i disagree that facial features are not important in ads. it is often said that the face is what sells.
i agree with the bulk of this site, i think you have identified an interesting and significant perspective on the appreciation of feminine beauty, but i want to know why do you complain about the domination of the fashion industry by gay men? many women will vouch that gay men are some of the best people to go shopping with because of their eye for fashion and style. i think it is salient to note that fashion is not solely about making oneself attractive to men (though this might have been the case in the 40s and 50s, when models had hourglass physiques to show off feminine styled clothing) but it is about creating 'a look'.
i think your site is valuable in helping people realise that the fashion industry is not a showcase of feminine beauty and as such helping women not to be alienated by the models, but i think it is us who need to change our perceptions of the fashion industry, rather than the fashion industry that needs to change. the fashion industry is not the one that says 'you should look like this', it is people's own minds that say that. couture is about creating a garment, gown or look of interest and beauty, not about dressing up beautiful women. the fashion industry never claimed to be about the most beautiful women in the world - it is and always will be about the most beautiful clothes in the world.
maybe the trend towards using masculinised models is down to the growing acceptability of being openly gay rather than any sickness in society or the fashion industry. i think your problem with the industry misses the point and takes on a personal dimension at odds with the objectivity of the site. isnt it the craving to be like others rather than just being ourselves the real sickness here?
Designer: Fashion models are selling clothes, and their facial features are not important in ads. Even if a chiseled look to a face is required, one could find women with this look that are not more than slightly masculine, but gay fashion designers will usually desire a greater level of masculinity. As long as the fashion industry is dominated by homosexual men, why would the industry be switching toward an alternative form of unconventional looks? The skinny and masculine unconventional looks reflect the aesthetic preferences of the dominant gay fashion designers, not looks that help sales. Men and women judge female attractiveness similarly; see the references in this comment. Therefore, it is surely not the case that the looks of high-fashion models reflect the fact that they are selling to women. Also, in controlled laboratory settings, exposure to images of skinny high-fashion models has generally been found to worsen the body image of women. What is the bright idea behind using models with looks at sharp odds with the preferences of women in general and also looks that disturb many women? There is no bright idea; it is simply a matter of gay fashion designers getting away with their aesthetic preferences because they dominate the fashion business.
I know that there are some effeminate male models, but it is the gay fashion designers again, a number of whom find adolescent boys appealing, but such models are not likely to become very common anytime soon since the gays wouldn’t be able to get away with it. If feminine women were used as high-fashion models, whereas some women would not be pleased, appreciation for feminine beauty is intrinsically harbored by most women, i.e., they would be much less disturbed than by the use of skinny high-fashion models.
Hana: Nothing is wrong with manly fashion models, but they encroach on the turf of feminine beauty, which is not the fault of the models, but that of gay fashion designers. Manly high-fashion models can have their fashion modeling jobs; I do not wish to take them away. However, when their skinniness is creating some problems for many girls and even the models themselves, then it is time to do something about the skinniness requirement.
If the homosexuals want to use skinny and masculine models, they have a right to use women that naturally possess these looks, but no model should have to starve to please the homosexuals.
You are confounding the masculinization in high-fashion models with athletic looks. Does the typical high-fashion model look athletic or someone with diarrhea? Besides, manly women usually look like women, not like men.
The looks promoted by this site are not those acquired by eating aplenty and having lots of babies (note the emphasis on a tiny waist). More importantly, you need to understand that this site is not about how a woman is supposed to look like; it focuses on models and beauty pageant contestants. Please read the FAQ to understand the site's purpose. I have nothing against your looks. May you be happy and live a healthy life!
Jessica: Gisele is not being made fun of. Rather, some aspects of her looks are being pointed out to illustrate the aesthetics problems caused by male homosexual fashion designers. By the way, do not forget to show this entry to Giselle and other high-ranking people in the fashion industry.
Elise: Based on the measurements that you mentioned, you appear to have an A cup, i.e., small breasts. This does not necessarily make you masculine as there are small-breasted feminine women around. How tall you are would make a difference. Your masculinity-femininity can be best assessed by looking at you, and if you want me to assess it, email me your pictures; hide/remove your face if you wish. As far as the borders of masculinity-femininity or the relative size of the rib cage go, this is best assessed by comparing yourself to women in general, and you know better than me how you compare to the average woman.
Shorter height and wider hips do not necessarily imply greater femininity; you need to look at the overall appearance. On the other hand, Giselle Bundchen has a more masculine physique than does Kate Moss.
BS talks...: Look at who is writing B.S.! The most feminine women are often biologically male? How can a woman be a biological male? The condition you have mentioned, complete androgen sensitivity syndrome in a 46-XY individual, is an intersex condition; people with this disorder are neither male nor female, and they are a few inches taller than women, on average, because there are some genes on the Y chromosome that make men larger than women, and these genes are operational in these individuals.
I certainly haven’t implied anything along the lines of only women with 32E-20-37 measurements or more feminine proportions as feminine. Therefore, your coming up with the giant, muscular and foot-long man as the threshold of masculinity is a ridiculous caricature of my arguments.
Your remaining points suggest that you have either not read this site or are deliberately misrepresenting it. I have shown numerous examples of women with smaller breasts looking more feminine than women with larger breasts. I have not described white women as more feminine than non-white women, but cited evidence that among the most overall feminine-looking women, white women are overrepresented, and have pointed out the ethnicity confound in comparisons across populations on numerous occasions. Additionally, I have said repeatedly that this site is about looks, not behavior.
Take sex/gender and sexuality 101 before writing more on it.
Ummm you need to stop making fun of gisele
she is my cousin
i no you wont believe me though
but everybody is beautiful
and you dont need to target gisele
I don't think this shows anything except that I prefer younger, fitter women, being 20 myself.
It makes sense to me that femininity would be tied to beauty though, but as simply true by definition. Hell, why would I want my woman to look like a man?
The thing that I'm a bit confused on is this sense of being more feminine. Having, say, larger breasts means you have more of a feminine characteristic, but I'm don't think I'm comfortable saying that just because they have more of x that they are then more feminine. Recognize the slight twist?
