Heather: If I have espoused pseudo science, then why do you find this site chilling? Shouldn’t you rest assured that others will see it this way, too, and that this site will not have any impact? You know the answer, and it is related to your inability to substantiate the pseudo science allegation. No anatomical/quantitative data should be required to tell feminine women apart from masculine women or attractive women from unattractive women, but without anatomical/numerical data, the arguments here would be dismissed as subjective.
Feminists like you are useless when it comes to solving the problems resulting from skinny high-fashion models. When it is clear that gay fashion designers are to blame, all you do is come up with an accusation of homophobia and a reference to the Nazis. What homophobia has been espoused here?
The Nazi analogy is nonsense. Leftists have had a long history of persecuting gays. A pro-gay stance has been adopted by leftists only from the 1970s onward. They used to consider homosexuality to be a form of fascist or bourgeois perversion. And, it is interesting to address how the label “fascist perversion” came into play. Homosexuality was not uncommon among the paramilitary youth in Weimar Germany who would eventually go on to form the Nazis. Whereas the Bolshevists had decriminalized sodomy in 1922, Stalinist communists recriminalized it in 1933 because they feared that the Nazis and fascists would infiltrate homosexual circles in Moscow, Leningrad and other Russian cities. There is even a tremendous amount of circumstantial evidence that Hitler was gay. Of course, toward the end of their regime, the Nazis put many homosexuals in concentration camps, but the point is that there is no relation between political ideology and anti-gay beliefs. Homosexuals have been persecuted by people of all political orientations at some time or the other, and a seemingly homophobic individual cannot be readily compared to a Nazi since he could very well be compared to other leftists in the past or clergy that have persecuted homosexuals. Similarly, the leftist roots of feminism are also the roots of Hitler and Nazi beliefs.
Very few of the nude models shown here are from the porn industry; most are simply nude models, and the reason they have been selected is because partial nudity is a requirement if one is to address aesthetics and there are no alternative sources of a large number of feminine and attractive women at this time. Dressed women are shown. Make-up is irrelevant. The nude models are taken from low-profile sources, i.e., the typical photo has not been airbrushed, and the women are often wearing minimal make-up. Since the focus is on young adults, and it is easy to come across many attractive young adults with blemishless skin, I don’t see why make-up should be an issue.
Women addressed as masculinized or transsexual-looking are not being stigmatized, but simply being described as they are, and this does not reflect my nature in any way.
It is absurd that you would accuse me of not recognizing that attraction and physical preference vary from person to person when the preferences of heterosexual and nonheterosexual men are well-contrasted within this site. There is, of course, variation within either group, but it has been abundantly shown that there is a lot that is objective about beauty and that most people mutually agree about what constitutes beauty.
Charly: Yes, there is plenty of variation in nature, but not all of it is useful toward a given purpose. You are mistaken about boyish/masculine young women turning feminine in their 30s and beyond. Girls start with a boyish figure, but one can tell which ones are going to end up looking feminine by their facial features. The masculinity-femininity of facial features has prenatal origins. Once women have reached adulthood, their faces will become more masculine with age, and their skeletal proportions are not going to become more feminine even if they acquire more feminine curves. How appealing are curves in women with a masculinized skeleton? You may want to compare the lingerie models in Table 1 with the glamour models having less impressive waist-to-hip ratios (WHRs) in Table 2 in an entry where confounds related to the association between WHR and attractiveness are addressed.
You have talked about attractiveness in the 30s and up to the 60s. This site is addressing models and beauty pageant contestants, i.e., mostly women in the 18-25 range. If some curvaceous or skinny young adult women become obese and curvaceous, respectively, in middle age, then this is of little relevance to this site. Beyond young adulthood, people lose overall attractiveness.
You are grossly mistaken about the prevalence of morbid obesity in America. 66% of American adults are overweight, but only about 32% of American adults are obese; the prevalence of morbid obesity would be a lot lower.
The wider hips of women are only partly related to childbirth; the rest serves to makes them more appealing to men. In other words, the typical woman with narrow hips will do a fine job at giving birth, and your impression of narrow-hipped women frequently dying during childbirth or not marrying for fear of giving birth until the availability of Cesarean-section births is way off the mark.
Your proposition that the domination of the fashion business by gays can possibly be explained in terms of anti-gay oppression preventing them from getting jobs elsewhere is implausible. Gays do not move around with a “I am gay” label attached to them. Only a minority of gays are discernible as such by virtue of their appearance/mannerisms. The stronger the anti-gay public sentiment, the greater the proportion of gays that will be closeted and thereby not experience discrimination related to their homosexuality if nothing about their looks/behaviors gives away their sexual orientation. In addition, increasing public tolerance of homosexuality in the past few decades has not only not corresponded to the fashion industry becoming less gay dominated, but the gay presence has actually become clearer in the form of an increasing proportion of very skinny and boyish women among high-fashion models, forcing Spanish and Italian governmental authorities to crack down on this trend in 2006. Read about why gays dominate the fashion business under the appropriate heading on this page.
I do not understand what you mention by my information confirming and re-affirming the physical status of androgynous people/transsexuals.
