/feminine as Zuzana’s even if they were matched for posing. In spite of Zuzana’s arching her back and sticking out her buttocks, in the first such picture notice her small rib cage, which is responsible for a dramatic feminine look as in making her hips look relatively wider, something that is impossible for Karolina to achieve. Of course, posing is making Zuzana’s physique look more dramatic, but Karolina’s pictures shown are not in anatomical position either. As far as photoshop is concerned, Zuzana’s photos are taken from a low profile publication and are part of a multiple pictures (say 100) per photo series collection, i.e., it is unlikely that someone went through the trouble of photoshop-ing all relevant pictures to make Zuzana look more feminine and consistently so through all the pictures. Karolina’s pictures, except the ones taken on stage, are, on the other hand, most likely photoshopped. Based on your stated measurements, their bust circumference is similar, but Karolina had an A-cup before she got implants and Zuzana has a DD cup. Therefore, Zuzana’s rib cage is a lot smaller, which gives her physique a much more dramatic hourglass look. Slender fashion models usually have a low circumferential waist measurement, but they generally have a noticeably broader rib cage than feminine glamour models, which stretches out their waist in front view.
There is no way that “if karolina was posing for an adult site and she had natural dd breast she probably would look even more feminine than zuzana.” Look at Karolina’s face, her broad ribcage, her broad shoulders and her picture from Vogue magazine. There is a front view comparison above where Karolina’s busts are large, yet she doesn’t look feminine, let alone anywhere as feminine as Zuzana looks.
So DD-cup breasts “are not appropriate for lingerie modeling because a lot of the bras they are selling don’t even come in dd”? Most women would be unable to fit in the clothing worn by the typical high-fashion model, but then the looks of high-fashion models are not supposed to reflect the availability of commonly used dress sizes. Similarly, whereas it is true that the models need to fit in clothes, there is no reason why designers couldn’t specify that their lingerie models be in the C-cup to DD-cup range if they had an interest in using very feminine looking lingerie models.
You left comments about a transvestite look, but this is not what I am talking about; I am talking about a transsexual look. It appears that you have a preference for somewhat masculinized women, especially since you call the women in the attractive women section as weak chinned. Your claim that I have “no polls or percentages of what heterosexual men prefer, no research even to back up anything you say” is abundantly refuted by a great deal of research cited within this site; just follow the links here.
Kate: Perhaps going through the attractive women section of this site will convince you that the writer isn’t a 300-pound woman or equivalent.
i used to work for a very famous victoria's secret photographer(he also did men's magizine GQ, Maxim), he was very straight and loved woman maybe even alittle too much....he worked with vs to find models, and lots of times he even solely chose who he wanted to shoot. so your argument that homosexuals are choosing the models is not valid. also i just wonder if you've ever seen any of the vs models in person. i'm saying if you've ever seen adriana lima in person there would be no way you could say she looks anything like a man, i think she'd make your heart almost stop. Alessandra is pretty. marissa miller has a rockin bod but her face is not gorgeous. giselle is the only one that looks the least bit masculine, and she's still beautiful in person. karolina is stunning because of her height and her hair, but i would agree that she is not really appropriate for lingerie, maybe just fashion and runway(but she is not masculine). I have seen alot of these models in person i can assure you these girls look like girls. but i also think that some of the girls aren't necessarily the best of the bunch either. i loved helena christensen, laetitia casta, Daniela Pestova, stephanie seymour...but finding anyone built like laetitia casta with as stunning of a face as hers is almost impossible. but even so most of these models if you see them in person will leave anyone weak in the knees. and 90% of the girls on your "attractive women" page wouldn't even turn a head. most of thier faces are either average or less than... definitely not the apitame of feminine beauty.
comparing zuzana to karolina is kinda of funny, knowing the ways of photography i can tell you that karolina's measurements are not that far from zuzana's if you took off her DD breasts (C's are actually the perfered size by the majority men). the differences between karolina's body and zuzana's are zuzana's obviously shorter, her legs are shorter..so they look a bit rounder. but their waist to hip ratio is about the same. karolina measurements are 33.5-23-34.5(i know this because i've seen it on her modeling card and they can't lie on those things, we use them for fittings) zuzana's is 34-25-34(and they wouldn't lie about that to make her waist bigger, smaller waists are always more desirable). and zuzana's butt is actually about the same size as karolina's, but the way she's posing makes it look bigger. she's arching her back and sticking out her butt with her legs spread, which is a very common pose with adult photography because it accentuates the butt and makes the waist look smaller. zuzana's giant breasts make her shoulders and waist look smaller than they actually are. you better believe that zuzana's pictures are using photoshop and posing to exagerate her feminine figure. if karolina was posing for an adult site and she had natural dd breast she probably would look even more feminine than zuzana. DD are not appropriate for lingerie modeling because alot of the bras they are selling don't even come in dd and the most common cup size is B (the girls gotta all be able to fit in the clothes). the only girls that look like transvestites are the ones that get so much plastic surgery and wear a ton of makeup like fergie for example(she's trying to exagerate her feminine sex appeal, which is also what transvestites do). when karolina is completely done up maybe she could look like a transvestite(that would be the makeup artists fault), but when she's natural and hanging around she just looks like a really pretty girl. also you pretty much have no sources(except your own opinion) for any of your claims..you have no polls or percentages of what heterosexual men prefer, no research even to back up anything you say. and i don't think the girls you find attractive look anymore feminine at all. from what i see what the girls you like have in common is not ultra feminine features but they all look very anglo-saxon, narrower faces, smaller eyes, pointy noses, thin lips, weak chins, and less than prominent cheek bones. i will say that laetitia casta is the ideal of feminine form and beauty.
Pages