how many times do you have to use that ridiculous "logic" that only homosexuals think these women are gorgeous? hate to break it to you, but almost all completely straight men would die to be with girls like her. you're in the minority, only because most likely, you're just some sad, pathetic, average to ugly male whose been rejected by beautiful girls all his life and he thinks making a site like this will redeem is dignity. while real, masculine, straight men are out right now playing sports and things like that, you're sitting on your ass making a site to give women beauty tips? who's the fag, now?
why don't you go visit websites like "askmen.com" and see what REAL men have to say about these women. although i don't completely agree with all the women on their top 99, you can't argue with the top 5.
now, let's hear you try to spill out bullshit about how girls like JESSICA ALBA or ADRIANA LIMA look masculine. most women in the world would die to look like them, and almost all straight men would die to be with them.
hmm: The talk about “gorgeous models” in the Victoria’s Secret lingerie show was in fashion circles. Alessandra Ambrosio was one of the models in this show, and what is remarkable is that anyone could be so clueless as to believe that lifetime-exclusive heterosexual men have any inclination toward fantasizing about the likes of Alessandra. I can understand some clueless men, unaware of the fake femininity of these women (e.g., breast implants), seeing these models in low resolution images on TV and thinking that they are hot, but a closer examination as above and also of some of the other ones -- such as Gisele Bundchen, Heidi Klum and Anna Beatriz Barros -- elsewhere within this site show just how feminine these women are.
The reason that the feminine glamour models are not good enough for being Victoria’s Secret models or fashion models in general is that the fashion business is dominated by homosexual men. Additionally, plenty of data from peer-reviewed journals has been cited within this site to refute the accusation that this site is merely someone’s opinion.
I have already pointed out that petite women like Camille would generally not be among the most feminine women, but see the feminine vs. masculine page to understand who between Alessandra and Camille is more feminine. Also read about the importance of femininity to beauty in women to understand what kind of looks the general public and heterosexual men prefer in women.
that huge close-up of that camille girl's face looks more like a little boy than any of the pictures of alessandra on here (and you DID choose not so great pictures of her). if she had short hair, thicker eyebrows and no lipgloss slathered on, she could pass for a 7 year old boy.
of course, it's MY opinion that she looks boyish but you don't see me making sites calling this shit "information", do you? or is this site merely just to make average, sloppy looking women feel better about themselves by trying to call them more feminine looking when that's really not the case?
it's also interesting how all these women you come up with that you think are feminine are amateur glamour models, because they are not good enough to become famous like victoria's secret models and such. this makes me question if you really aren't just some fat (excuse me, voluptuous *rolls eyes*) woman who's just jealous of these top models?
and by the way, you really shouldn't have your site be misunderstood as an "info" site. this isn't information, it's YOUR opinion. it is not information that these women look masculine to you; alessandra looks perfectly gorgeous to me, and that girl you compared to her is NOWHERE as beautiful as alessandra is.
the reason why alessandra is a top model is because she has very defining features, while that girl you compared her to has a very sloppy looking face. not to mention she has very thin, ugly eyebrows and yellow teeth, making her look like a two dollar skank.
you like skanky girls, that's fine, but that doesn't mean that the rest of heterosexual males do too, like you are trying to imply.
girls like alessandra are classy, and that's what makes her such a famous model, whereas you can find whorish looking "woman" like that thing next to her walking around in the streets everyday.
after the victoria's secret fashion show this year, all anyone could talk about was how hot the women were. i find it hilarious that you think these models look like trannies when every other man in the world is off masturbating to photos of them. are you sure YOU'RE not the one that's a homo?
Netty: I am not sure what you mean by asexualisation. What is sexually unappealing to people of a given sexual orientation may be sexually appealing to people of another sexual orientation.
The journal articles that I have cited are typically not in the public domain. To access these articles, you either have to pay the publisher (usually $25-plus per article) or go to the library of a major university and read them there. I have addressed a number of studies addressing what constitutes beauty. Go to the FAQ page and the answer to the first question will provide you with links to parts of this site where the nature of beauty has been addressed. There is more in this regard that I will add later.
