Jenn: You need to give heterosexual men more credit than assuming that they blindly believe what they are told is attractive or this site, the product of a heterosexual man, wouldn’t exist. There is a lot that is objective about beauty; this site also critiques the golden ratio as a descriptor of facial beauty. What do you mean by sexuality not being as neatly defined as within this site?
Craig: I also wonder why you have bothered to leave a comment, given the unjustified insults in it and its senseless nature. Western art is characterized by the Lolita complex? There is an art section within this site, featuring contemporary art, and the women shown are surely no Lolitas. Greco-Roman female figures are primarily those of adult females. Have you seen Aphrodite looking like a pubescent or adolescent girl? “Lolita” was written by Vladimir Nabokov, not Lewis Carroll (who presumably liked underage girls). The Barely-18-girls websites cater to a minority of heterosexual men. Sexual interest in underage children is much more strongly associated with homosexual or bisexual men than heterosexual men. Besides, if it weren’t for the gay domination of the fashion business, there would be no need to heavily rely on nude models for the attractive women section of this site, and many of these models are not taken from porn sites. Look at high-fashion models carefully; the central tendency among them approaches the looks of adolescent boys, not adolescent girls; heterosexual men are not involved in determining the norm among high-fashion models.
Hetero men say anyone is hot because they are told to think so, they are easily swayed by the media and how they think picking out certain women as attractive reflect on their personalities.
Though I'm not sure as many women as is claimed on this site have had breast augmentation, I whoelheartedly agree that there is a masculinization trend. It's not just in physical appearence, but also in attitude. I'm of the opinion that feminity is superior to masculinity in many ways, Western culture has told us for centuries that its the other way around. Feminine traits typically include being intuitive, diplomatic, understanding, etc. These are more sophisticated traits. That does not mean to negate the importance of maculine traits, there just has to be a balance. Like in Tao there is the Yin and Yang and every human being should strive to balance both in themselves. Too much of either means problems.
I think this physical manifestation is a reflection of a more dire issue: the eradication of feminity from American society. Thats what we should be focusing on, the overabundance of Yang energy.
As far as beauty goes, it's definitly subjective. I like this theory about beauty (http://goldennumber.net/face.htm) that the most attractive faces have proportions closest to the Golden Mean. Also I don't think sexuality is as neatly defined as this site, and the US in general leads us to believe.
thanks erik. i thought that the bust measurement you were talking about was the ribcage measurement, rather than the actual circumference where the bust is the fullest.
on a side point i think its interesting how many people take this site personally, when to me it just seems like an objective observation. from a young age, i always knew i was 'sexy' but that i wasnt 'beautiful' like the fashion models - i always knew there was a difference and i think this site has an interesting perspective on that.
i think though, that the reasoning that fashion models have masculine features to their physique is because it is the gay fashion designer's preference is not the whole story. in a photo, masculine features give a more striking angles and more interesting shapes, generally looking more dramatic than women with feminine features. obtaining a striking and dramatic looking image is the aim of the fashion industry, which is more about making a statement, or making art rather than about attractive women. many top designers and model agencies openly comment that the industry is more interested in androgenous or 'unlikely'/'unconventional' beauty because it is more interesting, there can be debate about it. fashion, like any kind of art, is about exploring and questioning the world, and in fashion we see a lot of questions being asked about the nature of beauty, just like how this site points out.
i think that the point is that whether you are a feminine woman (closer to hourglass) or one who has more masculine features (like the fashion models) is not a point of one is good and one is bad!! if you are a masculine woman you can still be more pretty or beautiful than a feminine woman!! theres good points to both, just like there is bad points to both. the sooner we accept that, the sooner we become happy with what we've got and the easier it is to accept our differences and celebrate our uniqueness.
First, sorry for the name confusion: I have posted under "Sandy" for some time now and don't fancy a new pseudonym for myself.
I disagree that women in Southeast Asia are typically hourglass-figured as I lived in the region for many years and most are not. Yes, they are slim and many are very small-waisted, but typically the hips and bust are small as well and they tend not to be as curvy as the typical western woman. There are exceptions of course and some have really stunning figures.