It is incorrect to talk about me disliking slender and boyish women; the correct expression is that I dislike the use of slender/boyish/masculinized women when well-shaped feminine women are required. I have nothing against slender and boyish women. The fashion industry, and more specifically the gays in it, have created a lot of problems; these problems are the reason why this site has been set up, and it is imperative that the source of the problems be addressed at length if the problems are to be solved.
Dan: Some physical variation does lie along a continuum. I don’t get the point about physical fitness. Physical fitness is not relevant to this site. Women who supposedly do not have an hourglass shape because of a large amount of adipose tissue will typically not have a skeletal frame consistent with an hourglass shape. There are very few “porn girls” here, and hourglass shapes are not strictly necessary for attractiveness, i.e., there is no problem if some of the attractive nude models do not have hourglass shapes as long as they are otherwise feminine and appealing.
Your numerical, pseudo-scientific analysis of what makes a woman attractive reminds me intensely of the Nazi's psysical determinations of what makes a person Aryan. The homophobia you undeniably express further accentuates your intolerance in ways that reflect the Nazi ideology. I found this website very chilling, even though I agree with your general statement: that curvy, feminine, healthy women are neglected in modern media.
Your choice to proliferate your website with photos of naked women in the porn industry, devoid of any candid photos of dressed women, or women without makeup, suggests a very unhealthy perspective on womankind. Similarly, to stigmatize less curvacious or soft-featured women by name-calling them as "masculinized" or "transexual" shows a childish and unforgiving nature.
You have articulated your personal tastes in beauty here, extremely clearly. But nowhere do you seem to recognise that attraction and physical preference vary from person to person, and cannot be standardized. Your egotism is unbelievably intense.
I suggest that you look within yourself. I suggest you look at your relationships with women, both romantic and otherwise, and see if they are healthy. (I suspect they are not.) And I suggest that you seek counselling. There are better ways to look at the world, and your overall life might improve.
Interesting site. I think you are addicted to porn and this is how you cover it up. Just kidding. In reality, there definitions of the body shapes are fairly arbitrary at their cut off points. It seems to me that what exists is a continueum from a hyper-masculine male body to a hyper-feminine female body. I am also interested in the role physical fitness plays--an hour glass shape can be lost to adipose tissue. I do believe some of your porn girls are misclassified as hour-glass figures when ther WHR is a little off.
If one looks at any fruit, seed, or vegetable plant in nature during the months of July, August, September, and October...the fruit and seed of a plant, indeed the different plants mature at different rates. The fruit, seed, or vegetable produced vary in beauty, shape, and size. I have seen small seeds produce great plants the following year and large more robust seeds produce nothing the following year. I have tasted great small fruits and vegetables and nasty tasting but more physically robust fruits and vegetables.
Nature and or God loves variation and experiments all the time
The point is that, people mature at different rates. Many of these slender boyish women that you have detailed here will be very curveous and pretty women by the time they are in their 30's, 40's, 50's, and many of them will be wonderfully shapely in their 60's. While many of the models (proper female beauty your standards) will be quite fat. I have seen such things transpire before my eyes.
In America 2007…the statistics that I read states that 66 percent of the population is morbidly obese. That is 30 pounds or more overweight. That leaves only 34 percent of the population available for models, 3.4 people out of 10 people.
Prior to modern OB/GYN care and surgery…many of these slender small hipped women would have and did die during childbirth. Better, yet they never married for fears of death during pregnancy. This has been the case for many thousands of years.
Perhaps the Fashion Industry is their revenge from the grave.
Is the Fashion Industry dominated by gays and lesbians? Maybe…How about another view point? That is, the Fashion Industry one of the only places gays or lesbians can work, live, and function without the crushing oppression of the ruling class’s crushing hatred of their gender/sexual choice. The oppression often leaves it’s victims in poverty and prostitution.
Maybe if they could work in other industries they would not all hang out in Fashion.
Further, if you look at your point of view on a couple of your pages, “A Parade of Transsexuals”…this concept could be expanded to your entire web site. Actual your web site is a fabulous resource for Androgynous people and Transsexuals. Your information confirms and re-affirms their physical status. Good job! Although, I do not think that was your intent.
Finally, Erik, the amount of work and thoroughness of your information is fabulous. I have thoroughly enjoyed the entire web site. I think that your dislike of the Fashion Industry and Slender boyish women spoils the fabulous and brilliant work that you have presented here.
Mootje: There is no argument here that skinniness equates to masculinity. There are plenty of skinny and feminine women around (example). The women described as masculinized are objectively so. Besides, all the girls upset by this site should realize that this site is about models and beauty pageant contestants, not women in general. There is nothing wrong with being masculinized. However, there are a number of scenarios where feminine women are required, and when masculinized women are inappropriately used, a criticism is appropriate. Note that the criticism is about the circumstances/people responsible for the inappropriate choices, not the contestants/models themselves.
Sarah: Do push-up bras result in this or this when there are other pictures of the same woman showing small breasts?
