erik i personally feel that larger noses are more attractive on a face they give character to a face as compared to smaller noses which make a face look empthy and plain but thats my feeling.
Andy: A larger nose will render a more masculine appearance if accompanied by other indicators of masculinization. Masculinization does make the nose larger. The nose, being in the middle of the face, is more important than some other parts of the face in attractiveness judgments.
Frank: Your ability to leave a comment is obviously not blocked. If your comment exceeded the number of allowed words, you would have been notified of this. The current setting allows each comment to have a maximum of 15,000 characters, which is generous. Beyond this, you will need to split your reply into two or more comments. I don't know why you have not been able to post your lengthy reply. Try again.
John: You have incorrectly implicated height. There are plenty of tall, feminine and attractive women around. The masculinized looks of the women shown above have nothing to do with their height. For instance, Keren Shacham, shown above, is not tall but her face looks masculine.
Please read the entry carefully for why there is a high prevalence of masculinized women among contemporary beauty pageant contestants.
John: Quit joking. Ad hominems do not refute arguments. Your comment does not belong in this entry. You have made assertions without backing them up. Examples: something about gays within this site is a misunderstanding, the perception of beauty has evolved with time, etc. There is plenty of data within this site relating above average femininity in women to good fertility and fecundity, i.e., a preference for above average femininity in women is expected to be a long-term stable central tendency in the heterosexual male population. 20th century model trends have already been explained elsewhere, which you have not even attempted to refute. And no, the most feminine models were not found in the 1930s, but more around the mid-twentieth century.
The high ranking of masculinized models in magazines or websites catering to the general heterosexual male population has also been explained earlier. For instance, Askmen.com selects about 200 or so famous young women -- which, thanks to the gay domination of the fashion business, comprise of models that are typically masculinized and other celebrities that are rarely examples of feminine beauty -- and then asks its readers to vote on them. Hence, the top-ranked ones would often be masculinized women. Many of the voting men are also unaware of posing tricks, airbrushing or how these women compare to feminine and attractive women.
If you wish to understand what it is that most people prefer, you need to look at controlled laboratory studies, where it is clear that the general public strongly and overwhelmingly prefers above average femininity in the looks of women. In these studies, the participants are shown pictures of women ranging from feminine to masculine and asked to pick what they like. There is no such analog in the real world, where the highest ranking models are typically masculinized and few examples of feminine beauty occupy the limelight.
I addressed Jessica Alba in a comment elsewhere and don’t wish to repeat it. I neither like nor dislike the looks of Scarlett Johansson, but Petra Nemcova looks good to me.
erik how important is the nose shape of a woman with respect to this femininity/masculinity issue?I mean does having a larger nose make a face more masucline than having a smaller nose?
yes erik thats exactly what i mean but i only used the example of the face shape i.e square that a squarer face gives a masculine look ofcourse there can be other features combined with this aswell.
John, Erik isn't promoting his own idea of beauty. Though you try to deny it, the contents of this site are BACKED UP BY SCIENTIFIC STUDIES, and Erik's idea of feminine beauty is what most people find attractive. Those celebrities you mentioned get the titles "The Sexiest" or "The Most Desirable" not mainly because of how they look but because of their personality, popularity, talent perhaps, and also because they have photos wherein they wear skimpy clothes and do sexy poses. Besides, those photos are already edited by computer softwares. They also employ posing tricks to look more feminine. You really should go through all the pages of this site before leaving your comments.
I'm sorry but I was just wondering why are there people on here like picking fights, it's just an opinion. I personally agree that most of these woman are unattractive...... Erik stated their "physical features" in a nice way, but I'm flat out saying they are masculine, manly,and nonetheless scary. Sorry if freedom of speech offends anyone but I must say there are two girls who are increadibly beautiful up there, but the rest are plain.
I've seen plenty of woman in real life that excel in beauty than any of these woman who are supossedly "geogeous". Honestly I think beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
And I'm sorry if anyone is offended, but it just proves that if you get so serious and mad about this simple subject and opinion then you must be woman who look manly or vise versa.
But of course I still find these womem beautiful on the inside because it's not just beauty but also brains.
