To all of you out there who think she has 'flab'. I hate to break this to you, but she does not. But then I guess you all like looking at crack whores.
Hi, I'm a gay man and I found this thread fascinating (and controversial). lol
As a gay man, I like my women to be feminine and my men to be masculine. Catwalk models do nothing for me. I don't think they're thin and boyish due to "aesthetic preferences" of gay designers. I think they're thin and boyish purely to show off the clothes. A good model is one who doesn't distract from the clothes. A really gorgeous feminine chick would take attention off the clothes due to her beauty. This could mean less revenue for the designer.
Victoria's Secret models? Ugh. They just look weird to me - tiny waists and big breasts. It's an odd combination and doesn't look natural.
I don't read a lot of straight porn. And if what Erik says about Playboy is true, now I know why. lol. Masculine women don't appeal to me. I'm sure many of these women were picked because they are Hugh's "type". I'm sure others were picked because they were happy to pose and highly sexed. The idea that androgen levels affect a woman's sex drive makes a lot of sense to me.
I agree feminine women (soft faces, proportional, slim but not skinny, shorter) are the most attractive. I don't like bulimic Barbies.
I don't think gay men "hate" women. That is a bizarre accusation to make. I think most gay men are indifferent to women, and have a distinct preference for men and/or masculine features. Just because I love apples, that doesn't mean i hate oranges. In the same way, just because a gay man desires men, doesn't mean he has anything against women. He simply has a preference (and may have no feelings at all, either positive or negative, toward women and feminine features).
Erik certainly isn't racist or sexist. I think his theory is very interesting and credible.
Last but not least, would heterosexual women find masculinised women "sexy" in that heterosexual women are attracted to men and masculinity? That would be an interesting proposition. As a gay man, of course I think masculinity is "sexy". But I understand if straight males don't agree and would prefer more feminine women in Playboy.
dsws: Interesting thought experiment, and you have arrived at the correct winning strategy.
For the benefit of the readers, it is worthwhile to explain type I and type II errors in your experiment. Type I error corresponds to more relaxed criteria of who is female, thus misclassifying some males as female. Type II error corresponds to stricter criteria of who is female, thus failing to classify some females as female. If you lower one type of error, you increase the other. Obviously, in your thought experiment, the assessment of sex is not based on genitals, but on secondary sexual characteristics.
Something like your thought experiment has been done on fruit flies and the winning strategy is what you figured. One population of fruit flies was bred to exaggerate the differences between males and females and the other bred more normally or bred to reduce the male-female difference. The population bred to exaggerate male-female differences ended up with more masculine males and more feminine females, on average, but it also had lower reproductive success. What happened? The problem was that hyperfeminine females would often give birth to males with feminine characteristics and hypermasculine males would often give birth to females with masculine characteristics—there is no natural way to deal with this issue, which is technically referred to as sexually antagonistic selection. Transmitting very feminine characteristics to males, which is inevitable in some cases, and transmitting very masculine characteristics to females, which is also inevitable sometimes, does not help with reproductive success. There you had it: lowered average reproductive success. Now, it was a matter of speculation that given chance mutations and sufficient time (many more generations into the future), the population with more exaggerated males and females could end up with reproductive success comparable to the other populations.
The Gods and Goddesses seem to have performed such experiments on humans. On the one hand you have East Asians, the standard/average humans, and on the other you have a tenth as many Northern Europeans with absolutely more numerous impressive examples of manhood, womanhood, beauty, genius, ability, achievement, valor, etc.—the manhood that lay waste other populations in its path would sometimes turn on each other; the choice that afforded one to seek the more beautiful as mate also meant that some of the less beautiful, though fertile, would die childless; an ordinary, martial life with parenthood would sometimes be passed or lost in the pursuit of exploration and achievement,... and, the numbers did not increase to the same extent.
This brings us to the motives behind this site. Is the person behind this site content with the ordinary and mundane or is he interested in the extraordinary, and is he content with being an observer or does he like to intervene, be an active participant?
Suppose you're placed in the following contest by some magical being. A hundred contestants are transported back in time, to a point where there were one million hominids on earth. Into that population, a hundred thousand genetically modified individuals are to be introduced, scattered around the world. Each contestant chooses some parameters for a thousand of these. Genetic markers are placed in the "junk DNA" along with each contestant's modifications. The contestants are then transported forward to that timeline's equivalent of the present, and the markers are measured. Finally the contestants are magically zapped back into our own timeline, and those whose markers were most abundant win fabulous prizes.