For demonstration sake, an example of a nude model I find very attractive (albeit a bit skinny):
I agree Fashion models are manly... But what is wrong with it. They need jobs too... seriously.. if manly women weren't worshiped for their exotic sexiness, they would be ridiculed and called men. Leave the tall skinny girls alone. it's good that they have a place in this world.
I am 5'8 with broad shoulders and a manly jutting chin and deep eyebrows. I have an athletic body and am quite skinny. If it were not for these women, i would have low self confidence, just like most overweight girls.
And in my opinion, people who aren't lazy (excluing people with excusable health problems, deserve to be praised for their "manly (really just healthier than average population) body"
All this nonsense and Dove Commercials and blah blah angers me! there are different types of beauty. and the most beautiful are the most physically fit. No most fashion models arent skinny, theyre athletic and have low body fat. Keep being jealous and thats more worry stacking up to make your body look even worse. They will outlive you by 20 years!
They are the superior beings. all people should look like them. But they dont. because we are lazy couch potatos. and don't get into old fashioned women having hips and big boodbs and fat... thats because they were confined to a kitchen and having babies all day. that is not what a woman should look like. the modern view of exercise is a good one. and if you excercise and can still have nice curves thats great! but the majority wont, so ... yea.. STOP HATING ME CUZ I'M BEAUTIFUL... wow i must sound so vain... reallly i'm not... thats all i have to say! toodles!
d2 opinions will always be offensive to some one or the other especially if it has any relation to them i apologised in advance because i know some may find it offensive but my intention wasnt to be offensive i was merely stating my opinion
Erik, you should post a pic of yourself so we can judge just how masculine you must be!!!
You must be a 7 feet tall very muscular macho man with a 12 inch penis, right? If not, we must put into question the sexuality of the woman that goes out with you.
Saying that women with larger breasts are "more feminine" than women with smaller breasts is like saying that men with bigger penises are "more masculine" than men with smaller penises. Then we can go on to a racial debate by asserting that Negroid men are on average more masculine than Caucasian men, just like you implied that Caucasian women were more feminine than non-Caucasian women......
Plenty of people know that secondary sexual characteristics are produced by sex hormones and are also affected by genes. Different races and ethnicities having different expressions. Ie, Brazilian women tend to have smaller breasts, yet bigger backside than most American women.
Like masculinity, feminity is not just about physical appereance, but also about behavior. Stereotipically feminine behavior is very attractive to most men, irregardless of how sensitive to testosterone the women in question happens to be.
It is also very interesting to know, however, that the most feminine woman out there, is often biologically male. As in the cases of women with Complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome, which are completely insensitive to male hormones.
Sexuality is very complex, something you try to understand, yet fail miserably at it.
Bulls**t talks...: Apparently, you do not have an understanding of what male heterosexuality is about. Besides, heterosexual men's johnsons respond to what their minds find artistically appealing in women, which also appeals to most women; see the references in this comment.
Tycho: I am sure that the readers of this site are grateful to you for pointing out facts that have escaped their attention, namely the advertisements and the affiliate links. Oh, how smart of you to have figured out an ulterior motive to this site that has nothing to do with the express purpose of promoting feminine beauty!
Seriously, you are so retarded and insane that it is not worth responding to your comment, but I have to defend myself against smear.
Regarding the affiiliate links, I have previously responded to a similar comment, and here is the response again:
Quote:
I am not affiliated with the porn industry, and many of the referenced adult-oriented sites are not porn sites. Why should I go through the trouble of spending hours looking up scientific literature and addressing it within this site when I could simply post, without using my actual name, more pictures of nude women, and uncensored ones at that, if earning commissions is the main motive of this site?
Identifying the source(s) of the images, if known, is a legal requirement since copyrighted images can only be displayed under the fair use provision or with explicit permission of the copyright holder, which is automatically granted to those who sign up as an affiliate. Therefore, it is almost a requirement to sign up as an affiliate in order to minimize the likelihood of legal problems over displaying copyrighted images. Additionally, the images displayed are usually not available to non-affiliates unless they join the site the images are taken from. Therefore, signing up as an affiliate is a necessity, regardless of the commission issue. The commission money from the sites providing the images also dovetails with the necessity of becoming an affiliate of these sites.
If I were paid to display some women here as attractive and did not explicitly state this, then you are looking at a conflict of interest similar to researchers reporting data from a drug trial without identifying that the drug manufacturer paid them to conduct the study. However, none of the sites that I am signed up as an affiliate with work in this manner. They pay a commission only if someone referred from this site joins them. Therefore, there is no need for me to explicitly state that I am an affiliate of a referenced site if this is the case. Even if I were paid to feature a particular model within this site, there is enough scientific data here to justify any claims I would make about her masculinity-femininity/attractiveness, i.e., you could not accuse me of saying that a given woman is attractive because I have been paid to say so.
It would be an easy matter to hide affiliate links, but I have made no attempt to do so. For instance, check out superbeauty.org, a website claiming to fight for female beauty. This site has little in terms of written content, but features links to many websites—supposedly united in their fight for beauty—and these websites happen to sell nude photographs of women. The links to these websites from the superbeauty site are in the form:
Quote:
superbeauty.org/cgi-bin/out.cgi?site=56
Guess what “site=56” corresponds to? The “out.cgi” file contains the full affiliate link, which you cannot see. I could easily do this with all my affiliate links, but do not feel any need to do so. Your comment regarding an ulterior monetary motive would be more appropriate for the superbeauty site, but this site does not offer a facility for people to leave comments, and good luck getting an appropriate response from the site’s webmaster if you email him a comment about the monetary motive.
Something has to pay for running this site, just as it requires money to produce magazines or educate people in institutions of higher learning. Is it fair to argue that the ads in a magazine or the fact that it is not offered for free or that one has to pay tuition to attend college implies an ulterior monetary motive that has little to do with educating the public? The latter argument cannot be made without a careful analysis of content, which you have failed to provide. If the readers are not being asked to pay to read the site, then the money has to come from somewhere, such as advertisements.