It's funny you should mention that becuase i was watching miss universe 2005 and I must say , second runner up Susan carizzo does have a very large nose.
And as i came across your page...well site or whatever I noticed most of these woman are either average looking without make-up and drag-queenish with makeup. HONESTLY the only beautiful girl I see is miss croatia. LOL I thought miss netherlands was a guy. Or was it beucase of her eyebrows that scares me. ANYWAYS really my point is no one is perfect and the reason why some of these girls are able to be in peagents is becuase of their height.
JUst like super models some are beautiful and some are less fortunate. But of course it's becuase of their height.
It's funny you should mention that becuase i was watching miss universe 2005 and I must say , second runner up Susan carizzo does have a very large nose.
And as i came across your page...well site or whatever I noticed most of these woman are either average looking without make-up and drag-queenish with makeup. HONESTLY the only beautiful girl I see is miss croatia. LOL I thought miss netherlands was a guy. Or was it beucase of her eyebrows that scares me. ANYWAYS really my point is no one is perfect and the reason why some of these girls are able to be in peagents is becuase of their height.
JUst like super models some are beautiful and some are less fortunate. But of course it's becuase of their height.
Andy: There is a difference between square (your usage) and squarer (my usage). It is not a square or squarer face by itself that is relevant, but multiple features that are giving Audrey a more masculine look compared to Nikky, namely a squarer jaw, higher cheekbones and also a narrower face (which I should have mentioned in the previous comment).
Matthewth: West Asia is obviously the Western part of Asia, the region immediately east of Europe. The Uygurs of the Xinjiang region of China are a good example of European-Asian mixes. If you go down south, you will also find other such mixes such as the Burusho and Hazara people.
Andy: If you can point out clear pictures of Cher’s physique as a young adult, I can judge it.
Okay, I revise my opinion slightly. Erik Holland isn't just a raving homophobe- in fact I was wrong, while he plainly dislikes and doesn't understand gays, that's not his only purpose. I even concede that he is trying to promote his own idea of feminine beauty. Normally, I would say that someone who thinks that Rebecca Romijn looks like a "male transvestite" was living in wilful self-deception, but I now see exactly what Erik is on about. This site completely misunderstands the fact that perceptions of beauty evolve with time and is trying to promote the kind of beauty that was fashionable in 1930.
Erik, by the way, what do you think of the fact that women like Adriana Lima, Veronica Varekova, Alessandra Ambrosio, Marisa Miller, Rebecca Romijn are frequently featured at or near the top of "sexiest" and "most desirable" women lists published by the likes of FHM, Maxim and AskMen.com, all strongly heterosexual-male dominated publications? Also what do you think of the "feminine beauty" of the likes of Jessica Alba, Scarlett Johansson and Petra Nemcova?
Some admixture between Europeans and Asians did occur, which is today most evident in West Asia
Sorry to steer this more off-topic, but i found the above quote perplexing.
You're talking about Europeans and Mongoloids mixing together to create...... what ethnic groups? What is meant by "West Asia"?
Frank Your objections have nothing to do with the arguments put forth by this site. If you are an evolutionary biologist, then why is your understanding so poor or have you even bothered to read enough of this site?
Whereas the frequency of blood groups varies with geography, blood type is poorly correlated with ethnicity. Phenotypic variation is not solely between groups; most of it is within groups. One could be an outlier within one’s group without having significant admixture from other groups.
As far as your being “pure” Chinese goes, till the end of the late Pleistocene (about 12,000 years ago) Northeast Asia was occupied by Europeans -- who occupied Mongolia as recently as the Bronze age and were also in Linzi, China in 500 B.C. -- who were eventually displaced by Asians, as evident from skull samples and even mitochondrial DNA evidence from Linzi, China. Some admixture between Europeans and Asians did occur, which is today most evident in West Asia. The Asians from mainland China who moved into Japan absorbed the Jomon and Ainu indigenous populations there, who were a lot closer to modern Europeans than to modern Asians, and this reflects in the looks of the Japanese to some extent. So, “pure” Chinese doesn’t mean that a Chinese individual couldn’t have some of his ancestry from other populations as recently as the Bronze Age.