You've made almost all your decisions. Your hominids are as genetically fit as you can make them when it comes to being clever, thrifty, sociable, and so on. But there are two parameters left, having to do with heterosexual male preferences. There are a number of physical features your hominids are genetically primed to recognize, that correlate with whether a fellow-hominid is male or female. These same features also correlate with strength, disease resistance, risk of dying in childbirth, and numerous other aspects of genetic fitness. Your hominids have two modules in their brains. The first recognizes whether a prospective mate is female, and blocks sexual interest if it can't tell. The second module interfaces with all the rest of the brain systems, and evaluates how desirable an identified female is on all other criteria.
One of your parameters is how stringent the first system should be. It will always have some type 1 errors and some of type 2, but not a huge number of either. After all, these hominids have a bunch of sex-correlated traits to look at, and plenty of brain power with which to make sense of them. Still, the number of errors won't be absolutely zero. It will occasionally send your straight-male hominids mistakenly chasing after other males. They'll waste some time, and sometimes suffer some unpleasant responses, sometimes not. It will also sometimes erroneously tell them to ignore a fertile female, and they'll miss a potential opportunity to breed.
The other parameter is how redundant the second system should be with the first. Is there an evolutionary gain from preferring highly-feminine females over those who score high on other criteria? Or should the second module just take for granted that the first one did its job?
I think it's self-evident that the winning contestant will be one who chooses moderately low stringency and slightly *negative* redundancy. If one of your hominids starts taking an interest in another male, it will soon get enough information that module 1 will flip-flop and tell him to break off the pursuit. It won't be instantaneous. There will be some lost opportunities during that little bit of wasted time. On the other hand, the very best opportunities to reproduce will be the ones where he can get a high-fitness mate without having to deal with a lot of competitors. Those will be the cases where the competitors' module 1 were too stringent, and erroneously rejected a fertile female.
Hominids are pretty bright, so module 2 would have enough processing power to take the male's own status into account. A very high-status male doesn't much care how many competitors there are: he's going to win anyway. So the redundancy would tend toward zero with high status. A very low-status male doesn't have much hope if there are any competitors, so a module 2 with high negative correlation would let him focus his efforts on the best shot at finding a female he can reproduce with. But there's never any appreciable advantage to positive correlation, because redundancy is pointless. There's no reason to opt for a less-fit mate just to reconfirm the obvious fact that she's female.
We don't know there's anything like a module 1 and module 2 in the real-world human brain. But we don't know there isn't, either. And even if the process isn't structured that way, similar considerations may apply.
It also fits with my personal experience. A woman has to be unambiguously recognizable as female to be attractive. Beyond that, going toward hyper-feminine features doesn't do anything more for me. Once there's no question about the fact that she's female, my subconscious really seems to have moved on to questions like whether she's interested in me, whether she's of an appropriate age, and so on.
Tayler, I really don't think the promoter of this page can be accused of racism. The purposes of this page are clarified by the author. He is probably an American of Northern European descent who finds Northern Europeans more appealing and analyzes them because their looks are overrepresented among high fashion models. That's a fact. He finds that ethnicity has to be considered when talking beauty, for most people find other people of their own ethnicity more appealing (that's a fact too - otherwise we wouldn't have so many ethnicities on the planet right now). And he defends that ethnicity is important when identifying feminity in women of different races because they have different facial and body measures. Which is a fact too.
I am not a Northern European and I don't feel offended by this site. It's true that some of the things said here seem to me very specific of American society to me, like women getting cosmetic surgery to have a double lid or such things. I suppose that's normal in a society where the leading classes have this kind of look. In Spain, where I come from, many women get cosmetic surgery to make their naturally rounded eyes look "Asian" (Spaniards may have "too" rounded eyes compared to other Europeans, so rounded eyes are not valuable because everybody has them), or to make their lips look African or they try to tan whatever it takes if they have very light skin. But I suppose those are just current trends influenced by fashion and those weren't beauty standards here 100 years ago.
But the point of this site is to discriminate feminine beauty from non-feminine standards promoted by high fashion designers. And I don't see what's wrong about that.
I don't see anything wrong either in showing pictures of real African women to talk about beauty standards. I think it's much more racist promoting Beyonce Knowles or Rihanna or Hale Berry as beauty standards and telling black women they have to look like them, because these women are only partly African. The same goes for Naomi Campbell, who may look a little bit darker, but she was born to a biracial mother and an Asian father. In Spain there are many real African immigrants from Nigeria or Senegal and they look much more like the pictures on this site than like those (African)-American beauties.