Your analysis of this site’s content is beyond ridiculous. There is no argument about a “gay conspiracy” here, but one of gay aesthetic preferences dictating the norms among female high-fashion models. You have labeled this argument as bizarre and a whine but failed to argue against any of the evidence offered and not put forth an alternative explanation of the looks of high-fashion models. Your accusation of pseudo science is unjustified. There is nothing remotely related to eugenics here. Are the graphs and diagrams ill-explained? Don’t blame me for your ignorance and low IQ. Additionally, the citations to papers published in peer-reviewed journals are typically referenced in the text in terms of numbers in brackets, contrary to your assertion of no actual reference notes within the text, and the numbers point to the corresponding references at the bottom of the page.
Do you seriously believe I have an extreme right-wing agenda? How often do you see right wingers use nudity to further their agenda? Don’t bother citing Wikipedia for anything of a scholarly nature. It is an online resource that can typically be edited by a random internet user and hence is of no scholarly merit. The typical person dislikes some or the other form of art, and if the Nazis disliked some art forms, then they were surely no different from others in finding some art disagreeable. For instance, in the heyday of Christianity, most art was banned and the allowed art had to deal with Biblical themes. You could easily have drawn an analogy from Christendom, but you chose to bring in the Nazis instead, which is a very poor analogy since this site is not advocating a ban on the use of masculine fashion models. There are many kinds of models and they can flourish in their niches without any opposition from me. My interest is in seeing feminine beauty where it is needed, as in a beauty pageant catering to the general public, and in establishing at least one mainstream outlet for feminine beauty appreciation (which will not be this site).
Your argument that some recommendations within this site are the type that lead to the de-humanization of “our brothers and sisters” and gas chambers has a familiar ring to it. This usually comes from the depraved minds of Marxists, who have manifested their strong belief in the brotherhood of humankind by putting the Nazis to shame with respect to the number of people killed in order to make the world a “better place.”
If you wish to respond, leave a sane comment or it will be removed.
Dan, given that this Erik Holland guy has a)links through to various porn sites with affiliate-style re-direction URLs like "http://refer.ccbill.com/cgi-bin/clicks.cgi?CA=912363-0000&PA=1078128" and b) google adwords on every page earning click-through revenue, the whole premise of this site has to be questions. This sounds like a porn-industry sting to me - a PR/marketing exercise much like the ones marketing agencies undertake all the time on behalf of other industries.
His bizarre and whining theories that the state of fashion is because of some bizarre gay conspiracy are also ludicrous - and smack of someone who has an anti-gay agenda.
Frankly, the whole premise of this site is psuedo- scientific eugenics-based twaddle, (note the copious references to serious works and ill-explained graphs and diagrams nicked from serious anthropology - without actual reference notes within the text).
Its probably an attempt to hijack some of the worthy topics of debate (eg. anorexia, female self-image), in the pursuit of a)click-thru revenue, and b)an extreme right-wing agenda.
By way of comparison, the Nazis condemed all modern art as 'entartete kunst' - degenerate art - see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Degenerate_art - because it didn't depict bucolic landscapes and 'german-looking' (ie. aryan) people going about herioic & legendary deeds. Sounds exactly like this 'Erik' person's raves about 'not feminine enough' and 'shouldn't be allowed to be a lingerie model' and 'this woman looks like a transexual'.
Make those points, fine, but don't come up with judgements about what should or should not 'be done about it'. That road leads to the gas chambers and de-huminisation of our brothers and sisters.
And no i'm not going to leave my e-mail address or URL - you're obviously a whacko.
This is one of the most ridiculous sites I have ever come across in the internet. Saying that men that prefer an Alessandra Ambrosio or Adriana Lima over Camille are somehow less heterosexual is a disgrace. How dare you stigmatize men for their preference in WOMEN? "Lifetime exclusive heterosexual men" HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! The audacity of you to think you define other people's sexuality!
By the way, I had loved to see what "Fashion" would be like if straight men ruled the fashion scene for one day... Common sense tells us that we need men in Fashion to be artistic, and that think with their heads, not with their penises.
barry why would you make an offensive comment but at the same time claim you dont want to offend anyone. what is the benefit of sharing your negative opinion on the matter? i dont have a square face or strong jawline but i still find it offensive. if you dont want to offend anyone keep your offensive opinions to yourself!
But there are lots of exceptions. How can you explain, for example, that masculinized Kate Moss is only 168 cm tall? She´s 10 cm shorter than Gisele, but has wider hips than Gisele.Gisele´s hips - 34 inches, Kate´s hips - 35 inches.
And my ribcage is about 75 cm and my bust about 85 cm. What does it mean?Do I have prominent breasts? I don´t know where are those borders in characterization of masculinity and feminity.
Erik: purely from an artistic point of view the shapes of faces in fashion and cosmetic ads using female models with masculine features give angles that are interesting. like you said on some pages of this site, the faces of feminine women are more rounded, with cheekbones not as prominent. this may be more attractive, but for many feminine looking faces means there are less chiselled angles for the photographer to capture. to me it is the difference between taking a photo of a fluffy lamb which may be very cute but is not as striking or interesting visually as a crocodile or armadillo.
i agree that the appearance of some current fashion models is disturbing, but i am wondering why you think that other forms of unconventional beauty will never be the norm in the fashion industy. all it takes is for someone to see something in a new way, and to take that look and build it into something saleable.
on that point, i have to wonder if the female models look masculine because they are selling to a primary audience of women. i have heard it commented that many male models are slightly feminine so maybe this is because they are being marketed to men. in fact i saw a male model in a magazine the other day that was strikingly female, so much so that it was almost a shock to see it. but then, if something is shocking our eyes are drawn to it, and we remember it and isnt this what sales and advertising is all about? i certainly found the look of the male model in question disturbing, but then when i think about fashion i see it as a make believe world, not like the real world in any way, it is more like an out of reach fantasy which represents the desirability and perfection of the product. maybe it does represent a warped reality where men look like women and women look like men, but i think this demonstrates how valuable the fashion industry can be in exploring our perceptions of the world around us.
i also have to wonder what would happen to the fashion industry if purely feminine models were used. given the low percentage of true hourglass figures in the population would more women be alienated by truly feminine models than those that are currently used?