I think that part of the problem in the US and in Europe as well are increasing waistlines as we get more obese in general. I know the average waist measurement has gone from about 26-27 inches in the '60's to more than 32 inches today. Of course a thicker waist translates into less of a visible hourglass shape and holds health risks as well. So while the typical skinny fashion model is unhealthy, so too are many American and European women today, just in different ways. There seems to be a fine line to walk in terms of health. A normal BMI -- not skinny, not fat -- is key.
I do think women are confused in today's world however. Even sizing has changed dramatically to add total confusion to our lives! As an example, in High School (many moons ago) I wore a size 6 and I was quite small. Today, at slightly more weight, I am either a size 2 petite or a size O (in intermediate priced stores). That's just crazy and this so-called "vanity sizing" is a gross disservice to women in general. Women have always been jerked around when it comes to clothing....sizing is too variable for us, while a man knows what size he wears, without ambiguity.
Lastly, I personally don't think that the hourglass figure or a strictly-defined WHR is the be-all and end-all of female beauty and that too much emphasis on this one aspect of attractiveness takes away from many things that are more relevant and far more important. Even this website features women who do not quite meet the hourglass definition, although all have WHRs that gives them discernible waistlines and curvacious figures. At any rate, all women have figure flaws; a more rectangular shaped women may have better legs than the typcial hourglass for example, and it is the overall look that matters in my opinion.
The 17 year old guy was not hypothetical, I was standing there!
Laurie in the WHR section of this website was not hypothetical, when she was obviously seeking your approval of her figure -- which just makes me feel sad.
If you think Tyra's breasts are not real, then you would say the same thing about me in the same light and clothing (or lack thereof) -- that's what makes this all so stupid!
Now that getting breasts is commonplace, people, if they're rude enough, ask if mine are real -- which just cracks me up! The few true hour-glass women now can find a bikini top that's bigger than a little triangle with support, which was a great plus for me, but a lot of people (you included) cannot tell the difference between real and fake!
Erik, what you're not hearing is that I am concerned about men's confining aesthetic preferences, period, whether the man is gay or straight! Opinions are one thing -- this all is entirely another!
As women, we just don't do this crap to you guys! I'm saying it is not appropriate for you to define what is or isn't feminine or not! It's fine to offer your "preferences" or opinions, but this site goes much further than that.
If women did this to men -- good luck!
I speak for women in general when I say we're tired of it! Whether the guys are gay or straight!
Being appreciated and being molded are two entirely different things, which you just don't seem to understand.
Again, you assume a woman does not have the ability to be creative enough to design clothes for Western consumption because she's poor and lives in a developing country? That's ridiculous!
She knows more about your hour glass designs than anyone in the Western world does. All of these statistics you and others are stating here are based on the US. If you look at women globally, hour glass figures are the norm -- women in the US and Western Europe are "odd" by comparison. Look at the average woman in Sri Lanka, for instance -- very much hour glass. Africa, India, South America, Southeast Asia, Meditteranean. Most of the rest of the world is what you call "natural hour glass," whether they're poor is irrelevant to whether they could design clothes for their own bodies. A design is an idea and ideas are not dependent upon wealth. Where do you come up with this stuff?
You're not telling women what size they should be?
You're stating that gay designers are defining what size women should be (0) as bad, and you're countering with a different size (WHR7) as good -- what do you call that?
You're stating that the women in the Dove ad do not meet your criteria -- what do you call that?
If you're going to say that you're only speaking about a very small percentage of women who would qualify to be high fashion models, as if that minimizes the impact of creating an alternative box for women to step into, you then also minimize the impact of your entire argument about gay men prescribing size for women.
Then you're fine with women creating an identical website prescribing what size, length, circumference, circumcized or uncircumcized, bent or straight and proper head shape your penis should be, and proclaim that as THE definition of masculine? And if you don't meet the criteria, you are not masculine, and then state we are just conveying the message of what masculine is according to nature?
The leading fashion industry has always tried to be different than the norm. They do not signify society's ideal. They signify what is unusual hoping that it is uncommon in a positive way. Just like the ridiculous stuff displayed on runways by models doesn't symbolize what people really want to wear.
This is all part of being "trendy". Masculine face worn by models will go away soon replace by something else, just like whatever that was fasionable in the 1970s is defnitely NOT fashionable today just because it once was.