I don't know your ethnicity, but I am a West-Mediterranean or Atlanto-Mediterranean and I think it's natural that I feel more attracted to men from my own ethnicity and it happens to be so. Sometimes, I also find men of other races or ethnicities attractive, but not so often. It probably happens the same to you and it happens to Erik too. I wouldn't call that racism. Sure there are people commenting on this site who are racist or at least obsessed with arguing that women from their own countries are the most beautiful, but I don't think the purpose of this site is comparing different races (that would be pointless), but comparing (Northern-) European women among them to see what makes them more or less feminine. Non feminine traits seem to dominate high fashion catwalks and Erik offers an alternative to them, that is more feminine models. Is that so bad?
About porn stars... What does beauty have to do with cooking? And anyway, I suppose porn stars have to cook their own meals when they come home, just like prostitutes or teachers or physicians.
You are such a bunch of sick disgusting racists. Probably some ugly ass skinheads. You can't post a picture of a unattractive middle aged black women who happens to be frowning and put her next to a picture of a beautiful white women. There are beautiful black women and ugly white women, and no those black women don't ahve to be mixed there are beautiful women who are all blacked. I would say mixed in general is attractive, doesn't have to be mixed with European per se. Because of colonialism Europeans have gone out and mixed with a lot of people, but I have seen mixed race people of many backgrounds who are gorgeous as well as non mixed people. You all are so full of shit it amazes me. Are tall blondes from Sweden attractive sure many of them are but there are other attractive women in the world too. You say you are fighting the fashion industries views of beauty and yet you actually seem to agree with them 95 percent. And different people have different preferences in looks and they are not all wrong for disagreeing with the sig heiling morons who run this site. I also love how you're examples of attractive woman mostly come from porn, porn star is really your ideal of femininity grow up and remember porn stars can't cook worth a damn probably can't even operate a microwave. It cracks me up that at the end of the day you white pride fools like to sit around beating off to exploited white girls being filmed by a bunch of Jewish pornographers.
Thank you very much for your explanations. I didn't answer to this post until today because I wanted to try some of your advice (or the advice in your page) before. I went to a wedding yesterday and I thought it would be the perfect excuse for some decent changes: I asked my esthetician for some small brown lash extensions and ask her to dye my eyebrows a little bit darker (light brown). It really worked! At the wedding, I got compliments from old friends and some people I meet every week, but no one realized what I had done exactly. They all agreed thought that I looked "healthier" than usually (not so pale, I suppose) and that my eyes already looked more blue (so I definitely won't try the contact lenses). The right dress and flats did the rest!
I find your comment on prostitution very interesting. Prostitution has never been illegal in Spain, so I had never given it a second thought, but it is a fact than since about 2000 all prostitutes have become immigrants and that made the prices sink so much that it no longer payed out for locals, who were mostly drug-addicts that made this to buy drugs. The only locals who still work as prostitutes are some so called "high-class escorts" (if such a thing can possibly exist) who insert their adverts in newspapers highlighting that they are Spaniards and college students. In the place where I live (no big cities, not many immigrants) prostitution exists but is not a big issue. But I imagine that what you say much be more acute in big cities and more touristic regions.
I try not to overvalue the role of prostitution here. I suppose that the fact that it's not forbidden makes it less interesting somehow to young men. Most men talk about it like something that must exist because there are unattractive or old men that cannot find a woman who would sleep with them and they "need to pay". I would say Spaniards don't have a very high opinion of men who pay prostitutes ("puteros") and these are seen somehow as losers among young people (in the "old good times" paying a prostitute was tolerated because men wouldn't sleep with their fiancee until they were married - Spaniards used to be very catholic - and that was the only legal way an unmarried man could have sex). On the other hand, it's clear that there are always more young Latin-American or Rumanian girls here in Asturias who marry (usually older or not so attractive) Spanish men that they have barely met and I am sure in some cases that could be described as almost socially accepted prostitution.
Anyway, that was not the point of my post! I just wanted to thank you for the refreshing ideas on your site and I wish some other women focused on that too - almost everything you post could have a practical application for women who are willing to improve their feminity and I can already talk about my small success (a lot of compliments and the numbers of two attractive men who would like to date me ;-)).