This is a very interesting site. I'm glad that someone has finally acknowledged the asexualisation of the human race. I'm sorry some people feel the need to resort to abuse to convey their opinion.
I would like to know how and where you found your information, as I have trouble finding full text articles. Also are you planning on dealing with the vast number of studies hoping to define the 'ideal' female beauty? Apologies if this has been stated elsewhere.
Netty
H: You are right that it is unlikely that all the judges are homosexual, but consider the following. Given the high status of high-fashion models, the looks standards in beauty pageants have leaned toward the fashion model look over the years, and this is undoubtedly also related to homosexual men working behind the scenes in pageants. This has corresponded to more manly women placing better in beauty pageants, which in turn has drawn more slender and manlier entrants in local beauty pageants, and prompted judges to more frequently chose women leaning toward fashion models in looks in order to maximize the prospects that their picks will go on to win the big titles. If you look up the biography of the Miss Universe 2006 contestants, you will note that a good number of them have some kind of fashion modeling background.
Therefore, there is something close to a vicious cycle that has taken place, but this will not translate to all beauty pageant contestants looking like high-fashion models in the future. High profile beauty pageants market themselves to the general public, and viewership concerns will translate to some feminine participants and occasional feminine winners. However, it is best for Donald Trump to set up a beauty pageant specifically catering to homosexual men, where they can have contestants who look like adolescent boys, transvestites, transsexuals and eunuchs. Given its grand title, the Miss Universe pageant should focus on feminine beauty.
The contestants from Albania and Sri Lanka don’t look bad, but they don’t look feminine. I debated whether I should flag Miss Sri Lanka because from what I have seen of Sri Lankan women, Ms. Fernandez doesn’t look like one, and I don’t know what norms to compare her with. Given her European name, she may have a large European component to her. In such cases I use the default European reference standards, and Ms. Fernandez looks masculine by these standards.
Have you ever considered the fact that these women are in the pageant because they have been voted for by judges and on some ocassions, the general public? and don't tell me all these judges are homosexual because that's bollocks.
I agree that one or two look a bit too man-like to be considered beautiful as a woman but most are very attractive, especially miss albania and miss sri lanka (but thats just my opinion.)
Jen: I agree that there is nothing wrong with the looks of the masculinized contestants. It is just that they don’t belong in a beauty pageant that, by virtue of it targeting the general population, is supposed to honor feminine beauty.
I really see nothing wrong with any of the ms. universe contestants. erik, you're looking wayyy too much into this whole thing. most of them are beautiful
H: A woman needs to have an hourglass figure in order for her physique to partly satisfy the requirements of feminine beauty. Charlize Theron has a woman’s physique, but with shoulders on the broad side, small breasts, a large rib case, etc., her physique is not an example of feminine beauty, and she is less feminine than women with hourglass physiques and more feminine faces.
Yes, most women do not have hourglass physiques, but modeling in general and especially beauty pageants are not supposed to represent the general female population. Beauty pageants are about aesthetics and are expected to emphasize feminine beauty, but what one observes is that they lean toward the tastes of homosexual men. There is nothing unrealistic about demanding that at least one high profile beauty pageant be about feminine beauty.
So in your opinion, a woman must be an exaggerated hourglass shape in order to be classed as feminine? You say Charize Theron does not have a feminine body...why is that? Just because she has smallish curves, it doesnt mean that she lacks femininity. Less than 10% of the female population are classed as having an hourglass shape. You complain that there is a lack of "feminine" looking women in the public eye but this is purely because not many women have that type of body shape in the first place. Maybe you should develop some more realistic goals to avoid being disappointed.
Paul: The actresses would need to be both feminine and attractive, and such women are few in number. One problem with an actress or other entertainment personality is that whereas it is easy to find pictures of her face, finding sufficiently informative pictures of her physique, especially her backside, will typically not be an easy task. Sometimes paparazzi pictures help, but one is more often disappointed than pleased with how these women look like in bikinis. Nevertheless, I have featured the face of Charlize Theron, but her physique is not feminine and cannot be used.