I have cited numerous studies about average differences between Asian and European facial features, and they show a consistent picture, which is also common observation. Average differences do not imply that two individuals taken at random from different populations will always differ along the direction of average differences.
Of course, men produce estrogens and women produce androgens. I have not implied otherwise. I have cited evidence showing higher levels of estrogens corresponding to greater femininity and attractiveness in women; see this example for instance.
Just because men have relatively longer legs than women does not make long legs a masculine characteristic since relative leg length varies more within a sex than between the sexes and thereby one could end up with long legs as a result of factors other than sex hormones and their receptors. Similarly, relative leg length varies more within populations than between populations, and it does not follow that populations with relatively longer legs are more masculine unless you show that this results from greater masculinization.
Nowhere have I argued that beauty is almost entirely objective or that my taste in women represents it or that there is any ethnic group that is supreme in all beauty characteristics or that white women are the most beautiful. I have repeatedly pointed out individual variation in aesthetic preferences and argued that it is not possible to objectively compare the attractiveness of women from different ethnic groups.
I have also not implied anything along the lines of a “totally fixed objective standard of Female - or Male – beauty.” Of course, evolution is an ongoing process, but genetic change that notably alters physical appearance in humans takes a lot longer than a handful of generations, i.e., over short periods of time, namely a few generations at least, many features that people find attractive will remain the same.
Please make an effort to understand the arguments within this site. I do not like seeing misrepresentations, non sequiturs and caricatures of my arguments.
Sarah: The formatting buttons only seem to work in some browsers. I will either change them or replace them with a link to formatting instructions. If you wanted to quote something, all you need to do is to left-click the mouse where you need to start, then drag the mouse where you wish to end while holding the left click pad down, then let go of the left click pad, point the mouse to anywhere inside the highlighted region, right click and select copy. Subsequently, paste this excerpt as either Quote:
excerpt
or <blockquote>excerpt</blockquote> in the form of a separate paragraph. On the other hand, you are supposed to have stopped posting nonsense and shouldn’t be commenting, let alone bother quoting me.
I have not said that all commentators disagreeing with me have been you, but you have posted comments under multiple aliases apart from “Sarah” such as “.” without the quotes, SH, maddie, Madeline.
Once again, I asked whether you were a prostitute since you mentioned “experience” rather than implying that you are or were one. If the bar incident you mentioned is true, then it would be an anomaly. Whereas martial arts experts can beat those who are stronger and faster but without such expertise, few people are martial arts experts. I also wonder what kind of bar it was. Decent bars catering to the general public often adopt dress codes and other means to keep African-Americans out to the maximum extent possible, and the bouncers/security usually keep a close eye on African-American men, ready to pounce on them at the slightest hint of trouble.
Dawn Yang underwent multiple cosmetic surgeries over a period of time. Look at her earliest pictures and her current ones and see the radical change. Dawn is well-aware of the cosmetic surgery allegations but has never bothered to lay them to rest by posting clear pictures of her from when she was a schoolgirl to present. People who knew her in school have a difficult time realizing that it is her. All this is well documented, and I don’t care if you don’t believe it; just quit posting nonsense.
The models from the attractive women section are not trying to look underage. They have styled their hair and are posing in response to the photographer’s request. All the models you picked have the physique of adult women. Why would a photographer use models with adult physiques, especially Sonia Blake, to cater to men who prefer underage girls? Some people look a few years younger than they are, and some such individuals are 18-year-old girls who are willing to pose nude, and these are the kind of women a photographer would use to legally cater to men interested in underage girls.
If you look better than Sonia Blake, then there should be no reason for you to be bothered by this site, and you could even send me your pictures to use as illustrative examples of feminine beauty, but I think most readers can reasonably guess how you look like.
Here is the survey showing up to 20% of men not being lifetime-exclusive heterosexual. Alessandra Ambrosio generally looks worse in her candid pictures than when she is modeling. The reason Victoria’s Secret can get away with using masculinized lingerie models has nothing to do with women generally finding them attractive but because it has no competition that is using feminine women. Frederick’s of Hollywood and other prominent lingerie retailers all generally use masculinized models because of the gay domination of the fashion business, including these companies.