Elise: You do not see a whole lot of feminine women with a mustache. Your measurements are not informative about masculinity-femininity. A number of masculinized high-fashion models have your measurements, but if you are a couple of inches shorter and have prominent breasts, i.e., a much smaller rib cage, then your appearance will be in the normal-to-feminine range.
Monique: If you are going to be bothered by individual cases like Laurie’s or the teenage male’s, then good luck living a contended life. It is not possible for everyone to be pleased or make all individuals conform to the behavior you like. Feminine women generally appreciate this site, and your case is curious. Do you so strongly empathize with unattractive women that you are disturbed by this site, in spite of being a woman that, judging by your self-description, would be classified as attractive by the standards of this site?
I don’t suppose that all women with large breasts have fake breasts; I have shown multiple women with naturally larger breasts than Tyra’s within this site. However, there are reasons why Tyra’s breasts at their peak in her Sports Illustrated shoot from years ago cannot be accepted as natural. In the first picture series that I cited, you can see very large breasts on the right even though she hasn’t gained weight elsewhere compared to her picture with much smaller breasts. For a slender woman to naturally have breasts as large as Tyra’s at her peak, she has to have the genetics to preferentially deposit body fat in her breasts, i.e., if the woman gains weight, her breasts should grow much larger. Here are recent pictures of Tyra having gained at least 30 pounds compared to her modeling days, but her breasts are not notably larger, though they look more natural because she has more fat in the top region of her breasts. How do you explain this? The second pair of pictures that I cited show very odd-looking large breasts in a woman that is lying down; they are obviously fake. Here is another picture of her fake breasts.
I have heard your concern about “men confining aesthetic preferences,” but you have ignored my response that men and women judge female attractiveness similarly; men are no more confining than women with respect to judging women’s physical attractiveness, and women are not being “molded” into believing that feminine beauty is desirable. What do you mean women “don’t do this crap” to men? Heterosexual women are much more particular than heterosexual men when it comes to whom they are willing to be intimately involved with, though not necessarily with respect to looks.
Sandi: I have been using the word “typically.” Do you seriously believe that just about any poor woman in a developing nation will have enough skills to come up with designer clothing? Why are some people poor? In many cases because they lack the skills to get a job that pays well enough, and many of the latter cannot be made to acquire the requisite skills.
Hourglass figures are by no means the norm anywhere in the world, and when found, they are most extensively found among European women, especially Northern Europeans. I have cited international waist-to-hip ratio statistics, and although I haven’t cited breast size statistics, the largest breasts among European women are disproportionately found among Northern Europeans (top three: England (average size C-cup), Denmark, Netherlands).
I haven’t talked about a 0.7 WHR as an ideal, and have actually critiqued this notion in a separate entry. The women in the Dove ad do not meet the attractiveness criteria of most people. You could use these women as fashion models, but not as high-fashion models if you wanted to set up an alternative to the gay-dominated fashion industry. Besides, by putting feminine and attractive women next to skinny and masculine high-fashion models, as within this site, even in the absence of an alternative fashion industry, many girls and women at risk for developing anorexia or bulimia will see the light and stop considering skinniness desirable. It is necessary to set up a competing standard of attractiveness in the public realm, which is ideally a feminine beauty standard since it is consistent with health and most people naturally harbor it, and this is not to convey “this is how women are supposed to look like,” but “this is how women considered attractive by most people look like.”
Angela: I am totally fine with women coming up with a comparable site telling men that they are not masculine unless their phallus conforms to a certain size and shape. I could even help these women by directing them to literature about masculinity-femininity in men. The site would also be more interesting on one important count, namely that it is more challenging to figure out who is a more masculine man in a number of cases. After all, an overall less masculine man could end up with larger muscles than an overall more masculine man by regularly lifting heavy weights or taking anabolic androgenic steroids. Human growth hormone supplementation can even make facial bones grow so as to add a more masculine look to the face without making the supplement taker more masculine. In addition, beyond a certain amount of testosterone exposure, male fetuses may end up developmentally disturbed and manifest a strange mix of hypermasculine, feminine, hypomasculine and normally masculine features. Interesting, isn’t it? You have my blessings to set up a site on masculinity among males.
Designer: Is the masculinization of high-fashion models partly explained by it resulting in more interesting and dramatic looks? Who finds the resulting fashion imagery more “interesting” and “dramatic”? Certainly not most people, a number of whom are disturbed by the looks of high-fashion models. “Unlikely/unconventional beauty” comes in many forms that will never be seen as the norm among high-fashion models; why does the standard of unconventionality bear an uncanny resemblance to the looks of adolescent boys? Anyway, you are right that a more masculine woman can be more attractive than a more feminine woman in some cases.
Aiko: The pageant is not about what a “real woman” is supposed to look like, but about beauty and smarts. Since the pageant is catering to the general public, it is only appropriate that it select contestants based on what most people find attractive in women, which is nowhere close to Zuleyka’s masculine looks. Given that the contestants are drawn from eligible candidates that number in the millions, it would be an easy matter to find 100 feminine and attractive women who are also very intelligent. The issue of baring the body is not relevant. Zuleyka is not being addressed here because she has not bared her body for photographers, but because the Miss Universe Organization is making a mockery of beauty by letting the likes of Zuleyka compete in the pageant, let alone win.
Random viewer: With respect to the nude women, judgments based on assumed personality characteristics are not relevant here, and neither is the face, which you assign the greatest value. The women’s faces are not shown clearly enough to be rated. In a scientific study of the attractiveness of physiques, the faces would be covered, the backgrounds would be the same, etc., but displaying the pictures above is not part of a scientific study.