There happens to be an actress whose face, as seen from the front, I found to be good looking, and I was curious how she looked like from the side and how her physique looked like, but I couldn’t find relevant pictures of her. Therefore, I got a movie in which she starred and got to see her from multiple angles, only to learn that the woman is neither feminine nor attractive. I would much rather avoid having to go through this trouble with other actresses since I strongly dislike romantic movies, which is where you would expect to most extensively see the more feminine ones.
Additionally, since I am focusing on models and beauty pageant contestants, they are best compared to women specifically selected for their looks, i.e., some kind of models, and these happen to be mostly nude models at present, but if I am successful, then there will be plenty of mainstream models that one could use in the future.
Paul: There is overwhelming consensus in the general population that masculinization decreases the attractiveness of women. Some people like masculinization in women, and this would not be a problem if there were at least some mainstream outlets for the appreciation of feminine beauty, but there are none. This is the reason that this site is needed.
You express the concern that my beliefs could make most women feel ugly. This would only be possible if my portrayal of beauty happens to be what most people are intrinsically oriented toward. For instance, if I were to fill the attractive women section with broad-nosed and morbidly obese women, then in Western societies, most women couldn’t possibly be made to feel bad about their looks after going through this section. On the other hand, my argument is not that unattractive equals ugly; ugliness refers to physical defects and abnormalities, and is uncommon.
It is true that only a small proportion of women qualify as feminine and attractive, but then beauty is among the least egalitarian attributes.
This site has nothing to do with how women should aspire to look like. It addresses models and beauty pageant contestants, and the goal is to end up with at least one mainstream outlet (not this site) for the appreciation of feminine beauty.
You are mistaken about the prevalence of people who are intersex; they are about 0.015% of the population. Most intersex individuals would be uncomfortable with who they are, regardless of this site.
How dare you say that women who show facial features typically and inappropriately seen as "masculine", are unattractive.
You may think your site is showing that women who are ultra fem are truly beautiful and that women should aspire to look like them, but you fail to realize that your beliefs would be causing most women on the planet to feel ugly for having slight signs of masculinity. Not one woman on your site could honestly be confused as male. According to your disturbing search for the most feminine people, 99 percent of women look like men. All those little "signs of masculinity" apply to nearly every woman I have ever seen.
People are more than female and male. 1 in 100 people are born inter-sex. Should these people believe themselves to be hideous? People like original, symmetrical faces. Androgyny is something that all people can't help but be attracted to. Maybe they don't see it as what they aspire to look like or what they want in a mate, but it is something entirely natural and beautiful.
I find your site terribly offensive and disturbing.
Helen: The resolution of current movies is much lower than the resolution of quality photographs. Movies focus on the face only part of the time, and the face close ups are typically shown with movement. The audience is not expected to especially focus on facial features and physique proportions, given that dialogue, background scenery, film plot, etc. will be competing for their attention. And, you can bet that the editors would use all kinds of digital tricks to portray the leading ladies in their best light. Therefore, movies are not a good source for evaluating facial aesthetics. Keira Knightley looked better to me in her Pirates movie than she does in her pictures, some examples of which are shown above.
I do not know what you mean by saying no in reference to Angelina Jolie, but her looks are not impressive enough for me to consider her for the attractive women section.
You say that all men you know look at porn, but then you do not know the vast majority of men. Whereas most men have seen pornography, only a minority seek it on a more or less regular basis. I know of many heterosexual men who do not watch pornography; they saw some pictures of naked women as teenage boys, and these pictures satisfied their curiosity; they don’t feel the need to continue seeking pictures of nude women anymore. In my reply to commentator Virgil above, I have noted that pornographers are limited by the number of women willing to participate in it, and feminine ones are the least likely to do so. Only a few women who pose nude and especially those who participate in pornography qualify as feminine and attractive, and these women are scattered over different sites. It is partly for these reasons that many men are not aware of a large number of real life examples of feminine and attractive women, notwithstanding the knowledge that feminine women are supposed to have rounded hips, prominent breasts and backsides, etc.