Don't listen to the haters and the race obsessed their just Nazis and everyone hates Nazis. I don't see whats wrong with having a round face. You don't look Gypsy to me at all. Gypsy people tend to be much shorter and stockier and of course darker skinned than you but there is nothing wrong with being Gypsy(I am and am proud of it.) Lots of Eastern European people have Asian blood I suppose but that is also not a bad thing. Maybe you can't make it in modeling I don't know I am so not an expert on that. Most of the people in the fashion world are superficial yes and they are often gay, I am not anti gay just not sure why they should be the judges of female beauty seeings as how they are neither women nor interested in women. But on a purely superficial level of my own as a man I think you are attractive, you're hot and I am sure you have noticed a lot of men think so. And I bet you have a sexy accent too lol, nobody thinks they have an accent but everyone does to people from another country. . I guess I don't understand the dream of wanting to be a model, so I don't see it as a big disappointment. Its understandable to want to be attractive looking but you can totally do that and have an awesome career of some kind. Just being a model idk its like just being a decoration.
I commented previously on the need to look to 1950s models for examples of feminine beauty; in particular, I drew attention to the fact that Playboy once contained some decent material.
Alizee Jacotey is one of many superior examples of feminine beauty that may have been overlooked by this site. Her dance routines exhibit some of the most enthralling exploitation of an optimal waste-to-hip ration ever accomplished. There is no doubt if my mind that her facial structure is beautifully ultra-feminine, although I fear that Erik will be able to refute my view. If there is any dispute about whether her breasts are real, it should be noted that a nude video of her was once available on youtube that proves them real. Let us not let her poor quality music distract us from the beauty she has displayed to the world.
I dont think erik gets my train of thought. its ok,he's not a scientist :) one must look at people from a biological perspective to understand how genetics influence a persons appearance. it has evertyhing to do with it. see, asian women, are smaller, more gentle in build....therefore appear thiner..nordic women are known for being tall and strong in build. its common sense, why slavs tend to be thiner looking. they're just more petite. every race has its perks! every subrace. we all wish we had what we dont have
I agree. I study human genetics, and if anybody is interested, there is a documantary called "Journey of Man" its a study done by doctor Spencer Wells, and in fact it was russian people who gave birth to the northerners, hence,such western nations like the british, germans and danish, are a product of slavs migration to the west, seperating themselves further from darker groups, like hindus,middle easterns and mongolians. the closer to the middle east and asia, the more exotic features, the further away, the more white. notice, most slavs dont turn red in the sun, they have a slightly olive skin tone, not to mention south slavs. and the famous cheekbones, u can deny that. almost every girl in eastern europe has high cheekbones, its like a trade mark. the gene polalso indicated that slavs have mixed background.
Apollyon, the first Slavic tribes in the world, around russia/ukraine/belarus were all blonde and blue eyed( or some type of light features) FYI. No one is copying North europeans because even if Eastern European girls are blonde blue eyed their features are still slavic. Natasha Poly, Sasha Pivovarova Natalya Vodianova etc. are prime examples.
Eastern European woman are popular in the fashion industry because of their unique features, that seem exotic/new/fresh to western europe, america, etc. All this talk of poor or cheap are excuses coming from insecure and jealous woman that wish they had an ounce of eastern european looks. It's very sad.
Cecilia: So you think that posting pictures of Frida Gustavsson refutes any significant argument offered by this site? In her we see an individual who does not look like an adolescent boy and, at 17, is approaching old age for a high-fashion model. She will look more feminine as she matures. She is not going to be a top high-fashion model.
A number of descriptors you have used—classy, unique, elegant, symmetric—have nothing to do with masculinity-femininity. The relationship between slenderness and femininity is not straightforward; you can find both feminine and non-feminine slender women. And, richness of lips is not necessarily a feminine characteristic. Northern Europeans such as Swedes, such as your example, often have naturally fleshier lips compared to the generally thinner lips of many European populations; this is an ethnic feature that has nothing to do with femininity.
The one feature you have attempted to justify is the thinness of high-fashion models. I have posted a large number of pictures of attractive slender women who do not look anything like adolescent boys and would never make it in the high-fashion industry. You have attempted to account for the androgyny by saying that it adds a cool touch to the femininity of the models, which is a nonsense statement. And, you have completely ignored the age preferences of the dominant fashion designers—they prefer to use teenage girls (younger than late teens) as opposed to young adult women to market clothes to adult women, even if they are middle aged or older. You cannot bring yourself to admit to the obvious explanation—that the dominant fashion designers prefer to have their female models look like boys in their early adolescence—and come up with poorer arguments that, at best, can account for only some observations.