I haven’t criticized the looks of Halle Berry and Jessica Alba. I pointed out Berry’s nose job and Alba’s masculinization. In the relative absence of feminine beauty in the limelight, why should it be surprising if the likes of Jessica Alba are popular, especially among Latinos? Just as it is very clear that the looks of high-fashion models do not reflect the preferences of the general public, it cannot be assumed some women become top actresses because they have the looks most people like. Connections and willingness to sleep around are important factors behind stardom for actresses, and women willing to prostitute themselves tend to be disproportionately masculinized, which will not be a problem if feminine beauty is not in the limelight.
Andy: It is difficult to address the looks of Cher since she has had many plastic surgeries, and I haven’t seen pictures of her as a young adult to address how feminine she is.
One of the great problems in all these sorts of discussions is that isolated bits of "evidence" are quoted as if they are the whole picture. This applies not just to physical characteristics, such as those which are supposed to make a man or a woman "beautiful", but in so many other ways.
I remember that when I was blood-typed I proved to have a blood type which was supposedly not found in my ethnicity (Chinese). There are several other features both about myself and my relatives which run counter to the supposed phenotype. Yet, I am, as far as I know, "pure" Chinese.
The problem is that so often studies on a small, and often not really randomly selected group is then taken to represent the group as a whole. If this is absurd enough when talking of "Chinese", how much more absurd when generalisations are made on the scale of such as "Asians" in general?
So all your comments about size of teeth, noses, obesity etc.etc., I place in such a context. No doubt there are groups of "Asians", "Africans" etc. who do fit into your stereotypes. There are many others who don't. And I suspect that there is no "race" (whatever that means) which is supreme in all characteristics of "beauty", even by your own rigid standards.
I'm afraid sex steroids might well be a red herring. As a matter of fact, men also produce oestrogens, and women produce androgens. There has been, as far as I know, no evidence that higher levels of one or the other, once above a certain level, correlate absolutely with "beauty".
Incidentally, average proportionate leg length is longer in men than in women - so long legs are actuall a masculine characteristic. I suspect very strongly that, when studied more carefully, proportionate leg length will also be shown to vary greatly within "races", at least as much as between them. The longest legs, proportionately, are probably to be found in some "black" African groups.
As for the concept of "beauty" itself, it is an interesting mixture of the objective - and the subjective. You seem to think that it is almost entirely the former, and that your taste in women represents it. OK, so you obviously think that generally white women are the most beautiful. You have the right to that belief, and others have the right to disagree.
My own experience is this. Growing up in the West, I have been constantly bombarded with the ideas and images of white women as the epitome of "Beauty". When I was younger I would probably have agreed. Now I am of a more mature age, I can honestly say that I personally believe that a beautiful Asian woman is unsurpassed. Not that I still don't appreciate the beauty of beautiful white women - or, for that matter, beautiful black, brown, Arab, Hispanic women etc.etc. I am glad of that, as I can appreciate so much more the great variety of female beauty in this world.
As in so many other fields of aesthetic appreciation, one of the most stultifying of all activities is to try and rigidly define what is or is not "Beautiful".
And there is another important point, which I, as an evolutionary biologist, must make. There is an "objective" aspect of beauty, although that is far from the totality. This objective aspect undoubtedly has something to do with our evolutionary past. It is why we don't find Chimpanzees sexually attractive (unless we are very perverted), and they don't find us so. But evolution is a dynamic process. We haven't stopped evolving as a species. As such, the "objective" part of sexual attraction is also bound to change - and our present preferences are a reference to our immediate evolutionary past rather than to our future, or even to the present. I'd be willing to expand on that if it interests anyone here. But the moot point here is that any idea that there can be a totally fixed objective standard of Female - or Male - beauty, is just wishful thinking.
erik i personally feel that larger noses are more attractive on a face they give character to a face as compared to smaller noses which make a face look empthy and plain but thats my feeling.
Andy: A larger nose will render a more masculine appearance if accompanied by other indicators of masculinization. Masculinization does make the nose larger. The nose, being in the middle of the face, is more important than some other parts of the face in attractiveness judgments.