Elle has got an exquisite face, whereas Monica's features are just... conventional and average. Elle also has an amazing rear end and overall body image. The only thing detracting from her beauty are wide shoulders and it is a flaw, but one which can be overlooked due to her facial features. I stick with Elle, despite shortcomings.
Well actually, I was talking about the UK's sexiext poll in which Keira was number one. Also, many men i'm sure have seen Keira in films where she would be viewed from all angles. It is much harder to use tricks to improve looks in a movie and yet she is still considered sexy and beautiful. I will also use the example of Angelina Jolie..you would probably label her as a masculinized women due to her broad shoulders, narrow hips and lack of a nipped-in waist. However, I do not know of anyone (including me) that would say no!
You say "Given the novelty of this site, you can bet that a number of men are not aware of the kind of feminine and attractive women out there." This is complete rubbish. All men I know look at porn and in this porn (i have seen much for myself) there is a huge variety of women, some curvy, some skinny etc, so men do know what is out there. Why do you assume men are ignorant to "feminine" beauty? It is obvious to everyone that very "feminine" women have small waists, small ribcages, wide hips and shapely asses. However, porn is hugely varied to cater for everyone's tastes.
Helen: Keira Knightley was ranked at number 5 in the 2006 FHM top-100 list; the number 1 woman on this list happens to be Scarlett Johansson. Anyway, Keira does rank highly, but caution is required before one accepts this as reflective of general male preference. For instance, the guy who portrayed Keira as a better-looking woman than a glamour model I had chosen did not come back to defend her looks after I showed Keira’s face from multiple angles. Many men are not aware of tricks of photography/make-up/lighting/posing and/or are not good at inferring 3-d shape from two-dimensional pictures shot from a single or few angles only. A major section educating men about these aspects will be eventually added to this site, and men who are lifetime-exclusive heterosexual will typically find a number of female celebrities they currently find good looking to be much less attractive after going through this section in conjunction with the rest of this site. Given the novelty of this site, you can bet that a number of men are not aware of the kind of feminine and attractive women out there. Exposing the general male population to lots of feminine and very attractive women will make them find stars such as Keira a lot less attractive. Therefore, what you have identified is not reflective of innate male preference but mostly reflects, instead, ignorance. Most lifetime-exclusive heterosexual men can easily be educated to appreciate the nuances of what their biological design predisposes them to.
You are mistaken about my aversion to even slight masculinization in women. I have identified slight physical masculinization in women as a correlate of sexiness -- sex appeal to heterosexual men -- in women; sexy women for heterosexual men remain overall feminine though they are not very feminine. I have also featured two pages in the attractive women section that show somewhat masculinized women, and some such women are also displayed elsewhere. However, too many fashion models and beauty pageant contestants are excessively masculine from the perspective of lifetime-exclusive heterosexual men in general, and something needs to be done about this.
Helen: You should read this to see the extent to which the public overwhelmingly prefers feminine looks in women; specifically note the effect size. I don't know how you have managed to find many heterosexual men who find at least three-fourths of these women "devastatingly beautiful." Anyway, you should have them judge the masculinized women in the 2006 Miss Universe pageant.
You talk above about keira knightly having masculine features. However, she was voted by the readers of lad-mag FHM in the UK as the sexiest woman in the world for 2006 and she certainly doesnt conform to your feminine ideal but is stunning in her own right. Surely this is a good representation of general male opinion on female beauty?