Kelly: Notice the picture of Alessandra Ambrosio above, under the “No comment is necessary” sentence, where she is contrasted with Sophie Howard. Alessandra’s picture is taken from the same photo shoot that you have used; notice the bikini, the bracelet, necklace and background. There is obviously something boyish about her physique in the picture that I have shown but not in the picture that you have shown. How is it possible for a woman’s physique to look boyish in some pictures, but not in others taken during the same photo shoot? Posing! It is clear from an evaluation of multiple pictures of Alessandra that posing is responsible for the non-boyish look rather than the boyish look. Alessandra is older now and not so successful in matching the physique of boys, but look up her pictures from a couple of years ago.
Sandy: You are right that the extreme WHR preference among many Chinese men is surprising given the WHR distribution of Chinese women. The question is whether this is a Western influence or something intrinsic. If it is intrinsic and has been similar to that of European men over the past 20,000 years or so, then one would tentatively conclude that sexual selection acting on women has been weaker among the Chinese; there is evidence for stronger sexual selection among Northern Europeans over this time period.
I have read your above 'research', like you are calling it. .. You describe these beautiful women to be too masculine.
I was born as a thin and fine woman. Not only my face, but also my body. I eat what I like, without gaining weight. I'm healthy and happy with my body.And who are you to say that I am too masculine!
I know a lot of girls who are seriously hurt by your words...
I would like you to remove our pictures from this site and add your own picture . Then we will tell you what we think of you!
Looser!
I think Alessandra's gorgeous, with an amazing body. Sure she's slender, but she's a healthy thin--nicely toned, but still has curves. Not anything like the waify Kate Moss type model.
She doesn't have implants btw--it's just a push-up bra. Even with someone who has nothing to work with (like me), it does wonders.
Interesting study. I live in Asia and must say, based on personal observation, that a whr of .6 among Chinese women would be extremely rare; at least more rare than in Europe or in the United States. Most Chinese women are slender with small waists but with correspondingly narrow hips, although of course there are exceptions. I would more generally see whrs of around .75-.8 here with smaller more petite frames and curves.
This is NOT to say that the women here are not feminine or attractive, just that genetically they would not have a waist/hip differentiation that I see in the West for example. Based on this, I wonder if young Chinese males have been influenced by the western "ideal" via the media, television, etc. or if this preference is inbred.
As an aside, I have read articles on Japanese women requesting buttocks implants to enlarge that area so that they will more closely resemble "western women".
Chris: Defining pornography in terms of the purpose of sexual titillation/gratification is a loose standard as it will classify R-rated Hollywood movies with sex scenes as pornographic, too; you need to add the requirement that sexual activity be depicted with nothing left to the imagination. Anyway, fashion models are not becoming more similar to “our favorite [non-model] celebrities” but it is the other way around. If Victoria’s Secret uses supermodels/very famous fashion models, it is bound to attract attention, but then the supermodels/very famous fashion models have ended up with their status because of the gay domination of the top ranks of the fashion business, not because the general public finds their looks appealing. There is a demand for lingerie, and since there is no heterosexual alternative to the gay-dominated fashion industry, Victoria’s Secret can do brisk business.
There is no way the typical heterosexual woman would prefer the face shape and the physique of Alessandra Ambrosio to those of Dasha. Additionally, men and women judge female attractiveness similarly.
I don’t get what you mean by Victoria’s Secret saving money after spending a lot on supermodels. The very famous high-fashion models it uses are so expensive that a company that can afford them should have no problems whatsoever in using comparatively hardly known feminine and attractive models to also sell lingerie. Victoria’s Secret will at most throw in a few feminine models.
Using its brand name, Victoria’s Secret can continue to sell well even if it suddenly switches to feminine models only, and it will actually be more successful because not only will a large number of women be buying from them, but also heterosexual men will take a strong interest in its lingerie show and catalogs, which would allow it to earn more advertising revenue. However, the gays involved make a lot of money and would much rather avoid using feminine women to the maximum extent possible, for aesthetic reasons as far as they are concerned.
I'll pardon your presumptuousness on the jealousy conclusion. As I'll apologize for not differentiating topless modeling & such from pornography (which is by definition for the sake of sexual gratification), though in general terms it is rather easy to classify it along with porn and the like of FHM, and Stuff. And your principle of advertisment doesn't explain the high response that the likes of Victoria Secret get from their consumers since it's quite likely that more than 1/2 of their consumers probably don't look like the models. Women actually do find Alessandra quiet cute. Models are becoming more analogous to "our favorite celebrities." Which might explain Victoria Secret's massive growth after using supermodels - and when it comes to the lingerie modeling, that's most probably a matter of saving money after expending a lot on the use of supermodels. In other words, more bang for your buck. As for it being a misleading example of sexiness to women, it's relative. People could argue the same for Barbie (who also does have a lingerie collection). Women's ideas of sexy don't always correlate to a mans, and it's not like they have to.