Frank: Your ability to leave a comment is obviously not blocked. If your comment exceeded the number of allowed words, you would have been notified of this. The current setting allows each comment to have a maximum of 15,000 characters, which is generous. Beyond this, you will need to split your reply into two or more comments. I don't know why you have not been able to post your lengthy reply. Try again.
John: You have incorrectly implicated height. There are plenty of tall, feminine and attractive women around. The masculinized looks of the women shown above have nothing to do with their height. For instance, Keren Shacham, shown above, is not tall but her face looks masculine.
Please read the entry carefully for why there is a high prevalence of masculinized women among contemporary beauty pageant contestants.
John: Quit joking. Ad hominems do not refute arguments. Your comment does not belong in this entry. You have made assertions without backing them up. Examples: something about gays within this site is a misunderstanding, the perception of beauty has evolved with time, etc. There is plenty of data within this site relating above average femininity in women to good fertility and fecundity, i.e., a preference for above average femininity in women is expected to be a long-term stable central tendency in the heterosexual male population. 20th century model trends have already been explained elsewhere, which you have not even attempted to refute. And no, the most feminine models were not found in the 1930s, but more around the mid-twentieth century.
The high ranking of masculinized models in magazines or websites catering to the general heterosexual male population has also been explained earlier. For instance, Askmen.com selects about 200 or so famous young women -- which, thanks to the gay domination of the fashion business, comprise of models that are typically masculinized and other celebrities that are rarely examples of feminine beauty -- and then asks its readers to vote on them. Hence, the top-ranked ones would often be masculinized women. Many of the voting men are also unaware of posing tricks, airbrushing or how these women compare to feminine and attractive women.
If you wish to understand what it is that most people prefer, you need to look at controlled laboratory studies, where it is clear that the general public strongly and overwhelmingly prefers above average femininity in the looks of women. In these studies, the participants are shown pictures of women ranging from feminine to masculine and asked to pick what they like. There is no such analog in the real world, where the highest ranking models are typically masculinized and few examples of feminine beauty occupy the limelight.
I addressed Jessica Alba in a comment elsewhere and don’t wish to repeat it. I neither like nor dislike the looks of Scarlett Johansson, but Petra Nemcova looks good to me.
Erik, why is my detailed reply to your attack on my post being blocked? Is it too long perhaps?
erik how important is the nose shape of a woman with respect to this femininity/masculinity issue?I mean does having a larger nose make a face more masucline than having a smaller nose?
yes erik thats exactly what i mean but i only used the example of the face shape i.e square that a squarer face gives a masculine look ofcourse there can be other features combined with this aswell.
John, Erik isn't promoting his own idea of beauty. Though you try to deny it, the contents of this site are BACKED UP BY SCIENTIFIC STUDIES, and Erik's idea of feminine beauty is what most people find attractive. Those celebrities you mentioned get the titles "The Sexiest" or "The Most Desirable" not mainly because of how they look but because of their personality, popularity, talent perhaps, and also because they have photos wherein they wear skimpy clothes and do sexy poses. Besides, those photos are already edited by computer softwares. They also employ posing tricks to look more feminine. You really should go through all the pages of this site before leaving your comments.
I'm sorry but I was just wondering why are there people on here like picking fights, it's just an opinion. I personally agree that most of these woman are unattractive...... Erik stated their "physical features" in a nice way, but I'm flat out saying they are masculine, manly,and nonetheless scary. Sorry if freedom of speech offends anyone but I must say there are two girls who are increadibly beautiful up there, but the rest are plain.
I've seen plenty of woman in real life that excel in beauty than any of these woman who are supossedly "geogeous". Honestly I think beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
And I'm sorry if anyone is offended, but it just proves that if you get so serious and mad about this simple subject and opinion then you must be woman who look manly or vise versa.
But of course I still find these womem beautiful on the inside because it's not just beauty but also brains.
It's funny you should mention that becuase i was watching miss universe 2005 and I must say , second runner up Susan carizzo does have a very large nose.