I don't think the fashion industry is influencing the girls to look more masculine. That is against human nature. In fact, the opposite is happening with teenagers nowadays look more slutty than ever before. In high school, the popular girls are still the most femine girls not lesbian female jocks.
Fashionistas like Versace stands to fame by being unusual. But people buy Versace for quality and fit....most of Versace's customers get custom made clothes. People in fame business do anything to get attention and they certainly play the extreme characters just like atheletes play certain parts, actors play certain parts. But in private lives as human, you can't ignore the natural wiring which has chosen attractive people as mates more so than unattractive people over thousands of years.
I predict that in 20-30 years in time, due to rising power of East Asia, Asian beauty (younger, slimer, cuter) will dominate over current gay fashion ideals. Then the masculine looks will be out of style.
There needs to be a better control. If we want to discern on body type, then Face should be covered, everyone should have same color of skin. Photos should be calibrated for color. It looks like the background in the photograph varies a lot so some women above are given "redish" skin tones which is not attractive as a more ideal skin tone for some photos due to light exposure.
I'll evaluate based on visual to emotional judgements. FYI, I'm young male from USA.
1) Nice from the back. Little flat breasts. Face looks like she has an attitude.
2) Droopy T&A. Wide shoulders. Face looks like a "nice person"
3) Uneven small breasts. Lower face is not attractive.
4) Same breasts as #1, but hips are too wide. Face looks average
5) Nipples don't line up. Face is not attractive.Masculine?
6) Nice breasts. Ok bottom. Feminine attractive face.
7) Nice breasts. Bottom little wide compared to shoulders. Ok face.
8) Long body. The space near the top of the butt looks weird. Face looks above average. unfair smiling.
9) Nice breasts. Weight shows on body. Face looks "rural"
10) Too skinny. Face not attractive. eyebrows too high in the middle
11) Average overall. Face looks "angry"
12) Nice breasts. Hips little wide near bottom. Face looks above average.
Conclusion: no one is highly attractive.
In my experience, here is the breakdown of female attractiveness:
Face - 70% (eyes are the focal point)
Breasts - 30%
Butt - 20%
If someone has a beautiful face, then that person can be considered attractive despite lack of feminine body.
Face is what generates deep emotions from guys. Body is only for sexual attraction.
Breasts: "perky" and "fullness" over size.
Butt: "roundness" over pyramid shape or flatness.
Tan helps a lot.
Most guys are NOT attractive to super skinny supermodels. Guys only date supermodels for status not for looks.
Guys like HOT females in the sack. But the most ideal for relationship would be glamour/beauty females.
The Miss Universe Pageant is all about women. Who says what a real woman's supposed to look like? Who says she has to have a small waist and large hips? Miss Rivera won fair and square and people shouldn't be judging her for being the current Miss Universe. And she won't be baring her body as Miss U, she's going to be working with humanitarian organizations. Intelligence also matters. The women who compete in these pageants know how to answer- they have brains. I think that masculine-ish looking women, like you say that Miss Rivera is, is not bad- it's the women who act masculine are the not so cool ones.
I randomly stumbled upon this, this is so funny. I guess the funniest thing is nearly all the "attractive" girls are from porn sites, and not very good ones. So I guess everyone is gay that doesn't like lot lizard looking girls. I'm sure the author, obviously a man, knows what that terms refers to, as I'm sure he is a total dumb ass, and probably a closet racist. Yeah, eating disorders are no joke, but more likely it is that, possibly darker in origin for strait males, Lewis Carroll nymph (Lolita) complex. See all western art, and all your barely 18 porn sites. For gay people, if that is a factor at all, it probably has more to do with the hormonal flux of that period, idealism (Greco-Roman), purity if anything.
I don't even know why I'm wasting my time writing this . . .
Monique: Tyra’s pictures shown clearly reveal breast implants, and if you are a self-proclaimed expert on detecting breast implants, then I don’t see how you have failed to observe this. It seems like you don’t want to accept it because Tyra in your estimation has been “honest” about her looks and possibly a good role model, but Tyra has only admitted to minor work like hair straightening, hair dyeing, colored contacts, fake eyelashes and shaving her moustache.