Chris: You should have read the comments above. Women in general prefer to look feminine, not masculine, and heterosexual women should know that heterosexual men prefer feminine-looking women. A fundamental principle behind advertising is, “buy our product, look like this.” Therefore, the masculine looks of many Victoria’s Secret models cannot be explained in terms of female preference. Since women wear lingerie to make themselves more sexually appealing to their male partners, who would typically be lifetime-exclusive heterosexual men, lingerie models directly or indirectly cater to the preferences of heterosexual men. In other words, there simply cannot be any justification for using masculinized lingerie models other than in terms of the preferences of the gay fashion designers behind the lingerie company. Your use of the term “crack whore” indicates jealously. If the nude women were dressed in lingerie or other clothing, nothing about them would suggest that they are “crack whores.” None of the nude women shown above are porn stars by the way. Once again, your comment suggests poor comprehension. Victoria’s Secret Company is not being criticized here for not filling its catalog with pictures of nude women, but for using a lot of masculinized women as lingerie models, many with breast implants.
What has prompted you to question whether I am homophobic? I am not. There is no unflattering portrayal of some homosexuals here that does not have a basis in reality, as inferred from a massive amount of evidence.
Chris: There are women with much larger all-natural breasts than Keeley’s. Keeley has natural breasts (32E), and they don’t look fake to start with. A surgeon who could use breast implants to give women the looks of Keeley’s breasts would be in great demand. Besides, Keeley is not into porn; she is just a topless model.
You should not be considering the arguments here in light of where you are placed with respect to feminine beauty; you need to consider the models and beauty pageant contestants addressed.
Chris: Your comment shows a complete failure to understand the argument. It would be obviously inappropriate for Victoria’s Secret to use nude models, let alone the porn stars that you have mentioned, as lingerie models. The point is that the company needs to use feminine models. The purpose of this series is to point out the inadequate femininity -- as far as the job is concerned -- of many Victoria’s Secret models by contrasting them with women having the requisite feminine appearance. At this time, one has little choice other than sourcing examples of women with feminine physiques from mostly nude models.
Whereas the nudity of the nude women in the attractive women section is appropriate in a “Hustler setting” but not lingerie modeling, dress women with their looks in lingerie, and they will be well suited to lingerie modeling.
Since a male transvestite is a cross-dressing man, something is wrong with your perception if you believe that there is a transvestite element to the looks of Zuzana. Zuzana has sharp gonial angles and a narrow face, which prevent her face from looking very feminine, but it has already been noted that the face is not that important in the context of lingerie modeling; Zuzana has not been added to the attractive women section of this site.
Name: Some correlation between one's own looks and the masculinity-femininity of a desired partner is expected, and I may address this at a later date. Your comment about not kicking Gisele out of bed if she had a great personality and a kind heart is appreciated. In long-term relationships, personality and nature are very important, and easily more important than physical attractiveness.
I'm gradually finding more things discomforting. And for one thing, lingerie models for the likes of Victoria Secret, Fredericks of Hollywood, and Cosabella are meant to cater to WOMEN who buy their products. If the picture displays the message "hey, you can look like a crack whore, like me." then women won't buy. The appeal to men is it see it on their partner - and if they choose to oogle it in the catalogs that weren't designed for them, oh well. It's like you're spiting the industry for refusing to make their catalogs into free soft-core porn. And another thing, are you homophobic?
I'd really have to question the authenticity of Keeley's breasts just because they seem unusually large and it's not uncommon for those of the porn industry to get implants (I guess the point was more natural feminine beauty, than anything). Oh, and don't bash on feet, unless you find Chinese foot binding attractive too. Pardon if this comment was off topic, my mind tends to wander in growing resentment of this site because by your definition I'm found to be lacking feminine beauty.
I don't really know so much if Karolina Kurova is inappropriate for modeling lingerie for Victoria Secret along with the rest of the Victoria Secret models. Most of the women you show on your site possessing 'feminine beauty' are glamour models and look most appropriate in a 'Hustler' setting - one that would appeal to men instead of women, not every woman would like to have her sexiness associated to the likes of Tara Patrick or Jenna Jamison. Because of that association, for them [glamour models] to be modeling lingerie in a marketing scheme to women would be...to put it plainly, kind of disgusting. High fashion gives the impression of sophistication, and so that is also the impression of Victoria Secret lingerie in their choice of using high fashion models. And that 2nd picture of Zuzana on the right does look a little transvestite based on my experience of being friends with many.
Out of Curiosity is there a correlation between physical characteristics one has and characteristics they are attracted too on the Feminine-Masculine Scale?
I don't think these women are fat. I wish their butts were like the ones on the right picture column in the backside section. Nice round butts!
Of the women on the page I prefer Veronika but I wouldn't kick Gisele out of bed if she had a great personality and a kind heart. I don't find girls like Gisele very attractive and they don't find me attractive. I tend to attract and be attracted to the ones with the small breast and butts like on the right column on the backside section.
Masculinized women look better if they workout and keep a healthy weight. Anorexic skin and bones girls are not attractive just pitiful. When I see one I wonder how much longer she has to live.
I'm going to take some figure drawing classes sometime so this site is going to help a lot!