And as i came across your page...well site or whatever I noticed most of these woman are either average looking without make-up and drag-queenish with makeup. HONESTLY the only beautiful girl I see is miss croatia. LOL I thought miss netherlands was a guy. Or was it beucase of her eyebrows that scares me. ANYWAYS really my point is no one is perfect and the reason why some of these girls are able to be in peagents is becuase of their height.
JUst like super models some are beautiful and some are less fortunate. But of course it's becuase of their height.
It's funny you should mention that becuase i was watching miss universe 2005 and I must say , second runner up Susan carizzo does have a very large nose.
And as i came across your page...well site or whatever I noticed most of these woman are either average looking without make-up and drag-queenish with makeup. HONESTLY the only beautiful girl I see is miss croatia. LOL I thought miss netherlands was a guy. Or was it beucase of her eyebrows that scares me. ANYWAYS really my point is no one is perfect and the reason why some of these girls are able to be in peagents is becuase of their height.
JUst like super models some are beautiful and some are less fortunate. But of course it's becuase of their height.
ok, so "West Asia", as you intend, encompasses part of China. That ISN'T obvious, so thanks for clarifying.
Andy: There is a difference between square (your usage) and squarer (my usage). It is not a square or squarer face by itself that is relevant, but multiple features that are giving Audrey a more masculine look compared to Nikky, namely a squarer jaw, higher cheekbones and also a narrower face (which I should have mentioned in the previous comment).
Matthewth: West Asia is obviously the Western part of Asia, the region immediately east of Europe. The Uygurs of the Xinjiang region of China are a good example of European-Asian mixes. If you go down south, you will also find other such mixes such as the Burusho and Hazara people.
Andy: If you can point out clear pictures of Cher’s physique as a young adult, I can judge it.
Okay, I revise my opinion slightly. Erik Holland isn't just a raving homophobe- in fact I was wrong, while he plainly dislikes and doesn't understand gays, that's not his only purpose. I even concede that he is trying to promote his own idea of feminine beauty. Normally, I would say that someone who thinks that Rebecca Romijn looks like a "male transvestite" was living in wilful self-deception, but I now see exactly what Erik is on about. This site completely misunderstands the fact that perceptions of beauty evolve with time and is trying to promote the kind of beauty that was fashionable in 1930.
Erik, by the way, what do you think of the fact that women like Adriana Lima, Veronica Varekova, Alessandra Ambrosio, Marisa Miller, Rebecca Romijn are frequently featured at or near the top of "sexiest" and "most desirable" women lists published by the likes of FHM, Maxim and AskMen.com, all strongly heterosexual-male dominated publications? Also what do you think of the "feminine beauty" of the likes of Jessica Alba, Scarlett Johansson and Petra Nemcova?
white people are not beautifull people
erik you said exactly what imeant a squarer jaw procides a masculine look
erike,
if you cant assess chers face then what about her body from what you see is it mascluine or feminine?
I think you are doing a wonderful job. You are very well educated and well informed and appreciate you posting your ideas for the public to access.
Keep up the good work.
Quote:
Sorry to steer this more off-topic, but i found the above quote perplexing.
You're talking about Europeans and Mongoloids mixing together to create...... what ethnic groups? What is meant by "West Asia"?
Frank Your objections have nothing to do with the arguments put forth by this site. If you are an evolutionary biologist, then why is your understanding so poor or have you even bothered to read enough of this site?
Whereas the frequency of blood groups varies with geography, blood type is poorly correlated with ethnicity. Phenotypic variation is not solely between groups; most of it is within groups. One could be an outlier within one’s group without having significant admixture from other groups.
As far as your being “pure” Chinese goes, till the end of the late Pleistocene (about 12,000 years ago) Northeast Asia was occupied by Europeans -- who occupied Mongolia as recently as the Bronze age and were also in Linzi, China in 500 B.C. -- who were eventually displaced by Asians, as evident from skull samples and even mitochondrial DNA evidence from Linzi, China. Some admixture between Europeans and Asians did occur, which is today most evident in West Asia. The Asians from mainland China who moved into Japan absorbed the Jomon and Ainu indigenous populations there, who were a lot closer to modern Europeans than to modern Asians, and this reflects in the looks of the Japanese to some extent. So, “pure” Chinese doesn’t mean that a Chinese individual couldn’t have some of his ancestry from other populations as recently as the Bronze Age.