Most women have a reasonable idea of how attractive they are, and would not be adversely affected by this site, but of those who are, at least this site is promoting looks consistent with health, fertility and fecundity, i.e., these looks cannot be acquired by indulging in negative health behaviors.
Not all 17-year-old boys are like your hypothetical example. Most men do not mind a little cellulite. For instance, a woman that I went out with had some cellulite, which you could observe if you squeezed her buttocks or upper thighs, but not otherwise. She was concerned about it, but I told her that I would much rather she have the fat on her, a healthy amount by the way, so that I enjoy massaging it rather than lose the fat to avoid the appearance of cellulite under any circumstances.
I have described Catherine Zeta Jones as Welsh and don’t see the point of your comment. It may be related to your superficial reading of my describing her pre-transformation looks as those of a South American Hispanic. Even her transformation has been of limited help. I had a difficult time convincing my roommate that the lead actress in The Mask of Zorro is Welsh, not a Latina.
Gay fashion designers are affecting the “rest of us” in numerous negative ways, as well-documented within this site. It is time for you to be concerned about their aesthetic preferences.
Sandi: All people in developing nations are not poor; some are better off than many in Western nations. The destitute person that you alluded to in your previous comment would typically not have the skills to come up with artistic products that would fetch a decent price in the West. On the other hand, if designing requires more skill than producing a product given a specified design, then a Western architect can design a product and outsource the labor or his non-Western counterpart can come up with the design and pay lower class people to put in the labor. You need to consider the designers, not the ones who stitch the fabric/provide manual labor, and focus on clothing, not handicrafts. Even a profitable company like Victoria’s Secret sells lingerie made in developing nations, but the design originates in Western nations.
There is nothing within this site telling women what size they should be.
Angela: What is creepy about this site and why would it be less creepy if women were behind it? Read carefully, the alleged ideal WHR of 0.7 is critiqued above. If feminine beauty is not common, this is how it is in nature; I am not responsible for it. Don’t blame me for conveying this message. There is no prescription here, but an educational attempt geared toward bringing more feminine and attractive women in the limelight. Besides, no guy would talk to a woman in real life as in the article above; I certainly haven’t.
Barry: Look carefully at Aishwarya Rai’s pictures, especially shoulder-width to hip-width ratio, width of rib cage, flattened backside, etc. She is not feminine. I could illustrate by posting her pictures, but it would open this entry to a flood of abuse by her fans, and there are a lot of them! Send me an email and I could email relevant pictures to you.
I am surprised you say aishwarya rais physique is not feminine it looks feminine enough from most of the pictures I have seen of her unless they have been aisbrused to such a degree to change her phsyique too as i have never seen her in real life.
It's interesting how beautiful the buttocks are on the women above, much better than any fashion model. This is the body part women seem to worry about most, but it's generally more beautiful on the average woman than the supermodel.
There is only one "God" (don't ever tell him I called him that, he'll take advantage) that I need to show my pictures to or be eye candy for and I wake up with him every morning!
High fashion this and high fashion that -- I guess I just don't care about high fashion, I care about people.
I care about immpressionable girls thinking they have to look like a size 0 or a WHR 7, and stop doing well in math to attract a guy.
I'm concerned when I hear a 17 year old boy in a gym criticize an incredibly fit instructor because she has a little cellulite and he thinks she should be perfect like he sees in magazines.
I'm concerned that these messages affect men's and women's expectations and harm their ability to connect.
I'm thankful for Tyra -- I don't know about her nose, but I have to laugh at your breast pictures -- have you really ever seen real breasts in person? Careful, someone might pull back the curtain on a virgin "wizard of oz" here! (Though being a virgin is a virtue -- it certainly wouldn't qualify you as a judge of real female breasts! What's sad is the idea of any man being the judge of any female's breasts except his mate's!)
Oh, and Catherine Zeta-Jones is Welsh, not "South American"!
High fashion -- yada, yada, yada, blah, blah, blah! If the "emperors" want to go around in the underwear gays have made for them, let them. We only need to be concerned if it affects the rest of us.
Jenn: You need to give heterosexual men more credit than assuming that they blindly believe what they are told is attractive or this site, the product of a heterosexual man, wouldn’t exist. There is a lot that is objective about beauty; this site also critiques the golden ratio as a descriptor of facial beauty. What do you mean by sexuality not being as neatly defined as within this site?