Gay fashion designers do not chose their models to “signify what is unusual hoping that it is uncommon in a positive way,” but because they find them aesthetically appealing. Nobody is arguing that “the fashion industry is influencing the girls to look more masculine;” its influence is in the form of increasing the desirability of skinniness in a number of girls and women. It is unlikely that the fashion norm will shift toward East Asians eventually; there are only two East Asian women among the top-50 high-fashion models (total sample size of 60 because some women tied with the same ranking) currently ranked at models.com. Norms are not a straightforward result of cultural domination. There was a time when Roman soldiers brought in Northern European slave women, and notwithstanding their slave status, the men lusted after them, and the women were envious and tried to make themselves more Nordic-looking. The skinny and masculine norm among high-fashion models is not changing as long as the fashion business is dominated by homosexual men, which is not to say that one couldn’t come up with an alternative fashion industry.
erik,
i disagree that facial features are not important in ads. it is often said that the face is what sells.
i agree with the bulk of this site, i think you have identified an interesting and significant perspective on the appreciation of feminine beauty, but i want to know why do you complain about the domination of the fashion industry by gay men? many women will vouch that gay men are some of the best people to go shopping with because of their eye for fashion and style. i think it is salient to note that fashion is not solely about making oneself attractive to men (though this might have been the case in the 40s and 50s, when models had hourglass physiques to show off feminine styled clothing) but it is about creating 'a look'.
i think your site is valuable in helping people realise that the fashion industry is not a showcase of feminine beauty and as such helping women not to be alienated by the models, but i think it is us who need to change our perceptions of the fashion industry, rather than the fashion industry that needs to change. the fashion industry is not the one that says 'you should look like this', it is people's own minds that say that. couture is about creating a garment, gown or look of interest and beauty, not about dressing up beautiful women. the fashion industry never claimed to be about the most beautiful women in the world - it is and always will be about the most beautiful clothes in the world.
maybe the trend towards using masculinised models is down to the growing acceptability of being openly gay rather than any sickness in society or the fashion industry. i think your problem with the industry misses the point and takes on a personal dimension at odds with the objectivity of the site. isnt it the craving to be like others rather than just being ourselves the real sickness here?
Designer: Fashion models are selling clothes, and their facial features are not important in ads. Even if a chiseled look to a face is required, one could find women with this look that are not more than slightly masculine, but gay fashion designers will usually desire a greater level of masculinity. As long as the fashion industry is dominated by homosexual men, why would the industry be switching toward an alternative form of unconventional looks? The skinny and masculine unconventional looks reflect the aesthetic preferences of the dominant gay fashion designers, not looks that help sales. Men and women judge female attractiveness similarly; see the references in this comment. Therefore, it is surely not the case that the looks of high-fashion models reflect the fact that they are selling to women. Also, in controlled laboratory settings, exposure to images of skinny high-fashion models has generally been found to worsen the body image of women. What is the bright idea behind using models with looks at sharp odds with the preferences of women in general and also looks that disturb many women? There is no bright idea; it is simply a matter of gay fashion designers getting away with their aesthetic preferences because they dominate the fashion business.
I know that there are some effeminate male models, but it is the gay fashion designers again, a number of whom find adolescent boys appealing, but such models are not likely to become very common anytime soon since the gays wouldn’t be able to get away with it. If feminine women were used as high-fashion models, whereas some women would not be pleased, appreciation for feminine beauty is intrinsically harbored by most women, i.e., they would be much less disturbed than by the use of skinny high-fashion models.
Hana: Nothing is wrong with manly fashion models, but they encroach on the turf of feminine beauty, which is not the fault of the models, but that of gay fashion designers. Manly high-fashion models can have their fashion modeling jobs; I do not wish to take them away. However, when their skinniness is creating some problems for many girls and even the models themselves, then it is time to do something about the skinniness requirement.
If the homosexuals want to use skinny and masculine models, they have a right to use women that naturally possess these looks, but no model should have to starve to please the homosexuals.
You are confounding the masculinization in high-fashion models with athletic looks. Does the typical high-fashion model look athletic or someone with diarrhea? Besides, manly women usually look like women, not like men.
The looks promoted by this site are not those acquired by eating aplenty and having lots of babies (note the emphasis on a tiny waist). More importantly, you need to understand that this site is not about how a woman is supposed to look like; it focuses on models and beauty pageant contestants. Please read the FAQ to understand the site's purpose. I have nothing against your looks. May you be happy and live a healthy life!
Jessica: Gisele is not being made fun of. Rather, some aspects of her looks are being pointed out to illustrate the aesthetics problems caused by male homosexual fashion designers. By the way, do not forget to show this entry to Giselle and other high-ranking people in the fashion industry.
Elise: Based on the measurements that you mentioned, you appear to have an A cup, i.e., small breasts. This does not necessarily make you masculine as there are small-breasted feminine women around. How tall you are would make a difference. Your masculinity-femininity can be best assessed by looking at you, and if you want me to assess it, email me your pictures; hide/remove your face if you wish. As far as the borders of masculinity-femininity or the relative size of the rib cage go, this is best assessed by comparing yourself to women in general, and you know better than me how you compare to the average woman.
Shorter height and wider hips do not necessarily imply greater femininity; you need to look at the overall appearance. On the other hand, Giselle Bundchen has a more masculine physique than does Kate Moss.
BS talks...: Look at who is writing B.S.! The most feminine women are often biologically male? How can a woman be a biological male? The condition you have mentioned, complete androgen sensitivity syndrome in a 46-XY individual, is an intersex condition; people with this disorder are neither male nor female, and they are a few inches taller than women, on average, because there are some genes on the Y chromosome that make men larger than women, and these genes are operational in these individuals.
I certainly haven’t implied anything along the lines of only women with 32E-20-37 measurements or more feminine proportions as feminine. Therefore, your coming up with the giant, muscular and foot-long man as the threshold of masculinity is a ridiculous caricature of my arguments.