Any argument about clothes looking better on very thin models is readily refuted by showing pictures of feminine women who are slender or have a healthy body weight; just show examples such as those of these 9 models in Table 2 here to people and ask their opinion: http://www.femininebeauty.info/skinny-fashion-models (none of these 9 feminine models have fat legs and ankles, a big head, a big backside or the face of a 6-year-old)
What sense does it make to market clothes meant for women by using models that do not look much woman-like? If clothes hangars are better able to display clothes, do people buy clothes to wear them or hang them on clothes hangars in their closet?
And, being well-dressed is a very important aspect of sex appeal in social settings. So thinking that fashion is not about sex is misguided; it is in part, a part that is a big component.
Your other comment was on the page on the cheekbones comparison, but it does not compare “ugly models” with “beautiful women”; it exaggerates the differences between the cheekbones of high-fashion models and more typical cheekbones; the exaggeration helps clarify the differences.
Maria: Since the body and face, as they are, are being considered, it is incorrect to say that different countries have different perceptions of femininity; do not be misled by ignorant or off-topic discussions by people not affiliated with this site, which is everyone except me.
Hair and eye color will not necessarily trump overall looks when it comes to appealing to men. With blond hair and blue eyes, you will be at an advantage in southern Spain or southern Italy, even compared to more feminine women, but given that you live in Northern Spain, the coloring may not be an advantage that is strong enough to overcome not being feminine enough overall, assuming this is the case.
What may be an issue is that you are living in a country where prostitution is widely accessible to men, a scenario that is bad for women in general. In this scenario, a woman who is not so attractive and is unwilling to be lose with her sexuality is going to lose men to more easily available women whom they are aroused by, the minimum attractiveness requirements of which are much lower than the women men fantasize about—what is the point in courting a woman who is “Stuck up” and is not attractive enough to make up for the effort?
Most prostitutes in Spain are immigrants, which could partly account for your observation regarding immigrant women. Then, mixed ancestry people are presumably also disproportionately inclined toward promiscuity—a consequence of people with bipolar disorder II being more likely to develop a romantic relationship with and have a child with someone of a different geographic population; this mental illness is more often accompanied by abnormal sexuality and has genetic correlates—which could account for your observation that the unattractive mixed-ancestry women are more successful with men.
I would definitely advise you to darken your eyebrows and eyelashes to make your face more attractive and leave the scalp hair at its natural light color. Here are some relevant articles on why darkening the eye lining helps: http://www.femininebeauty.info/makeup-benefits
Regarding eye color, playing around with colored contacts is your choice. Contacts tend to redden the white of the eye and are not worth it if this happens.
Blue eyes tend to come in different shades. The lighter blue shades correspond to lesser amounts of melanin in the front of the iris, which is none in the extreme.
Markus: The age of the internet started years ago, and it is better in Japan. Uncensored Japanese pornography has been widely available to the Japanese, via the internet, for years. Where is the demand to see more of the labia unencumbered by pubic hair? How many are fans of blackened folds or lining?
#155 | link | Submitted by Ekaterina on Wed, 03/04/2009 - 19:02.
''...but in all honesty let's see your face. ''
''You see, Emily...you're too scared to post your own picture because you realize that you're not too great yourself, '
She's good at 'talking' her beauty but never 'showing' it which is ironic considering the number of photos of every other nordic women shes spammed the website with when she could have simply posted one of her own to make her point. It would not surprise me if the real reason she was not posting her pictures was because she did not truly hold a 'very high' opinion of her 'individual looks' as opposed to the 'high' opinion she appears to have of her ethnic group looks. She knows beauty is not an 'ethnic group'.
''lighting plays a huge part in how a person looks''
Northern europeans/europeans look good in 'image' 'photos'. Its not surprising 'image' is very central to european culture and why europeans take 'image' so far for it is a reflection of the 'global' admiration for there fine/straight noses. Magazines, television, billboards, newspapers, posters, catwalks, internet etc.... Nearly everything european, the core of european culture is associated with 'image' which could explain her 'endless' spamming of pictures.
Beauty though is MORE THAN just an 'image'. Looking good in 'image' is only one part of beauty and not the totality of it.
The camera could never do justice to a 'beauty'. 'Beauty' can never be fully 'captured'. It can only 'move' by being 'seen' with the naked human eye never the eye of the camera for the camera no matter how perfected will never be able to 'capture' what the naked human eye feels when face to face with 'beauty'.
Erik, the reason why Japanese women are unshaven in porn doesn't have anything to do with the color of the labia. As a matter of fact, the labia cannot simply be shown, for Japanese Law forbids showing vaginas or penises in pornography. In Japanese porn, mainly addressed to Japanese men living in Japan, this parts are therefor censored (pixeled). It may be that you see the uncensored version in the United States, but we don't see them in Europe.