Heather: If I have espoused pseudo science, then why do you find this site chilling? Shouldn’t you rest assured that others will see it this way, too, and that this site will not have any impact? You know the answer, and it is related to your inability to substantiate the pseudo science allegation. No anatomical/quantitative data should be required to tell feminine women apart from masculine women or attractive women from unattractive women, but without anatomical/numerical data, the arguments here would be dismissed as subjective.
Feminists like you are useless when it comes to solving the problems resulting from skinny high-fashion models. When it is clear that gay fashion designers are to blame, all you do is come up with an accusation of homophobia and a reference to the Nazis. What homophobia has been espoused here?
The Nazi analogy is nonsense. Leftists have had a long history of persecuting gays. A pro-gay stance has been adopted by leftists only from the 1970s onward. They used to consider homosexuality to be a form of fascist or bourgeois perversion. And, it is interesting to address how the label “fascist perversion” came into play. Homosexuality was not uncommon among the paramilitary youth in Weimar Germany who would eventually go on to form the Nazis. Whereas the Bolshevists had decriminalized sodomy in 1922, Stalinist communists recriminalized it in 1933 because they feared that the Nazis and fascists would infiltrate homosexual circles in Moscow, Leningrad and other Russian cities. There is even a tremendous amount of circumstantial evidence that Hitler was gay. Of course, toward the end of their regime, the Nazis put many homosexuals in concentration camps, but the point is that there is no relation between political ideology and anti-gay beliefs. Homosexuals have been persecuted by people of all political orientations at some time or the other, and a seemingly homophobic individual cannot be readily compared to a Nazi since he could very well be compared to other leftists in the past or clergy that have persecuted homosexuals. Similarly, the leftist roots of feminism are also the roots of Hitler and Nazi beliefs.
Very few of the nude models shown here are from the porn industry; most are simply nude models, and the reason they have been selected is because partial nudity is a requirement if one is to address aesthetics and there are no alternative sources of a large number of feminine and attractive women at this time. Dressed women are shown. Make-up is irrelevant. The nude models are taken from low-profile sources, i.e., the typical photo has not been airbrushed, and the women are often wearing minimal make-up. Since the focus is on young adults, and it is easy to come across many attractive young adults with blemishless skin, I don’t see why make-up should be an issue.
Women addressed as masculinized or transsexual-looking are not being stigmatized, but simply being described as they are, and this does not reflect my nature in any way.
It is absurd that you would accuse me of not recognizing that attraction and physical preference vary from person to person when the preferences of heterosexual and nonheterosexual men are well-contrasted within this site. There is, of course, variation within either group, but it has been abundantly shown that there is a lot that is objective about beauty and that most people mutually agree about what constitutes beauty.
Your suggestions are useless. On the other hand, I suggest that you read about how women can be protected from the negative influence of the fashion industry, and act on the knowledge.
Charly: Yes, there is plenty of variation in nature, but not all of it is useful toward a given purpose. You are mistaken about boyish/masculine young women turning feminine in their 30s and beyond. Girls start with a boyish figure, but one can tell which ones are going to end up looking feminine by their facial features. The masculinity-femininity of facial features has prenatal origins. Once women have reached adulthood, their faces will become more masculine with age, and their skeletal proportions are not going to become more feminine even if they acquire more feminine curves. How appealing are curves in women with a masculinized skeleton? You may want to compare the lingerie models in Table 1 with the glamour models having less impressive waist-to-hip ratios (WHRs) in Table 2 in an entry where confounds related to the association between WHR and attractiveness are addressed.
You have talked about attractiveness in the 30s and up to the 60s. This site is addressing models and beauty pageant contestants, i.e., mostly women in the 18-25 range. If some curvaceous or skinny young adult women become obese and curvaceous, respectively, in middle age, then this is of little relevance to this site. Beyond young adulthood, people lose overall attractiveness.
You are grossly mistaken about the prevalence of morbid obesity in America. 66% of American adults are overweight, but only about 32% of American adults are obese; the prevalence of morbid obesity would be a lot lower.
The wider hips of women are only partly related to childbirth; the rest serves to makes them more appealing to men. In other words, the typical woman with narrow hips will do a fine job at giving birth, and your impression of narrow-hipped women frequently dying during childbirth or not marrying for fear of giving birth until the availability of Cesarean-section births is way off the mark.
Your proposition that the domination of the fashion business by gays can possibly be explained in terms of anti-gay oppression preventing them from getting jobs elsewhere is implausible. Gays do not move around with a “I am gay” label attached to them. Only a minority of gays are discernible as such by virtue of their appearance/mannerisms. The stronger the anti-gay public sentiment, the greater the proportion of gays that will be closeted and thereby not experience discrimination related to their homosexuality if nothing about their looks/behaviors gives away their sexual orientation. In addition, increasing public tolerance of homosexuality in the past few decades has not only not corresponded to the fashion industry becoming less gay dominated, but the gay presence has actually become clearer in the form of an increasing proportion of very skinny and boyish women among high-fashion models, forcing Spanish and Italian governmental authorities to crack down on this trend in 2006. Read about why gays dominate the fashion business under the appropriate heading on this page.
I do not understand what you mention by my information confirming and re-affirming the physical status of androgynous people/transsexuals.