Craig: I also wonder why you have bothered to leave a comment, given the unjustified insults in it and its senseless nature. Western art is characterized by the Lolita complex? There is an art section within this site, featuring contemporary art, and the women shown are surely no Lolitas. Greco-Roman female figures are primarily those of adult females. Have you seen Aphrodite looking like a pubescent or adolescent girl? “Lolita” was written by Vladimir Nabokov, not Lewis Carroll (who presumably liked underage girls). The Barely-18-girls websites cater to a minority of heterosexual men. Sexual interest in underage children is much more strongly associated with homosexual or bisexual men than heterosexual men. Besides, if it weren’t for the gay domination of the fashion business, there would be no need to heavily rely on nude models for the attractive women section of this site, and many of these models are not taken from porn sites. Look at high-fashion models carefully; the central tendency among them approaches the looks of adolescent boys, not adolescent girls; heterosexual men are not involved in determining the norm among high-fashion models.
Hetero men say anyone is hot because they are told to think so, they are easily swayed by the media and how they think picking out certain women as attractive reflect on their personalities.
Though I'm not sure as many women as is claimed on this site have had breast augmentation, I whoelheartedly agree that there is a masculinization trend. It's not just in physical appearence, but also in attitude. I'm of the opinion that feminity is superior to masculinity in many ways, Western culture has told us for centuries that its the other way around. Feminine traits typically include being intuitive, diplomatic, understanding, etc. These are more sophisticated traits. That does not mean to negate the importance of maculine traits, there just has to be a balance. Like in Tao there is the Yin and Yang and every human being should strive to balance both in themselves. Too much of either means problems.
I think this physical manifestation is a reflection of a more dire issue: the eradication of feminity from American society. Thats what we should be focusing on, the overabundance of Yang energy.
As far as beauty goes, it's definitly subjective. I like this theory about beauty (http://goldennumber.net/face.htm) that the most attractive faces have proportions closest to the Golden Mean. Also I don't think sexuality is as neatly defined as this site, and the US in general leads us to believe.
thanks erik. i thought that the bust measurement you were talking about was the ribcage measurement, rather than the actual circumference where the bust is the fullest.
on a side point i think its interesting how many people take this site personally, when to me it just seems like an objective observation. from a young age, i always knew i was 'sexy' but that i wasnt 'beautiful' like the fashion models - i always knew there was a difference and i think this site has an interesting perspective on that.
i think though, that the reasoning that fashion models have masculine features to their physique is because it is the gay fashion designer's preference is not the whole story. in a photo, masculine features give a more striking angles and more interesting shapes, generally looking more dramatic than women with feminine features. obtaining a striking and dramatic looking image is the aim of the fashion industry, which is more about making a statement, or making art rather than about attractive women. many top designers and model agencies openly comment that the industry is more interested in androgenous or 'unlikely'/'unconventional' beauty because it is more interesting, there can be debate about it. fashion, like any kind of art, is about exploring and questioning the world, and in fashion we see a lot of questions being asked about the nature of beauty, just like how this site points out.
i think that the point is that whether you are a feminine woman (closer to hourglass) or one who has more masculine features (like the fashion models) is not a point of one is good and one is bad!! if you are a masculine woman you can still be more pretty or beautiful than a feminine woman!! theres good points to both, just like there is bad points to both. the sooner we accept that, the sooner we become happy with what we've got and the easier it is to accept our differences and celebrate our uniqueness.
Sandi:
First, sorry for the name confusion: I have posted under "Sandy" for some time now and don't fancy a new pseudonym for myself.
I disagree that women in Southeast Asia are typically hourglass-figured as I lived in the region for many years and most are not. Yes, they are slim and many are very small-waisted, but typically the hips and bust are small as well and they tend not to be as curvy as the typical western woman. There are exceptions of course and some have really stunning figures.
I think that part of the problem in the US and in Europe as well are increasing waistlines as we get more obese in general. I know the average waist measurement has gone from about 26-27 inches in the '60's to more than 32 inches today. Of course a thicker waist translates into less of a visible hourglass shape and holds health risks as well. So while the typical skinny fashion model is unhealthy, so too are many American and European women today, just in different ways. There seems to be a fine line to walk in terms of health. A normal BMI -- not skinny, not fat -- is key.