Your remaining points suggest that you have either not read this site or are deliberately misrepresenting it. I have shown numerous examples of women with smaller breasts looking more feminine than women with larger breasts. I have not described white women as more feminine than non-white women, but cited evidence that among the most overall feminine-looking women, white women are overrepresented, and have pointed out the ethnicity confound in comparisons across populations on numerous occasions. Additionally, I have said repeatedly that this site is about looks, not behavior.
Take sex/gender and sexuality 101 before writing more on it.
Ummm you need to stop making fun of gisele
she is my cousin
i no you wont believe me though
but everybody is beautiful
and you dont need to target gisele
I would go with 8 & 1. 76531 are ok.
I don't think this shows anything except that I prefer younger, fitter women, being 20 myself.
It makes sense to me that femininity would be tied to beauty though, but as simply true by definition. Hell, why would I want my woman to look like a man?
The thing that I'm a bit confused on is this sense of being more feminine. Having, say, larger breasts means you have more of a feminine characteristic, but I'm don't think I'm comfortable saying that just because they have more of x that they are then more feminine. Recognize the slight twist?
For demonstration sake, an example of a nude model I find very attractive (albeit a bit skinny):
I agree Fashion models are manly... But what is wrong with it. They need jobs too... seriously.. if manly women weren't worshiped for their exotic sexiness, they would be ridiculed and called men. Leave the tall skinny girls alone. it's good that they have a place in this world.
I am 5'8 with broad shoulders and a manly jutting chin and deep eyebrows. I have an athletic body and am quite skinny. If it were not for these women, i would have low self confidence, just like most overweight girls.
And in my opinion, people who aren't lazy (excluing people with excusable health problems, deserve to be praised for their "manly (really just healthier than average population) body"
All this nonsense and Dove Commercials and blah blah angers me! there are different types of beauty. and the most beautiful are the most physically fit. No most fashion models arent skinny, theyre athletic and have low body fat. Keep being jealous and thats more worry stacking up to make your body look even worse. They will outlive you by 20 years!
They are the superior beings. all people should look like them. But they dont. because we are lazy couch potatos. and don't get into old fashioned women having hips and big boodbs and fat... thats because they were confined to a kitchen and having babies all day. that is not what a woman should look like. the modern view of exercise is a good one. and if you excercise and can still have nice curves thats great! but the majority wont, so ... yea.. STOP HATING ME CUZ I'M BEAUTIFUL... wow i must sound so vain... reallly i'm not... thats all i have to say! toodles!
d2 opinions will always be offensive to some one or the other especially if it has any relation to them i apologised in advance because i know some may find it offensive but my intention wasnt to be offensive i was merely stating my opinion
Erik, you should post a pic of yourself so we can judge just how masculine you must be!!!
You must be a 7 feet tall very muscular macho man with a 12 inch penis, right? If not, we must put into question the sexuality of the woman that goes out with you.
Saying that women with larger breasts are "more feminine" than women with smaller breasts is like saying that men with bigger penises are "more masculine" than men with smaller penises. Then we can go on to a racial debate by asserting that Negroid men are on average more masculine than Caucasian men, just like you implied that Caucasian women were more feminine than non-Caucasian women......
Plenty of people know that secondary sexual characteristics are produced by sex hormones and are also affected by genes. Different races and ethnicities having different expressions. Ie, Brazilian women tend to have smaller breasts, yet bigger backside than most American women.
Like masculinity, feminity is not just about physical appereance, but also about behavior. Stereotipically feminine behavior is very attractive to most men, irregardless of how sensitive to testosterone the women in question happens to be.
It is also very interesting to know, however, that the most feminine woman out there, is often biologically male. As in the cases of women with Complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome, which are completely insensitive to male hormones.
Sexuality is very complex, something you try to understand, yet fail miserably at it.
Bulls**t talks...: Apparently, you do not have an understanding of what male heterosexuality is about. Besides, heterosexual men's johnsons respond to what their minds find artistically appealing in women, which also appeals to most women; see the references in this comment.
Tycho: I am sure that the readers of this site are grateful to you for pointing out facts that have escaped their attention, namely the advertisements and the affiliate links. Oh, how smart of you to have figured out an ulterior motive to this site that has nothing to do with the express purpose of promoting feminine beauty!
Seriously, you are so retarded and insane that it is not worth responding to your comment, but I have to defend myself against smear.
Regarding the affiiliate links, I have previously responded to a similar comment, and here is the response again:
Quote:
Something has to pay for running this site, just as it requires money to produce magazines or educate people in institutions of higher learning. Is it fair to argue that the ads in a magazine or the fact that it is not offered for free or that one has to pay tuition to attend college implies an ulterior monetary motive that has little to do with educating the public? The latter argument cannot be made without a careful analysis of content, which you have failed to provide. If the readers are not being asked to pay to read the site, then the money has to come from somewhere, such as advertisements.
Your analysis of this site’s content is beyond ridiculous. There is no argument about a “gay conspiracy” here, but one of gay aesthetic preferences dictating the norms among female high-fashion models. You have labeled this argument as bizarre and a whine but failed to argue against any of the evidence offered and not put forth an alternative explanation of the looks of high-fashion models. Your accusation of pseudo science is unjustified. There is nothing remotely related to eugenics here. Are the graphs and diagrams ill-explained? Don’t blame me for your ignorance and low IQ. Additionally, the citations to papers published in peer-reviewed journals are typically referenced in the text in terms of numbers in brackets, contrary to your assertion of no actual reference notes within the text, and the numbers point to the corresponding references at the bottom of the page.
Do you seriously believe I have an extreme right-wing agenda? How often do you see right wingers use nudity to further their agenda? Don’t bother citing Wikipedia for anything of a scholarly nature. It is an online resource that can typically be edited by a random internet user and hence is of no scholarly merit. The typical person dislikes some or the other form of art, and if the Nazis disliked some art forms, then they were surely no different from others in finding some art disagreeable. For instance, in the heyday of Christianity, most art was banned and the allowed art had to deal with Biblical themes. You could easily have drawn an analogy from Christendom, but you chose to bring in the Nazis instead, which is a very poor analogy since this site is not advocating a ban on the use of masculine fashion models. There are many kinds of models and they can flourish in their niches without any opposition from me. My interest is in seeing feminine beauty where it is needed, as in a beauty pageant catering to the general public, and in establishing at least one mainstream outlet for feminine beauty appreciation (which will not be this site).