It is incorrect to talk about me disliking slender and boyish women; the correct expression is that I dislike the use of slender/boyish/masculinized women when well-shaped feminine women are required. I have nothing against slender and boyish women. The fashion industry, and more specifically the gays in it, have created a lot of problems; these problems are the reason why this site has been set up, and it is imperative that the source of the problems be addressed at length if the problems are to be solved.
Dan: Some physical variation does lie along a continuum. I don’t get the point about physical fitness. Physical fitness is not relevant to this site. Women who supposedly do not have an hourglass shape because of a large amount of adipose tissue will typically not have a skeletal frame consistent with an hourglass shape. There are very few “porn girls” here, and hourglass shapes are not strictly necessary for attractiveness, i.e., there is no problem if some of the attractive nude models do not have hourglass shapes as long as they are otherwise feminine and appealing.
Your numerical, pseudo-scientific analysis of what makes a woman attractive reminds me intensely of the Nazi's psysical determinations of what makes a person Aryan. The homophobia you undeniably express further accentuates your intolerance in ways that reflect the Nazi ideology. I found this website very chilling, even though I agree with your general statement: that curvy, feminine, healthy women are neglected in modern media.
Your choice to proliferate your website with photos of naked women in the porn industry, devoid of any candid photos of dressed women, or women without makeup, suggests a very unhealthy perspective on womankind. Similarly, to stigmatize less curvacious or soft-featured women by name-calling them as "masculinized" or "transexual" shows a childish and unforgiving nature.
You have articulated your personal tastes in beauty here, extremely clearly. But nowhere do you seem to recognise that attraction and physical preference vary from person to person, and cannot be standardized. Your egotism is unbelievably intense.
I suggest that you look within yourself. I suggest you look at your relationships with women, both romantic and otherwise, and see if they are healthy. (I suspect they are not.) And I suggest that you seek counselling. There are better ways to look at the world, and your overall life might improve.
Interesting site. I think you are addicted to porn and this is how you cover it up. Just kidding. In reality, there definitions of the body shapes are fairly arbitrary at their cut off points. It seems to me that what exists is a continueum from a hyper-masculine male body to a hyper-feminine female body. I am also interested in the role physical fitness plays--an hour glass shape can be lost to adipose tissue. I do believe some of your porn girls are misclassified as hour-glass figures when ther WHR is a little off.
However, I would like to point out the following:
If one looks at any fruit, seed, or vegetable plant in nature during the months of July, August, September, and October...the fruit and seed of a plant, indeed the different plants mature at different rates. The fruit, seed, or vegetable produced vary in beauty, shape, and size. I have seen small seeds produce great plants the following year and large more robust seeds produce nothing the following year. I have tasted great small fruits and vegetables and nasty tasting but more physically robust fruits and vegetables.
Nature and or God loves variation and experiments all the time
The point is that, people mature at different rates. Many of these slender boyish women that you have detailed here will be very curveous and pretty women by the time they are in their 30's, 40's, 50's, and many of them will be wonderfully shapely in their 60's. While many of the models (proper female beauty your standards) will be quite fat. I have seen such things transpire before my eyes.
In America 2007…the statistics that I read states that 66 percent of the population is morbidly obese. That is 30 pounds or more overweight. That leaves only 34 percent of the population available for models, 3.4 people out of 10 people.
Prior to modern OB/GYN care and surgery…many of these slender small hipped women would have and did die during childbirth. Better, yet they never married for fears of death during pregnancy. This has been the case for many thousands of years.
Perhaps the Fashion Industry is their revenge from the grave.
Is the Fashion Industry dominated by gays and lesbians? Maybe…How about another view point? That is, the Fashion Industry one of the only places gays or lesbians can work, live, and function without the crushing oppression of the ruling class’s crushing hatred of their gender/sexual choice. The oppression often leaves it’s victims in poverty and prostitution.
Maybe if they could work in other industries they would not all hang out in Fashion.
Further, if you look at your point of view on a couple of your pages, “A Parade of Transsexuals”…this concept could be expanded to your entire web site. Actual your web site is a fabulous resource for Androgynous people and Transsexuals. Your information confirms and re-affirms their physical status. Good job! Although, I do not think that was your intent.
Finally, Erik, the amount of work and thoroughness of your information is fabulous. I have thoroughly enjoyed the entire web site. I think that your dislike of the Fashion Industry and Slender boyish women spoils the fabulous and brilliant work that you have presented here.
Mootje: There is no argument here that skinniness equates to masculinity. There are plenty of skinny and feminine women around (example). The women described as masculinized are objectively so. Besides, all the girls upset by this site should realize that this site is about models and beauty pageant contestants, not women in general. There is nothing wrong with being masculinized. However, there are a number of scenarios where feminine women are required, and when masculinized women are inappropriately used, a criticism is appropriate. Note that the criticism is about the circumstances/people responsible for the inappropriate choices, not the contestants/models themselves.
Sarah: Do push-up bras result in this or this when there are other pictures of the same woman showing small breasts?