I do think women are confused in today's world however. Even sizing has changed dramatically to add total confusion to our lives! As an example, in High School (many moons ago) I wore a size 6 and I was quite small. Today, at slightly more weight, I am either a size 2 petite or a size O (in intermediate priced stores). That's just crazy and this so-called "vanity sizing" is a gross disservice to women in general. Women have always been jerked around when it comes to clothing....sizing is too variable for us, while a man knows what size he wears, without ambiguity.
Lastly, I personally don't think that the hourglass figure or a strictly-defined WHR is the be-all and end-all of female beauty and that too much emphasis on this one aspect of attractiveness takes away from many things that are more relevant and far more important. Even this website features women who do not quite meet the hourglass definition, although all have WHRs that gives them discernible waistlines and curvacious figures. At any rate, all women have figure flaws; a more rectangular shaped women may have better legs than the typcial hourglass for example, and it is the overall look that matters in my opinion.
The 17 year old guy was not hypothetical, I was standing there!
Laurie in the WHR section of this website was not hypothetical, when she was obviously seeking your approval of her figure -- which just makes me feel sad.
If you think Tyra's breasts are not real, then you would say the same thing about me in the same light and clothing (or lack thereof) -- that's what makes this all so stupid!
Now that getting breasts is commonplace, people, if they're rude enough, ask if mine are real -- which just cracks me up! The few true hour-glass women now can find a bikini top that's bigger than a little triangle with support, which was a great plus for me, but a lot of people (you included) cannot tell the difference between real and fake!
Erik, what you're not hearing is that I am concerned about men's confining aesthetic preferences, period, whether the man is gay or straight! Opinions are one thing -- this all is entirely another!
As women, we just don't do this crap to you guys! I'm saying it is not appropriate for you to define what is or isn't feminine or not! It's fine to offer your "preferences" or opinions, but this site goes much further than that.
If women did this to men -- good luck!
I speak for women in general when I say we're tired of it! Whether the guys are gay or straight!
Being appreciated and being molded are two entirely different things, which you just don't seem to understand.
Again, you assume a woman does not have the ability to be creative enough to design clothes for Western consumption because she's poor and lives in a developing country? That's ridiculous!
She knows more about your hour glass designs than anyone in the Western world does. All of these statistics you and others are stating here are based on the US. If you look at women globally, hour glass figures are the norm -- women in the US and Western Europe are "odd" by comparison. Look at the average woman in Sri Lanka, for instance -- very much hour glass. Africa, India, South America, Southeast Asia, Meditteranean. Most of the rest of the world is what you call "natural hour glass," whether they're poor is irrelevant to whether they could design clothes for their own bodies. A design is an idea and ideas are not dependent upon wealth. Where do you come up with this stuff?
You're not telling women what size they should be?
You're stating that gay designers are defining what size women should be (0) as bad, and you're countering with a different size (WHR7) as good -- what do you call that?
You're stating that the women in the Dove ad do not meet your criteria -- what do you call that?
If you're going to say that you're only speaking about a very small percentage of women who would qualify to be high fashion models, as if that minimizes the impact of creating an alternative box for women to step into, you then also minimize the impact of your entire argument about gay men prescribing size for women.
You just don't get to have it both ways!
Then you're fine with women creating an identical website prescribing what size, length, circumference, circumcized or uncircumcized, bent or straight and proper head shape your penis should be, and proclaim that as THE definition of masculine? And if you don't meet the criteria, you are not masculine, and then state we are just conveying the message of what masculine is according to nature?
Yeah right!
The leading fashion industry has always tried to be different than the norm. They do not signify society's ideal. They signify what is unusual hoping that it is uncommon in a positive way. Just like the ridiculous stuff displayed on runways by models doesn't symbolize what people really want to wear.
This is all part of being "trendy". Masculine face worn by models will go away soon replace by something else, just like whatever that was fasionable in the 1970s is defnitely NOT fashionable today just because it once was.
I don't think the fashion industry is influencing the girls to look more masculine. That is against human nature. In fact, the opposite is happening with teenagers nowadays look more slutty than ever before. In high school, the popular girls are still the most femine girls not lesbian female jocks.