Also, your aversion to even slight masculinization in women leaves me wondering if perhaps you feel threatened by these strong looking women because you are insecure about your own masculinity?
how many times do you have to use that ridiculous "logic" that only homosexuals think these women are gorgeous? hate to break it to you, but almost all completely straight men would die to be with girls like her. you're in the minority, only because most likely, you're just some sad, pathetic, average to ugly male whose been rejected by beautiful girls all his life and he thinks making a site like this will redeem is dignity. while real, masculine, straight men are out right now playing sports and things like that, you're sitting on your ass making a site to give women beauty tips? who's the fag, now?
why don't you go visit websites like "askmen.com" and see what REAL men have to say about these women. although i don't completely agree with all the women on their top 99, you can't argue with the top 5.
now, let's hear you try to spill out bullshit about how girls like JESSICA ALBA or ADRIANA LIMA look masculine. most women in the world would die to look like them, and almost all straight men would die to be with them.
hmm: The talk about “gorgeous models” in the Victoria’s Secret lingerie show was in fashion circles. Alessandra Ambrosio was one of the models in this show, and what is remarkable is that anyone could be so clueless as to believe that lifetime-exclusive heterosexual men have any inclination toward fantasizing about the likes of Alessandra. I can understand some clueless men, unaware of the fake femininity of these women (e.g., breast implants), seeing these models in low resolution images on TV and thinking that they are hot, but a closer examination as above and also of some of the other ones -- such as Gisele Bundchen, Heidi Klum and Anna Beatriz Barros -- elsewhere within this site show just how feminine these women are.
The reason that the feminine glamour models are not good enough for being Victoria’s Secret models or fashion models in general is that the fashion business is dominated by homosexual men. Additionally, plenty of data from peer-reviewed journals has been cited within this site to refute the accusation that this site is merely someone’s opinion.
I have already pointed out that petite women like Camille would generally not be among the most feminine women, but see the feminine vs. masculine page to understand who between Alessandra and Camille is more feminine. Also read about the importance of femininity to beauty in women to understand what kind of looks the general public and heterosexual men prefer in women.
I agree that between Zuleyka and Kurara Chibana (Miss Japan), Ms. Chibana should have won.
and one more thing (sorry for the triple posts)
that huge close-up of that camille girl's face looks more like a little boy than any of the pictures of alessandra on here (and you DID choose not so great pictures of her). if she had short hair, thicker eyebrows and no lipgloss slathered on, she could pass for a 7 year old boy.
of course, it's MY opinion that she looks boyish but you don't see me making sites calling this shit "information", do you? or is this site merely just to make average, sloppy looking women feel better about themselves by trying to call them more feminine looking when that's really not the case?
it's also interesting how all these women you come up with that you think are feminine are amateur glamour models, because they are not good enough to become famous like victoria's secret models and such. this makes me question if you really aren't just some fat (excuse me, voluptuous *rolls eyes*) woman who's just jealous of these top models?
and by the way, you really shouldn't have your site be misunderstood as an "info" site. this isn't information, it's YOUR opinion. it is not information that these women look masculine to you; alessandra looks perfectly gorgeous to me, and that girl you compared to her is NOWHERE as beautiful as alessandra is.
the reason why alessandra is a top model is because she has very defining features, while that girl you compared her to has a very sloppy looking face. not to mention she has very thin, ugly eyebrows and yellow teeth, making her look like a two dollar skank.
you like skanky girls, that's fine, but that doesn't mean that the rest of heterosexual males do too, like you are trying to imply.
girls like alessandra are classy, and that's what makes her such a famous model, whereas you can find whorish looking "woman" like that thing next to her walking around in the streets everyday.
i completely agree with you. miss universe looks like michael jackson.
i think miss japan should've won, although you probably won't agree with me, since you seem to only prefer white women.
LOL
after the victoria's secret fashion show this year, all anyone could talk about was how hot the women were. i find it hilarious that you think these models look like trannies when every other man in the world is off masturbating to photos of them. are you sure YOU'RE not the one that's a homo?
Netty: I am not sure what you mean by asexualisation. What is sexually unappealing to people of a given sexual orientation may be sexually appealing to people of another sexual orientation.