Kelly: Notice the picture of Alessandra Ambrosio above, under the “No comment is necessary” sentence, where she is contrasted with Sophie Howard. Alessandra’s picture is taken from the same photo shoot that you have used; notice the bikini, the bracelet, necklace and background. There is obviously something boyish about her physique in the picture that I have shown but not in the picture that you have shown. How is it possible for a woman’s physique to look boyish in some pictures, but not in others taken during the same photo shoot? Posing! It is clear from an evaluation of multiple pictures of Alessandra that posing is responsible for the non-boyish look rather than the boyish look. Alessandra is older now and not so successful in matching the physique of boys, but look up her pictures from a couple of years ago.
Sandy: You are right that the extreme WHR preference among many Chinese men is surprising given the WHR distribution of Chinese women. The question is whether this is a Western influence or something intrinsic. If it is intrinsic and has been similar to that of European men over the past 20,000 years or so, then one would tentatively conclude that sexual selection acting on women has been weaker among the Chinese; there is evidence for stronger sexual selection among Northern Europeans over this time period.
I have read your above 'research', like you are calling it. .. You describe these beautiful women to be too masculine.
I was born as a thin and fine woman. Not only my face, but also my body. I eat what I like, without gaining weight. I'm healthy and happy with my body.And who are you to say that I am too masculine!
I know a lot of girls who are seriously hurt by your words...
I would like you to remove our pictures from this site and add your own picture . Then we will tell you what we think of you!
Looser!
http://www.eppynet.com/INDEX/newsletter/modelle/2005.2006/images/alessandra_ambrosio.jpg
boyish figure???
I think Alessandra's gorgeous, with an amazing body. Sure she's slender, but she's a healthy thin--nicely toned, but still has curves. Not anything like the waify Kate Moss type model.
She doesn't have implants btw--it's just a push-up bra. Even with someone who has nothing to work with (like me), it does wonders.
Interesting study. I live in Asia and must say, based on personal observation, that a whr of .6 among Chinese women would be extremely rare; at least more rare than in Europe or in the United States. Most Chinese women are slender with small waists but with correspondingly narrow hips, although of course there are exceptions. I would more generally see whrs of around .75-.8 here with smaller more petite frames and curves.
This is NOT to say that the women here are not feminine or attractive, just that genetically they would not have a waist/hip differentiation that I see in the West for example. Based on this, I wonder if young Chinese males have been influenced by the western "ideal" via the media, television, etc. or if this preference is inbred.
As an aside, I have read articles on Japanese women requesting buttocks implants to enlarge that area so that they will more closely resemble "western women".
Chris: Defining pornography in terms of the purpose of sexual titillation/gratification is a loose standard as it will classify R-rated Hollywood movies with sex scenes as pornographic, too; you need to add the requirement that sexual activity be depicted with nothing left to the imagination. Anyway, fashion models are not becoming more similar to “our favorite [non-model] celebrities” but it is the other way around. If Victoria’s Secret uses supermodels/very famous fashion models, it is bound to attract attention, but then the supermodels/very famous fashion models have ended up with their status because of the gay domination of the top ranks of the fashion business, not because the general public finds their looks appealing. There is a demand for lingerie, and since there is no heterosexual alternative to the gay-dominated fashion industry, Victoria’s Secret can do brisk business.
There is no way the typical heterosexual woman would prefer the face shape and the physique of Alessandra Ambrosio to those of Dasha. Additionally, men and women judge female attractiveness similarly.
I don’t get what you mean by Victoria’s Secret saving money after spending a lot on supermodels. The very famous high-fashion models it uses are so expensive that a company that can afford them should have no problems whatsoever in using comparatively hardly known feminine and attractive models to also sell lingerie. Victoria’s Secret will at most throw in a few feminine models.
Using its brand name, Victoria’s Secret can continue to sell well even if it suddenly switches to feminine models only, and it will actually be more successful because not only will a large number of women be buying from them, but also heterosexual men will take a strong interest in its lingerie show and catalogs, which would allow it to earn more advertising revenue. However, the gays involved make a lot of money and would much rather avoid using feminine women to the maximum extent possible, for aesthetic reasons as far as they are concerned.
I'll pardon your presumptuousness on the jealousy conclusion. As I'll apologize for not differentiating topless modeling & such from pornography (which is by definition for the sake of sexual gratification), though in general terms it is rather easy to classify it along with porn and the like of FHM, and Stuff. And your principle of advertisment doesn't explain the high response that the likes of Victoria Secret get from their consumers since it's quite likely that more than 1/2 of their consumers probably don't look like the models. Women actually do find Alessandra quiet cute. Models are becoming more analogous to "our favorite celebrities." Which might explain Victoria Secret's massive growth after using supermodels - and when it comes to the lingerie modeling, that's most probably a matter of saving money after expending a lot on the use of supermodels. In other words, more bang for your buck. As for it being a misleading example of sexiness to women, it's relative. People could argue the same for Barbie (who also does have a lingerie collection). Women's ideas of sexy don't always correlate to a mans, and it's not like they have to.