Fashionistas like Versace stands to fame by being unusual. But people buy Versace for quality and fit....most of Versace's customers get custom made clothes. People in fame business do anything to get attention and they certainly play the extreme characters just like atheletes play certain parts, actors play certain parts. But in private lives as human, you can't ignore the natural wiring which has chosen attractive people as mates more so than unattractive people over thousands of years.
I predict that in 20-30 years in time, due to rising power of East Asia, Asian beauty (younger, slimer, cuter) will dominate over current gay fashion ideals. Then the masculine looks will be out of style.
There needs to be a better control. If we want to discern on body type, then Face should be covered, everyone should have same color of skin. Photos should be calibrated for color. It looks like the background in the photograph varies a lot so some women above are given "redish" skin tones which is not attractive as a more ideal skin tone for some photos due to light exposure.
I'll evaluate based on visual to emotional judgements. FYI, I'm young male from USA.
1) Nice from the back. Little flat breasts. Face looks like she has an attitude.
2) Droopy T&A. Wide shoulders. Face looks like a "nice person"
3) Uneven small breasts. Lower face is not attractive.
4) Same breasts as #1, but hips are too wide. Face looks average
5) Nipples don't line up. Face is not attractive.Masculine?
6) Nice breasts. Ok bottom. Feminine attractive face.
7) Nice breasts. Bottom little wide compared to shoulders. Ok face.
8) Long body. The space near the top of the butt looks weird. Face looks above average. unfair smiling.
9) Nice breasts. Weight shows on body. Face looks "rural"
10) Too skinny. Face not attractive. eyebrows too high in the middle
11) Average overall. Face looks "angry"
12) Nice breasts. Hips little wide near bottom. Face looks above average.
Conclusion: no one is highly attractive.
In my experience, here is the breakdown of female attractiveness:
Face - 70% (eyes are the focal point)
Breasts - 30%
Butt - 20%
If someone has a beautiful face, then that person can be considered attractive despite lack of feminine body.
Face is what generates deep emotions from guys. Body is only for sexual attraction.
Breasts: "perky" and "fullness" over size.
Butt: "roundness" over pyramid shape or flatness.
Tan helps a lot.
Most guys are NOT attractive to super skinny supermodels. Guys only date supermodels for status not for looks.
Guys like HOT females in the sack. But the most ideal for relationship would be glamour/beauty females.
The Miss Universe Pageant is all about women. Who says what a real woman's supposed to look like? Who says she has to have a small waist and large hips? Miss Rivera won fair and square and people shouldn't be judging her for being the current Miss Universe. And she won't be baring her body as Miss U, she's going to be working with humanitarian organizations. Intelligence also matters. The women who compete in these pageants know how to answer- they have brains. I think that masculine-ish looking women, like you say that Miss Rivera is, is not bad- it's the women who act masculine are the not so cool ones.
I had a look at some more pictures of her erik and i see what you mean she has a very odd shape figure
I randomly stumbled upon this, this is so funny. I guess the funniest thing is nearly all the "attractive" girls are from porn sites, and not very good ones. So I guess everyone is gay that doesn't like lot lizard looking girls. I'm sure the author, obviously a man, knows what that terms refers to, as I'm sure he is a total dumb ass, and probably a closet racist. Yeah, eating disorders are no joke, but more likely it is that, possibly darker in origin for strait males, Lewis Carroll nymph (Lolita) complex. See all western art, and all your barely 18 porn sites. For gay people, if that is a factor at all, it probably has more to do with the hormonal flux of that period, idealism (Greco-Roman), purity if anything.
I don't even know why I'm wasting my time writing this . . .
By the way, my measurements are 86-64-91. Is my body feminine or masculinized?
Sorry, but woman with a moustache is masculinized?
Monique: Tyra’s pictures shown clearly reveal breast implants, and if you are a self-proclaimed expert on detecting breast implants, then I don’t see how you have failed to observe this. It seems like you don’t want to accept it because Tyra in your estimation has been “honest” about her looks and possibly a good role model, but Tyra has only admitted to minor work like hair straightening, hair dyeing, colored contacts, fake eyelashes and shaving her moustache.
Most women have a reasonable idea of how attractive they are, and would not be adversely affected by this site, but of those who are, at least this site is promoting looks consistent with health, fertility and fecundity, i.e., these looks cannot be acquired by indulging in negative health behaviors.