Your argument that some recommendations within this site are the type that lead to the de-humanization of “our brothers and sisters” and gas chambers has a familiar ring to it. This usually comes from the depraved minds of Marxists, who have manifested their strong belief in the brotherhood of humankind by putting the Nazis to shame with respect to the number of people killed in order to make the world a “better place.”
If you wish to respond, leave a sane comment or it will be removed.
Dan, given that this Erik Holland guy has a)links through to various porn sites with affiliate-style re-direction URLs like "http://refer.ccbill.com/cgi-bin/clicks.cgi?CA=912363-0000&PA=1078128" and b) google adwords on every page earning click-through revenue, the whole premise of this site has to be questions. This sounds like a porn-industry sting to me - a PR/marketing exercise much like the ones marketing agencies undertake all the time on behalf of other industries.
His bizarre and whining theories that the state of fashion is because of some bizarre gay conspiracy are also ludicrous - and smack of someone who has an anti-gay agenda.
Frankly, the whole premise of this site is psuedo- scientific eugenics-based twaddle, (note the copious references to serious works and ill-explained graphs and diagrams nicked from serious anthropology - without actual reference notes within the text).
Its probably an attempt to hijack some of the worthy topics of debate (eg. anorexia, female self-image), in the pursuit of a)click-thru revenue, and b)an extreme right-wing agenda.
By way of comparison, the Nazis condemed all modern art as 'entartete kunst' - degenerate art - see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Degenerate_art - because it didn't depict bucolic landscapes and 'german-looking' (ie. aryan) people going about herioic & legendary deeds. Sounds exactly like this 'Erik' person's raves about 'not feminine enough' and 'shouldn't be allowed to be a lingerie model' and 'this woman looks like a transexual'.
Make those points, fine, but don't come up with judgements about what should or should not 'be done about it'. That road leads to the gas chambers and de-huminisation of our brothers and sisters.
And no i'm not going to leave my e-mail address or URL - you're obviously a whacko.
Sorry, I made a mistake, Kate Moss is even 11 cm shorter than Gisele and I meant femininity, not feminity.
This is one of the most ridiculous sites I have ever come across in the internet. Saying that men that prefer an Alessandra Ambrosio or Adriana Lima over Camille are somehow less heterosexual is a disgrace. How dare you stigmatize men for their preference in WOMEN? "Lifetime exclusive heterosexual men" HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! The audacity of you to think you define other people's sexuality!
By the way, I had loved to see what "Fashion" would be like if straight men ruled the fashion scene for one day... Common sense tells us that we need men in Fashion to be artistic, and that think with their heads, not with their penises.
barry why would you make an offensive comment but at the same time claim you dont want to offend anyone. what is the benefit of sharing your negative opinion on the matter? i dont have a square face or strong jawline but i still find it offensive. if you dont want to offend anyone keep your offensive opinions to yourself!
When is the ribcage defined as ´´small´´?
But there are lots of exceptions. How can you explain, for example, that masculinized Kate Moss is only 168 cm tall? She´s 10 cm shorter than Gisele, but has wider hips than Gisele.Gisele´s hips - 34 inches, Kate´s hips - 35 inches.
And my ribcage is about 75 cm and my bust about 85 cm. What does it mean?Do I have prominent breasts? I don´t know where are those borders in characterization of masculinity and feminity.
Erik: purely from an artistic point of view the shapes of faces in fashion and cosmetic ads using female models with masculine features give angles that are interesting. like you said on some pages of this site, the faces of feminine women are more rounded, with cheekbones not as prominent. this may be more attractive, but for many feminine looking faces means there are less chiselled angles for the photographer to capture. to me it is the difference between taking a photo of a fluffy lamb which may be very cute but is not as striking or interesting visually as a crocodile or armadillo.
i agree that the appearance of some current fashion models is disturbing, but i am wondering why you think that other forms of unconventional beauty will never be the norm in the fashion industy. all it takes is for someone to see something in a new way, and to take that look and build it into something saleable.
on that point, i have to wonder if the female models look masculine because they are selling to a primary audience of women. i have heard it commented that many male models are slightly feminine so maybe this is because they are being marketed to men. in fact i saw a male model in a magazine the other day that was strikingly female, so much so that it was almost a shock to see it. but then, if something is shocking our eyes are drawn to it, and we remember it and isnt this what sales and advertising is all about? i certainly found the look of the male model in question disturbing, but then when i think about fashion i see it as a make believe world, not like the real world in any way, it is more like an out of reach fantasy which represents the desirability and perfection of the product. maybe it does represent a warped reality where men look like women and women look like men, but i think this demonstrates how valuable the fashion industry can be in exploring our perceptions of the world around us.
i also have to wonder what would happen to the fashion industry if purely feminine models were used. given the low percentage of true hourglass figures in the population would more women be alienated by truly feminine models than those that are currently used?
Elise: You do not see a whole lot of feminine women with a mustache. Your measurements are not informative about masculinity-femininity. A number of masculinized high-fashion models have your measurements, but if you are a couple of inches shorter and have prominent breasts, i.e., a much smaller rib cage, then your appearance will be in the normal-to-feminine range.
Monique: If you are going to be bothered by individual cases like Laurie’s or the teenage male’s, then good luck living a contended life. It is not possible for everyone to be pleased or make all individuals conform to the behavior you like. Feminine women generally appreciate this site, and your case is curious. Do you so strongly empathize with unattractive women that you are disturbed by this site, in spite of being a woman that, judging by your self-description, would be classified as attractive by the standards of this site?