PEOPLE SERIOUSLY have a look at this hahaha: http://www.femininebeauty.info/fashion-model-cheekbones
Erik's view's on ugly vs, beautiful(ugly models vs beautiful women). It's HILARIOUS and truly shows how disturbed and obsessive his thoughts on feminity are.
I really liked this post. It's something that, as a woman, I find extremely useful, for I have very light and thin eyebrows and lashes, with pale blue eyes, and I think they make my eyes look less expressive and smaller. Your graphics will help me to know how to make up myself decently and still succeed to make them look bigger. Thank you for these kind of information, i really hope that helps me add feminity of my face.
By the way: I am shocked to see how three or two women who seem to have serious self-confidence issues insist on posting more and more off topic comments just trying to convince each other that people of their country/ethnicity are the most beautiful in the world.
I landed on this site because I was looking for advice on how to make myself look more feminine, as I consider myself an average looking woman (I don't have very common looks but I am not specially feminine/attractive) and I am not so confident about my physique. And I personally consider that if they were so happy about their own looks, they wouldn't be visiting this site so often and trying to convince people that they look good by talking. They would simply post a picture of themselves. Ok, you must be careful in the internet, but as long as your are dressed, I don't see what's the problem. Today, almost everybody who is employed as something better than waiter/cleaning lady has a picture of himself in the internet on the website of the company they work for or, in my case, on the website of the school where I teach. I mean, if i were as confident as they are, I wouldn't hesitate to post a picture of me and if I don't do it because I don't like my looks that much.
Well, just an opinion. I hope I didn't offend anyone.
It's fun how people in different countries actually have a different perception of feminity. I am Spanish (Spanish, from Spain, in Europe, not from some Spanish-speaking country in Latin-America), I am very tall (for a Spaniard, at least - 1'78, what is like 5 feet 10 or 11 I think), I am thin but not bony and I have blond hair and blue eyes. I have never ever felt that was an advantage for me in Spain when trying to attract men's attention.
On the one hand, I always think: Ok, I am special, only 10% of the Spanish population are blond with blue eyes (a little bit more in Northern Spain perhaps, where I live) and that should make me more attractive, but it doesn't. I see my male friends really prefer much more average looking girls, more petite and small-framed, let's say with light skin, medium brown hair and brown eyes. As there are virtually no foreigners where I live, even immigrant girls are more likely to have success among men, for instance bi-racial Brazilians (men are crazy about, even if they don't look that good). I really don't know what the problem is with me! Ok, I am tall, but males are usually taller than me anyway and despite of having blond hair and blue eyes I am not aware of having the "German" features some Spaniards say they find unattractive in women (strong jaw, strong cheekbones, "thin" eyes), much the opposite. When I ask male friends, they just say that I am not very feminine. Do you think that petite women are necessarily more feminine? My measures are actually close to 90-60-90 (supposedly perfect), but is it possible that they don't work in a woman my height? Do you find woman with very light eyebrows or eyelashes less attractive? I have the feeling that women with my hair and eye color who are models usually have darker eyebrows than me (maybe dyed?).
And do you find light/pale blue eyes more attractive? I have noticed that my brown and black-haired girlfriends with blue eyes have darker shades of blue, more "intensive" ones, that "pop-up" more than mine. Is there an explanation for that, by the way, or is it just random? Has that anything to do with melanin? can you give me some advice? Should I try some of those transparent contacts for light eyes that just "enhance" the color with a ring around the iris or something like that?
Thank you very much in advance for your opinions :-)
To all of you out there who think she has 'flab'. I hate to break this to you, but she does not. But then I guess you all like looking at crack whores.
Hi, I'm a gay man and I found this thread fascinating (and controversial). lol
As a gay man, I like my women to be feminine and my men to be masculine. Catwalk models do nothing for me. I don't think they're thin and boyish due to "aesthetic preferences" of gay designers. I think they're thin and boyish purely to show off the clothes. A good model is one who doesn't distract from the clothes. A really gorgeous feminine chick would take attention off the clothes due to her beauty. This could mean less revenue for the designer.
Victoria's Secret models? Ugh. They just look weird to me - tiny waists and big breasts. It's an odd combination and doesn't look natural.
I don't read a lot of straight porn. And if what Erik says about Playboy is true, now I know why. lol. Masculine women don't appeal to me. I'm sure many of these women were picked because they are Hugh's "type". I'm sure others were picked because they were happy to pose and highly sexed. The idea that androgen levels affect a woman's sex drive makes a lot of sense to me.