Not all 17-year-old boys are like your hypothetical example. Most men do not mind a little cellulite. For instance, a woman that I went out with had some cellulite, which you could observe if you squeezed her buttocks or upper thighs, but not otherwise. She was concerned about it, but I told her that I would much rather she have the fat on her, a healthy amount by the way, so that I enjoy massaging it rather than lose the fat to avoid the appearance of cellulite under any circumstances.
I have described Catherine Zeta Jones as Welsh and don’t see the point of your comment. It may be related to your superficial reading of my describing her pre-transformation looks as those of a South American Hispanic. Even her transformation has been of limited help. I had a difficult time convincing my roommate that the lead actress in The Mask of Zorro is Welsh, not a Latina.
Gay fashion designers are affecting the “rest of us” in numerous negative ways, as well-documented within this site. It is time for you to be concerned about their aesthetic preferences.
Sandi: All people in developing nations are not poor; some are better off than many in Western nations. The destitute person that you alluded to in your previous comment would typically not have the skills to come up with artistic products that would fetch a decent price in the West. On the other hand, if designing requires more skill than producing a product given a specified design, then a Western architect can design a product and outsource the labor or his non-Western counterpart can come up with the design and pay lower class people to put in the labor. You need to consider the designers, not the ones who stitch the fabric/provide manual labor, and focus on clothing, not handicrafts. Even a profitable company like Victoria’s Secret sells lingerie made in developing nations, but the design originates in Western nations.
There is nothing within this site telling women what size they should be.
Angela: What is creepy about this site and why would it be less creepy if women were behind it? Read carefully, the alleged ideal WHR of 0.7 is critiqued above. If feminine beauty is not common, this is how it is in nature; I am not responsible for it. Don’t blame me for conveying this message. There is no prescription here, but an educational attempt geared toward bringing more feminine and attractive women in the limelight. Besides, no guy would talk to a woman in real life as in the article above; I certainly haven’t.
Barry: Look carefully at Aishwarya Rai’s pictures, especially shoulder-width to hip-width ratio, width of rib cage, flattened backside, etc. She is not feminine. I could illustrate by posting her pictures, but it would open this entry to a flood of abuse by her fans, and there are a lot of them! Send me an email and I could email relevant pictures to you.
thanks erik that is what i wanted to know
Margaux i agree with you, all of you people are jealous and you all know you want to be in her shoes. She's SWEET!!!!!!!!!! AND I LOVE HER!!!
Erik
I am surprised you say aishwarya rais physique is not feminine it looks feminine enough from most of the pictures I have seen of her unless they have been aisbrused to such a degree to change her phsyique too as i have never seen her in real life.
I think 1 and 8 are the over all best looking females. If I had to look like one of the 12 women, I'd pick one of those.
It's interesting how beautiful the buttocks are on the women above, much better than any fashion model. This is the body part women seem to worry about most, but it's generally more beautiful on the average woman than the supermodel.
There is only one "God" (don't ever tell him I called him that, he'll take advantage) that I need to show my pictures to or be eye candy for and I wake up with him every morning!
High fashion this and high fashion that -- I guess I just don't care about high fashion, I care about people.
I care about immpressionable girls thinking they have to look like a size 0 or a WHR 7, and stop doing well in math to attract a guy.
I'm concerned when I hear a 17 year old boy in a gym criticize an incredibly fit instructor because she has a little cellulite and he thinks she should be perfect like he sees in magazines.
I'm concerned that these messages affect men's and women's expectations and harm their ability to connect.
I'm thankful for Tyra -- I don't know about her nose, but I have to laugh at your breast pictures -- have you really ever seen real breasts in person? Careful, someone might pull back the curtain on a virgin "wizard of oz" here! (Though being a virgin is a virtue -- it certainly wouldn't qualify you as a judge of real female breasts! What's sad is the idea of any man being the judge of any female's breasts except his mate's!)
Oh, and Catherine Zeta-Jones is Welsh, not "South American"!
High fashion -- yada, yada, yada, blah, blah, blah! If the "emperors" want to go around in the underwear gays have made for them, let them. We only need to be concerned if it affects the rest of us.
Pages