I have cited numerous studies about average differences between Asian and European facial features, and they show a consistent picture, which is also common observation. Average differences do not imply that two individuals taken at random from different populations will always differ along the direction of average differences.
Of course, men produce estrogens and women produce androgens. I have not implied otherwise. I have cited evidence showing higher levels of estrogens corresponding to greater femininity and attractiveness in women; see this example for instance.
Just because men have relatively longer legs than women does not make long legs a masculine characteristic since relative leg length varies more within a sex than between the sexes and thereby one could end up with long legs as a result of factors other than sex hormones and their receptors. Similarly, relative leg length varies more within populations than between populations, and it does not follow that populations with relatively longer legs are more masculine unless you show that this results from greater masculinization.
Nowhere have I argued that beauty is almost entirely objective or that my taste in women represents it or that there is any ethnic group that is supreme in all beauty characteristics or that white women are the most beautiful. I have repeatedly pointed out individual variation in aesthetic preferences and argued that it is not possible to objectively compare the attractiveness of women from different ethnic groups.
I have also not implied anything along the lines of a “totally fixed objective standard of Female - or Male – beauty.” Of course, evolution is an ongoing process, but genetic change that notably alters physical appearance in humans takes a lot longer than a handful of generations, i.e., over short periods of time, namely a few generations at least, many features that people find attractive will remain the same.
Please make an effort to understand the arguments within this site. I do not like seeing misrepresentations, non sequiturs and caricatures of my arguments.
Sarah: The formatting buttons only seem to work in some browsers. I will either change them or replace them with a link to formatting instructions. If you wanted to quote something, all you need to do is to left-click the mouse where you need to start, then drag the mouse where you wish to end while holding the left click pad down, then let go of the left click pad, point the mouse to anywhere inside the highlighted region, right click and select copy. Subsequently, paste this excerpt as either
Quote:
or
<blockquote>excerpt</blockquote>in the form of a separate paragraph. On the other hand, you are supposed to have stopped posting nonsense and shouldn’t be commenting, let alone bother quoting me.I have not said that all commentators disagreeing with me have been you, but you have posted comments under multiple aliases apart from “Sarah” such as “.” without the quotes, SH, maddie, Madeline.
Once again, I asked whether you were a prostitute since you mentioned “experience” rather than implying that you are or were one. If the bar incident you mentioned is true, then it would be an anomaly. Whereas martial arts experts can beat those who are stronger and faster but without such expertise, few people are martial arts experts. I also wonder what kind of bar it was. Decent bars catering to the general public often adopt dress codes and other means to keep African-Americans out to the maximum extent possible, and the bouncers/security usually keep a close eye on African-American men, ready to pounce on them at the slightest hint of trouble.
Dawn Yang underwent multiple cosmetic surgeries over a period of time. Look at her earliest pictures and her current ones and see the radical change. Dawn is well-aware of the cosmetic surgery allegations but has never bothered to lay them to rest by posting clear pictures of her from when she was a schoolgirl to present. People who knew her in school have a difficult time realizing that it is her. All this is well documented, and I don’t care if you don’t believe it; just quit posting nonsense.
The models from the attractive women section are not trying to look underage. They have styled their hair and are posing in response to the photographer’s request. All the models you picked have the physique of adult women. Why would a photographer use models with adult physiques, especially Sonia Blake, to cater to men who prefer underage girls? Some people look a few years younger than they are, and some such individuals are 18-year-old girls who are willing to pose nude, and these are the kind of women a photographer would use to legally cater to men interested in underage girls.
If you look better than Sonia Blake, then there should be no reason for you to be bothered by this site, and you could even send me your pictures to use as illustrative examples of feminine beauty, but I think most readers can reasonably guess how you look like.