I agree feminine women (soft faces, proportional, slim but not skinny, shorter) are the most attractive. I don't like bulimic Barbies.
I don't think gay men "hate" women. That is a bizarre accusation to make. I think most gay men are indifferent to women, and have a distinct preference for men and/or masculine features. Just because I love apples, that doesn't mean i hate oranges. In the same way, just because a gay man desires men, doesn't mean he has anything against women. He simply has a preference (and may have no feelings at all, either positive or negative, toward women and feminine features).
Erik certainly isn't racist or sexist. I think his theory is very interesting and credible.
Last but not least, would heterosexual women find masculinised women "sexy" in that heterosexual women are attracted to men and masculinity? That would be an interesting proposition. As a gay man, of course I think masculinity is "sexy". But I understand if straight males don't agree and would prefer more feminine women in Playboy.
Hi I'm a retard and i love to suck 8=====D
dsws: Interesting thought experiment, and you have arrived at the correct winning strategy.
For the benefit of the readers, it is worthwhile to explain type I and type II errors in your experiment. Type I error corresponds to more relaxed criteria of who is female, thus misclassifying some males as female. Type II error corresponds to stricter criteria of who is female, thus failing to classify some females as female. If you lower one type of error, you increase the other. Obviously, in your thought experiment, the assessment of sex is not based on genitals, but on secondary sexual characteristics.
Something like your thought experiment has been done on fruit flies and the winning strategy is what you figured. One population of fruit flies was bred to exaggerate the differences between males and females and the other bred more normally or bred to reduce the male-female difference. The population bred to exaggerate male-female differences ended up with more masculine males and more feminine females, on average, but it also had lower reproductive success. What happened? The problem was that hyperfeminine females would often give birth to males with feminine characteristics and hypermasculine males would often give birth to females with masculine characteristics—there is no natural way to deal with this issue, which is technically referred to as sexually antagonistic selection. Transmitting very feminine characteristics to males, which is inevitable in some cases, and transmitting very masculine characteristics to females, which is also inevitable sometimes, does not help with reproductive success. There you had it: lowered average reproductive success. Now, it was a matter of speculation that given chance mutations and sufficient time (many more generations into the future), the population with more exaggerated males and females could end up with reproductive success comparable to the other populations.
The Gods and Goddesses seem to have performed such experiments on humans. On the one hand you have East Asians, the standard/average humans, and on the other you have a tenth as many Northern Europeans with absolutely more numerous impressive examples of manhood, womanhood, beauty, genius, ability, achievement, valor, etc.—the manhood that lay waste other populations in its path would sometimes turn on each other; the choice that afforded one to seek the more beautiful as mate also meant that some of the less beautiful, though fertile, would die childless; an ordinary, martial life with parenthood would sometimes be passed or lost in the pursuit of exploration and achievement,... and, the numbers did not increase to the same extent.
This brings us to the motives behind this site. Is the person behind this site content with the ordinary and mundane or is he interested in the extraordinary, and is he content with being an observer or does he like to intervene, be an active participant?
Thought experiment:
Suppose you're placed in the following contest by some magical being. A hundred contestants are transported back in time, to a point where there were one million hominids on earth. Into that population, a hundred thousand genetically modified individuals are to be introduced, scattered around the world. Each contestant chooses some parameters for a thousand of these. Genetic markers are placed in the "junk DNA" along with each contestant's modifications. The contestants are then transported forward to that timeline's equivalent of the present, and the markers are measured. Finally the contestants are magically zapped back into our own timeline, and those whose markers were most abundant win fabulous prizes.
You've made almost all your decisions. Your hominids are as genetically fit as you can make them when it comes to being clever, thrifty, sociable, and so on. But there are two parameters left, having to do with heterosexual male preferences. There are a number of physical features your hominids are genetically primed to recognize, that correlate with whether a fellow-hominid is male or female. These same features also correlate with strength, disease resistance, risk of dying in childbirth, and numerous other aspects of genetic fitness. Your hominids have two modules in their brains. The first recognizes whether a prospective mate is female, and blocks sexual interest if it can't tell. The second module interfaces with all the rest of the brain systems, and evaluates how desirable an identified female is on all other criteria.