I don’t suppose that all women with large breasts have fake breasts; I have shown multiple women with naturally larger breasts than Tyra’s within this site. However, there are reasons why Tyra’s breasts at their peak in her Sports Illustrated shoot from years ago cannot be accepted as natural. In the first picture series that I cited, you can see very large breasts on the right even though she hasn’t gained weight elsewhere compared to her picture with much smaller breasts. For a slender woman to naturally have breasts as large as Tyra’s at her peak, she has to have the genetics to preferentially deposit body fat in her breasts, i.e., if the woman gains weight, her breasts should grow much larger. Here are recent pictures of Tyra having gained at least 30 pounds compared to her modeling days, but her breasts are not notably larger, though they look more natural because she has more fat in the top region of her breasts. How do you explain this? The second pair of pictures that I cited show very odd-looking large breasts in a woman that is lying down; they are obviously fake. Here is another picture of her fake breasts.
I have heard your concern about “men confining aesthetic preferences,” but you have ignored my response that men and women judge female attractiveness similarly; men are no more confining than women with respect to judging women’s physical attractiveness, and women are not being “molded” into believing that feminine beauty is desirable. What do you mean women “don’t do this crap” to men? Heterosexual women are much more particular than heterosexual men when it comes to whom they are willing to be intimately involved with, though not necessarily with respect to looks.
Hi All,
for all the gals wanting a smaller WHR please check this: http://jn.nutrition.org/cgi/content/full/135/5/1196#T1
; it is about the relationship between diet & abdominal obesity.
it also talks alittle about the relatonship between being physically active & WHR.
we need more info about this, not only for beauty but for health too!
we also need such a site for men ;)
...though women -in genera- are more sophisticated in their choices.
Sandi: I have been using the word “typically.” Do you seriously believe that just about any poor woman in a developing nation will have enough skills to come up with designer clothing? Why are some people poor? In many cases because they lack the skills to get a job that pays well enough, and many of the latter cannot be made to acquire the requisite skills.
Hourglass figures are by no means the norm anywhere in the world, and when found, they are most extensively found among European women, especially Northern Europeans. I have cited international waist-to-hip ratio statistics, and although I haven’t cited breast size statistics, the largest breasts among European women are disproportionately found among Northern Europeans (top three: England (average size C-cup), Denmark, Netherlands).
I haven’t talked about a 0.7 WHR as an ideal, and have actually critiqued this notion in a separate entry. The women in the Dove ad do not meet the attractiveness criteria of most people. You could use these women as fashion models, but not as high-fashion models if you wanted to set up an alternative to the gay-dominated fashion industry. Besides, by putting feminine and attractive women next to skinny and masculine high-fashion models, as within this site, even in the absence of an alternative fashion industry, many girls and women at risk for developing anorexia or bulimia will see the light and stop considering skinniness desirable. It is necessary to set up a competing standard of attractiveness in the public realm, which is ideally a feminine beauty standard since it is consistent with health and most people naturally harbor it, and this is not to convey “this is how women are supposed to look like,” but “this is how women considered attractive by most people look like.”
Angela: I am totally fine with women coming up with a comparable site telling men that they are not masculine unless their phallus conforms to a certain size and shape. I could even help these women by directing them to literature about masculinity-femininity in men. The site would also be more interesting on one important count, namely that it is more challenging to figure out who is a more masculine man in a number of cases. After all, an overall less masculine man could end up with larger muscles than an overall more masculine man by regularly lifting heavy weights or taking anabolic androgenic steroids. Human growth hormone supplementation can even make facial bones grow so as to add a more masculine look to the face without making the supplement taker more masculine. In addition, beyond a certain amount of testosterone exposure, male fetuses may end up developmentally disturbed and manifest a strange mix of hypermasculine, feminine, hypomasculine and normally masculine features. Interesting, isn’t it? You have my blessings to set up a site on masculinity among males.
Designer: Is the masculinization of high-fashion models partly explained by it resulting in more interesting and dramatic looks? Who finds the resulting fashion imagery more “interesting” and “dramatic”? Certainly not most people, a number of whom are disturbed by the looks of high-fashion models. “Unlikely/unconventional beauty” comes in many forms that will never be seen as the norm among high-fashion models; why does the standard of unconventionality bear an uncanny resemblance to the looks of adolescent boys? Anyway, you are right that a more masculine woman can be more attractive than a more feminine woman in some cases.
Aiko: The pageant is not about what a “real woman” is supposed to look like, but about beauty and smarts. Since the pageant is catering to the general public, it is only appropriate that it select contestants based on what most people find attractive in women, which is nowhere close to Zuleyka’s masculine looks. Given that the contestants are drawn from eligible candidates that number in the millions, it would be an easy matter to find 100 feminine and attractive women who are also very intelligent. The issue of baring the body is not relevant. Zuleyka is not being addressed here because she has not bared her body for photographers, but because the Miss Universe Organization is making a mockery of beauty by letting the likes of Zuleyka compete in the pageant, let alone win.
Random viewer: With respect to the nude women, judgments based on assumed personality characteristics are not relevant here, and neither is the face, which you assign the greatest value. The women’s faces are not shown clearly enough to be rated. In a scientific study of the attractiveness of physiques, the faces would be covered, the backgrounds would be the same, etc., but displaying the pictures above is not part of a scientific study.
Gay fashion designers do not chose their models to “signify what is unusual hoping that it is uncommon in a positive way,” but because they find them aesthetically appealing. Nobody is arguing that “the fashion industry is influencing the girls to look more masculine;” its influence is in the form of increasing the desirability of skinniness in a number of girls and women. It is unlikely that the fashion norm will shift toward East Asians eventually; there are only two East Asian women among the top-50 high-fashion models (total sample size of 60 because some women tied with the same ranking) currently ranked at models.com. Norms are not a straightforward result of cultural domination. There was a time when Roman soldiers brought in Northern European slave women, and notwithstanding their slave status, the men lusted after them, and the women were envious and tried to make themselves more Nordic-looking. The skinny and masculine norm among high-fashion models is not changing as long as the fashion business is dominated by homosexual men, which is not to say that one couldn’t come up with an alternative fashion industry.
Pages