The journal articles that I have cited are typically not in the public domain. To access these articles, you either have to pay the publisher (usually $25-plus per article) or go to the library of a major university and read them there. I have addressed a number of studies addressing what constitutes beauty. Go to the FAQ page and the answer to the first question will provide you with links to parts of this site where the nature of beauty has been addressed. There is more in this regard that I will add later.
This is a very interesting site. I'm glad that someone has finally acknowledged the asexualisation of the human race. I'm sorry some people feel the need to resort to abuse to convey their opinion.
I would like to know how and where you found your information, as I have trouble finding full text articles. Also are you planning on dealing with the vast number of studies hoping to define the 'ideal' female beauty? Apologies if this has been stated elsewhere.
Netty
H: You are right that it is unlikely that all the judges are homosexual, but consider the following. Given the high status of high-fashion models, the looks standards in beauty pageants have leaned toward the fashion model look over the years, and this is undoubtedly also related to homosexual men working behind the scenes in pageants. This has corresponded to more manly women placing better in beauty pageants, which in turn has drawn more slender and manlier entrants in local beauty pageants, and prompted judges to more frequently chose women leaning toward fashion models in looks in order to maximize the prospects that their picks will go on to win the big titles. If you look up the biography of the Miss Universe 2006 contestants, you will note that a good number of them have some kind of fashion modeling background.
Therefore, there is something close to a vicious cycle that has taken place, but this will not translate to all beauty pageant contestants looking like high-fashion models in the future. High profile beauty pageants market themselves to the general public, and viewership concerns will translate to some feminine participants and occasional feminine winners. However, it is best for Donald Trump to set up a beauty pageant specifically catering to homosexual men, where they can have contestants who look like adolescent boys, transvestites, transsexuals and eunuchs. Given its grand title, the Miss Universe pageant should focus on feminine beauty.
The contestants from Albania and Sri Lanka don’t look bad, but they don’t look feminine. I debated whether I should flag Miss Sri Lanka because from what I have seen of Sri Lankan women, Ms. Fernandez doesn’t look like one, and I don’t know what norms to compare her with. Given her European name, she may have a large European component to her. In such cases I use the default European reference standards, and Ms. Fernandez looks masculine by these standards.
Have you ever considered the fact that these women are in the pageant because they have been voted for by judges and on some ocassions, the general public? and don't tell me all these judges are homosexual because that's bollocks.
I agree that one or two look a bit too man-like to be considered beautiful as a woman but most are very attractive, especially miss albania and miss sri lanka (but thats just my opinion.)
Jen: I agree that there is nothing wrong with the looks of the masculinized contestants. It is just that they don’t belong in a beauty pageant that, by virtue of it targeting the general population, is supposed to honor feminine beauty.
I really see nothing wrong with any of the ms. universe contestants. erik, you're looking wayyy too much into this whole thing. most of them are beautiful
H: A woman needs to have an hourglass figure in order for her physique to partly satisfy the requirements of feminine beauty. Charlize Theron has a woman’s physique, but with shoulders on the broad side, small breasts, a large rib case, etc., her physique is not an example of feminine beauty, and she is less feminine than women with hourglass physiques and more feminine faces.
Yes, most women do not have hourglass physiques, but modeling in general and especially beauty pageants are not supposed to represent the general female population. Beauty pageants are about aesthetics and are expected to emphasize feminine beauty, but what one observes is that they lean toward the tastes of homosexual men. There is nothing unrealistic about demanding that at least one high profile beauty pageant be about feminine beauty.
So in your opinion, a woman must be an exaggerated hourglass shape in order to be classed as feminine? You say Charize Theron does not have a feminine body...why is that? Just because she has smallish curves, it doesnt mean that she lacks femininity. Less than 10% of the female population are classed as having an hourglass shape. You complain that there is a lack of "feminine" looking women in the public eye but this is purely because not many women have that type of body shape in the first place. Maybe you should develop some more realistic goals to avoid being disappointed.