Here is the survey showing up to 20% of men not being lifetime-exclusive heterosexual. Alessandra Ambrosio generally looks worse in her candid pictures than when she is modeling. The reason Victoria’s Secret can get away with using masculinized lingerie models has nothing to do with women generally finding them attractive but because it has no competition that is using feminine women. Frederick’s of Hollywood and other prominent lingerie retailers all generally use masculinized models because of the gay domination of the fashion business, including these companies.
I haven’t criticized the looks of Halle Berry and Jessica Alba. I pointed out Berry’s nose job and Alba’s masculinization. In the relative absence of feminine beauty in the limelight, why should it be surprising if the likes of Jessica Alba are popular, especially among Latinos? Just as it is very clear that the looks of high-fashion models do not reflect the preferences of the general public, it cannot be assumed some women become top actresses because they have the looks most people like. Connections and willingness to sleep around are important factors behind stardom for actresses, and women willing to prostitute themselves tend to be disproportionately masculinized, which will not be a problem if feminine beauty is not in the limelight.
Andy: It is difficult to address the looks of Cher since she has had many plastic surgeries, and I haven’t seen pictures of her as a young adult to address how feminine she is.
One of the great problems in all these sorts of discussions is that isolated bits of "evidence" are quoted as if they are the whole picture. This applies not just to physical characteristics, such as those which are supposed to make a man or a woman "beautiful", but in so many other ways.
I remember that when I was blood-typed I proved to have a blood type which was supposedly not found in my ethnicity (Chinese). There are several other features both about myself and my relatives which run counter to the supposed phenotype. Yet, I am, as far as I know, "pure" Chinese.
The problem is that so often studies on a small, and often not really randomly selected group is then taken to represent the group as a whole. If this is absurd enough when talking of "Chinese", how much more absurd when generalisations are made on the scale of such as "Asians" in general?
So all your comments about size of teeth, noses, obesity etc.etc., I place in such a context. No doubt there are groups of "Asians", "Africans" etc. who do fit into your stereotypes. There are many others who don't. And I suspect that there is no "race" (whatever that means) which is supreme in all characteristics of "beauty", even by your own rigid standards.
I'm afraid sex steroids might well be a red herring. As a matter of fact, men also produce oestrogens, and women produce androgens. There has been, as far as I know, no evidence that higher levels of one or the other, once above a certain level, correlate absolutely with "beauty".
Incidentally, average proportionate leg length is longer in men than in women - so long legs are actuall a masculine characteristic. I suspect very strongly that, when studied more carefully, proportionate leg length will also be shown to vary greatly within "races", at least as much as between them. The longest legs, proportionately, are probably to be found in some "black" African groups.
As for the concept of "beauty" itself, it is an interesting mixture of the objective - and the subjective. You seem to think that it is almost entirely the former, and that your taste in women represents it. OK, so you obviously think that generally white women are the most beautiful. You have the right to that belief, and others have the right to disagree.
My own experience is this. Growing up in the West, I have been constantly bombarded with the ideas and images of white women as the epitome of "Beauty". When I was younger I would probably have agreed. Now I am of a more mature age, I can honestly say that I personally believe that a beautiful Asian woman is unsurpassed. Not that I still don't appreciate the beauty of beautiful white women - or, for that matter, beautiful black, brown, Arab, Hispanic women etc.etc. I am glad of that, as I can appreciate so much more the great variety of female beauty in this world.
As in so many other fields of aesthetic appreciation, one of the most stultifying of all activities is to try and rigidly define what is or is not "Beautiful".
And there is another important point, which I, as an evolutionary biologist, must make. There is an "objective" aspect of beauty, although that is far from the totality. This objective aspect undoubtedly has something to do with our evolutionary past. It is why we don't find Chimpanzees sexually attractive (unless we are very perverted), and they don't find us so. But evolution is a dynamic process. We haven't stopped evolving as a species. As such, the "objective" part of sexual attraction is also bound to change - and our present preferences are a reference to our immediate evolutionary past rather than to our future, or even to the present. I'd be willing to expand on that if it interests anyone here. But the moot point here is that any idea that there can be a totally fixed objective standard of Female - or Male - beauty, is just wishful thinking.
Would it just be on this website alone, then? I can highlight on other ones but just not on here.
Pages