Chris: You should have read the comments above. Women in general prefer to look feminine, not masculine, and heterosexual women should know that heterosexual men prefer feminine-looking women. A fundamental principle behind advertising is, “buy our product, look like this.” Therefore, the masculine looks of many Victoria’s Secret models cannot be explained in terms of female preference. Since women wear lingerie to make themselves more sexually appealing to their male partners, who would typically be lifetime-exclusive heterosexual men, lingerie models directly or indirectly cater to the preferences of heterosexual men. In other words, there simply cannot be any justification for using masculinized lingerie models other than in terms of the preferences of the gay fashion designers behind the lingerie company. Your use of the term “crack whore” indicates jealously. If the nude women were dressed in lingerie or other clothing, nothing about them would suggest that they are “crack whores.” None of the nude women shown above are porn stars by the way. Once again, your comment suggests poor comprehension. Victoria’s Secret Company is not being criticized here for not filling its catalog with pictures of nude women, but for using a lot of masculinized women as lingerie models, many with breast implants.
What has prompted you to question whether I am homophobic? I am not. There is no unflattering portrayal of some homosexuals here that does not have a basis in reality, as inferred from a massive amount of evidence.
Chris: There are women with much larger all-natural breasts than Keeley’s. Keeley has natural breasts (32E), and they don’t look fake to start with. A surgeon who could use breast implants to give women the looks of Keeley’s breasts would be in great demand. Besides, Keeley is not into porn; she is just a topless model.
You should not be considering the arguments here in light of where you are placed with respect to feminine beauty; you need to consider the models and beauty pageant contestants addressed.
Chris: Your comment shows a complete failure to understand the argument. It would be obviously inappropriate for Victoria’s Secret to use nude models, let alone the porn stars that you have mentioned, as lingerie models. The point is that the company needs to use feminine models. The purpose of this series is to point out the inadequate femininity -- as far as the job is concerned -- of many Victoria’s Secret models by contrasting them with women having the requisite feminine appearance. At this time, one has little choice other than sourcing examples of women with feminine physiques from mostly nude models.
Whereas the nudity of the nude women in the attractive women section is appropriate in a “Hustler setting” but not lingerie modeling, dress women with their looks in lingerie, and they will be well suited to lingerie modeling.
Since a male transvestite is a cross-dressing man, something is wrong with your perception if you believe that there is a transvestite element to the looks of Zuzana. Zuzana has sharp gonial angles and a narrow face, which prevent her face from looking very feminine, but it has already been noted that the face is not that important in the context of lingerie modeling; Zuzana has not been added to the attractive women section of this site.
Name: Some correlation between one's own looks and the masculinity-femininity of a desired partner is expected, and I may address this at a later date. Your comment about not kicking Gisele out of bed if she had a great personality and a kind heart is appreciated. In long-term relationships, personality and nature are very important, and easily more important than physical attractiveness.
No, the author is right. #7 is the most attractive.
looks like ur typical 14yr old german boy
I'm gradually finding more things discomforting. And for one thing, lingerie models for the likes of Victoria Secret, Fredericks of Hollywood, and Cosabella are meant to cater to WOMEN who buy their products. If the picture displays the message "hey, you can look like a crack whore, like me." then women won't buy. The appeal to men is it see it on their partner - and if they choose to oogle it in the catalogs that weren't designed for them, oh well. It's like you're spiting the industry for refusing to make their catalogs into free soft-core porn. And another thing, are you homophobic?
I'd really have to question the authenticity of Keeley's breasts just because they seem unusually large and it's not uncommon for those of the porn industry to get implants (I guess the point was more natural feminine beauty, than anything). Oh, and don't bash on feet, unless you find Chinese foot binding attractive too. Pardon if this comment was off topic, my mind tends to wander in growing resentment of this site because by your definition I'm found to be lacking feminine beauty.
I don't really know so much if Karolina Kurova is inappropriate for modeling lingerie for Victoria Secret along with the rest of the Victoria Secret models. Most of the women you show on your site possessing 'feminine beauty' are glamour models and look most appropriate in a 'Hustler' setting - one that would appeal to men instead of women, not every woman would like to have her sexiness associated to the likes of Tara Patrick or Jenna Jamison. Because of that association, for them [glamour models] to be modeling lingerie in a marketing scheme to women would be...to put it plainly, kind of disgusting. High fashion gives the impression of sophistication, and so that is also the impression of Victoria Secret lingerie in their choice of using high fashion models. And that 2nd picture of Zuzana on the right does look a little transvestite based on my experience of being friends with many.
Out of Curiosity is there a correlation between physical characteristics one has and characteristics they are attracted too on the Feminine-Masculine Scale?
I don't think these women are fat. I wish their butts were like the ones on the right picture column in the backside section. Nice round butts!
Of the women on the page I prefer Veronika but I wouldn't kick Gisele out of bed if she had a great personality and a kind heart. I don't find girls like Gisele very attractive and they don't find me attractive. I tend to attract and be attracted to the ones with the small breast and butts like on the right column on the backside section.
Masculinized women look better if they workout and keep a healthy weight. Anorexic skin and bones girls are not attractive just pitiful. When I see one I wonder how much longer she has to live.
I'm going to take some figure drawing classes sometime so this site is going to help a lot!
Pages