Paul: The actresses would need to be both feminine and attractive, and such women are few in number. One problem with an actress or other entertainment personality is that whereas it is easy to find pictures of her face, finding sufficiently informative pictures of her physique, especially her backside, will typically not be an easy task. Sometimes paparazzi pictures help, but one is more often disappointed than pleased with how these women look like in bikinis. Nevertheless, I have featured the face of Charlize Theron, but her physique is not feminine and cannot be used.
There happens to be an actress whose face, as seen from the front, I found to be good looking, and I was curious how she looked like from the side and how her physique looked like, but I couldn’t find relevant pictures of her. Therefore, I got a movie in which she starred and got to see her from multiple angles, only to learn that the woman is neither feminine nor attractive. I would much rather avoid having to go through this trouble with other actresses since I strongly dislike romantic movies, which is where you would expect to most extensively see the more feminine ones.
Additionally, since I am focusing on models and beauty pageant contestants, they are best compared to women specifically selected for their looks, i.e., some kind of models, and these happen to be mostly nude models at present, but if I am successful, then there will be plenty of mainstream models that one could use in the future.
Do you not find any actresses sufficiently feminine. Or anyone in the entertainment industry?
Paul: There is overwhelming consensus in the general population that masculinization decreases the attractiveness of women. Some people like masculinization in women, and this would not be a problem if there were at least some mainstream outlets for the appreciation of feminine beauty, but there are none. This is the reason that this site is needed.
You express the concern that my beliefs could make most women feel ugly. This would only be possible if my portrayal of beauty happens to be what most people are intrinsically oriented toward. For instance, if I were to fill the attractive women section with broad-nosed and morbidly obese women, then in Western societies, most women couldn’t possibly be made to feel bad about their looks after going through this section. On the other hand, my argument is not that unattractive equals ugly; ugliness refers to physical defects and abnormalities, and is uncommon.
It is true that only a small proportion of women qualify as feminine and attractive, but then beauty is among the least egalitarian attributes.
This site has nothing to do with how women should aspire to look like. It addresses models and beauty pageant contestants, and the goal is to end up with at least one mainstream outlet (not this site) for the appreciation of feminine beauty.
You are mistaken about the prevalence of people who are intersex; they are about 0.015% of the population. Most intersex individuals would be uncomfortable with who they are, regardless of this site.
Dear site,
How dare you say that women who show facial features typically and inappropriately seen as "masculine", are unattractive.
You may think your site is showing that women who are ultra fem are truly beautiful and that women should aspire to look like them, but you fail to realize that your beliefs would be causing most women on the planet to feel ugly for having slight signs of masculinity. Not one woman on your site could honestly be confused as male. According to your disturbing search for the most feminine people, 99 percent of women look like men. All those little "signs of masculinity" apply to nearly every woman I have ever seen.
People are more than female and male. 1 in 100 people are born inter-sex. Should these people believe themselves to be hideous? People like original, symmetrical faces. Androgyny is something that all people can't help but be attracted to. Maybe they don't see it as what they aspire to look like or what they want in a mate, but it is something entirely natural and beautiful.
I find your site terribly offensive and disturbing.
Helen: The resolution of current movies is much lower than the resolution of quality photographs. Movies focus on the face only part of the time, and the face close ups are typically shown with movement. The audience is not expected to especially focus on facial features and physique proportions, given that dialogue, background scenery, film plot, etc. will be competing for their attention. And, you can bet that the editors would use all kinds of digital tricks to portray the leading ladies in their best light. Therefore, movies are not a good source for evaluating facial aesthetics. Keira Knightley looked better to me in her Pirates movie than she does in her pictures, some examples of which are shown above.
I do not know what you mean by saying no in reference to Angelina Jolie, but her looks are not impressive enough for me to consider her for the attractive women section.
You say that all men you know look at porn, but then you do not know the vast majority of men. Whereas most men have seen pornography, only a minority seek it on a more or less regular basis. I know of many heterosexual men who do not watch pornography; they saw some pictures of naked women as teenage boys, and these pictures satisfied their curiosity; they don’t feel the need to continue seeking pictures of nude women anymore. In my reply to commentator Virgil above, I have noted that pornographers are limited by the number of women willing to participate in it, and feminine ones are the least likely to do so. Only a few women who pose nude and especially those who participate in pornography qualify as feminine and attractive, and these women are scattered over different sites. It is partly for these reasons that many men are not aware of a large number of real life examples of feminine and attractive women, notwithstanding the knowledge that feminine women are supposed to have rounded hips, prominent breasts and backsides, etc.
Elle has got an exquisite face, whereas Monica's features are just... conventional and average. Elle also has an amazing rear end and overall body image. The only thing detracting from her beauty are wide shoulders and it is a flaw, but one which can be overlooked due to her facial features. I stick with Elle, despite shortcomings.
Well actually, I was talking about the UK's sexiext poll in which Keira was number one. Also, many men i'm sure have seen Keira in films where she would be viewed from all angles. It is much harder to use tricks to improve looks in a movie and yet she is still considered sexy and beautiful. I will also use the example of Angelina Jolie..you would probably label her as a masculinized women due to her broad shoulders, narrow hips and lack of a nipped-in waist. However, I do not know of anyone (including me) that would say no!
You say "Given the novelty of this site, you can bet that a number of men are not aware of the kind of feminine and attractive women out there." This is complete rubbish. All men I know look at porn and in this porn (i have seen much for myself) there is a huge variety of women, some curvy, some skinny etc, so men do know what is out there. Why do you assume men are ignorant to "feminine" beauty? It is obvious to everyone that very "feminine" women have small waists, small ribcages, wide hips and shapely asses. However, porn is hugely varied to cater for everyone's tastes.
Helen: Keira Knightley was ranked at number 5 in the 2006 FHM top-100 list; the number 1 woman on this list happens to be Scarlett Johansson. Anyway, Keira does rank highly, but caution is required before one accepts this as reflective of general male preference. For instance, the guy who portrayed Keira as a better-looking woman than a glamour model I had chosen did not come back to defend her looks after I showed Keira’s face from multiple angles. Many men are not aware of tricks of photography/make-up/lighting/posing and/or are not good at inferring 3-d shape from two-dimensional pictures shot from a single or few angles only. A major section educating men about these aspects will be eventually added to this site, and men who are lifetime-exclusive heterosexual will typically find a number of female celebrities they currently find good looking to be much less attractive after going through this section in conjunction with the rest of this site. Given the novelty of this site, you can bet that a number of men are not aware of the kind of feminine and attractive women out there. Exposing the general male population to lots of feminine and very attractive women will make them find stars such as Keira a lot less attractive. Therefore, what you have identified is not reflective of innate male preference but mostly reflects, instead, ignorance. Most lifetime-exclusive heterosexual men can easily be educated to appreciate the nuances of what their biological design predisposes them to.
You are mistaken about my aversion to even slight masculinization in women. I have identified slight physical masculinization in women as a correlate of sexiness -- sex appeal to heterosexual men -- in women; sexy women for heterosexual men remain overall feminine though they are not very feminine. I have also featured two pages in the attractive women section that show somewhat masculinized women, and some such women are also displayed elsewhere. However, too many fashion models and beauty pageant contestants are excessively masculine from the perspective of lifetime-exclusive heterosexual men in general, and something needs to be done about this.
Helen: You should read this to see the extent to which the public overwhelmingly prefers feminine looks in women; specifically note the effect size. I don't know how you have managed to find many heterosexual men who find at least three-fourths of these women "devastatingly beautiful." Anyway, you should have them judge the masculinized women in the 2006 Miss Universe pageant.
You talk above about keira knightly having masculine features. However, she was voted by the readers of lad-mag FHM in the UK as the sexiest woman in the world for 2006 and she certainly doesnt conform to your feminine ideal but is stunning in her own right. Surely this is a good representation of general male opinion on female beauty?
Also, your aversion to even slight masculinization in women leaves me wondering if perhaps you feel threatened by these strong looking women because you are insecure about your own masculinity?
Pages