One of your parameters is how stringent the first system should be. It will always have some type 1 errors and some of type 2, but not a huge number of either. After all, these hominids have a bunch of sex-correlated traits to look at, and plenty of brain power with which to make sense of them. Still, the number of errors won't be absolutely zero. It will occasionally send your straight-male hominids mistakenly chasing after other males. They'll waste some time, and sometimes suffer some unpleasant responses, sometimes not. It will also sometimes erroneously tell them to ignore a fertile female, and they'll miss a potential opportunity to breed.
The other parameter is how redundant the second system should be with the first. Is there an evolutionary gain from preferring highly-feminine females over those who score high on other criteria? Or should the second module just take for granted that the first one did its job?
I think it's self-evident that the winning contestant will be one who chooses moderately low stringency and slightly *negative* redundancy. If one of your hominids starts taking an interest in another male, it will soon get enough information that module 1 will flip-flop and tell him to break off the pursuit. It won't be instantaneous. There will be some lost opportunities during that little bit of wasted time. On the other hand, the very best opportunities to reproduce will be the ones where he can get a high-fitness mate without having to deal with a lot of competitors. Those will be the cases where the competitors' module 1 were too stringent, and erroneously rejected a fertile female.
Hominids are pretty bright, so module 2 would have enough processing power to take the male's own status into account. A very high-status male doesn't much care how many competitors there are: he's going to win anyway. So the redundancy would tend toward zero with high status. A very low-status male doesn't have much hope if there are any competitors, so a module 2 with high negative correlation would let him focus his efforts on the best shot at finding a female he can reproduce with. But there's never any appreciable advantage to positive correlation, because redundancy is pointless. There's no reason to opt for a less-fit mate just to reconfirm the obvious fact that she's female.
We don't know there's anything like a module 1 and module 2 in the real-world human brain. But we don't know there isn't, either. And even if the process isn't structured that way, similar considerations may apply.
It also fits with my personal experience. A woman has to be unambiguously recognizable as female to be attractive. Beyond that, going toward hyper-feminine features doesn't do anything more for me. Once there's no question about the fact that she's female, my subconscious really seems to have moved on to questions like whether she's interested in me, whether she's of an appropriate age, and so on.
Tayler, I really don't think the promoter of this page can be accused of racism. The purposes of this page are clarified by the author. He is probably an American of Northern European descent who finds Northern Europeans more appealing and analyzes them because their looks are overrepresented among high fashion models. That's a fact. He finds that ethnicity has to be considered when talking beauty, for most people find other people of their own ethnicity more appealing (that's a fact too - otherwise we wouldn't have so many ethnicities on the planet right now). And he defends that ethnicity is important when identifying feminity in women of different races because they have different facial and body measures. Which is a fact too.
I am not a Northern European and I don't feel offended by this site. It's true that some of the things said here seem to me very specific of American society to me, like women getting cosmetic surgery to have a double lid or such things. I suppose that's normal in a society where the leading classes have this kind of look. In Spain, where I come from, many women get cosmetic surgery to make their naturally rounded eyes look "Asian" (Spaniards may have "too" rounded eyes compared to other Europeans, so rounded eyes are not valuable because everybody has them), or to make their lips look African or they try to tan whatever it takes if they have very light skin. But I suppose those are just current trends influenced by fashion and those weren't beauty standards here 100 years ago.
But the point of this site is to discriminate feminine beauty from non-feminine standards promoted by high fashion designers. And I don't see what's wrong about that.
I don't see anything wrong either in showing pictures of real African women to talk about beauty standards. I think it's much more racist promoting Beyonce Knowles or Rihanna or Hale Berry as beauty standards and telling black women they have to look like them, because these women are only partly African. The same goes for Naomi Campbell, who may look a little bit darker, but she was born to a biracial mother and an Asian father. In Spain there are many real African immigrants from Nigeria or Senegal and they look much more like the pictures on this site than like those (African)-American beauties.
I don't know your ethnicity, but I am a West-Mediterranean or Atlanto-Mediterranean and I think it's natural that I feel more attracted to men from my own ethnicity and it happens to be so. Sometimes, I also find men of other races or ethnicities attractive, but not so often. It probably happens the same to you and it happens to Erik too. I wouldn't call that racism. Sure there are people commenting on this site who are racist or at least obsessed with arguing that women from their own countries are the most beautiful, but I don't think the purpose of this site is comparing different races (that would be pointless), but comparing (Northern-) European women among them to see what makes them more or less feminine. Non feminine traits seem to dominate high fashion catwalks and Erik offers an alternative to them, that is more feminine models. Is that so bad?
About porn stars... What does beauty have to do with cooking? And anyway, I suppose porn stars have to cook their own meals when they come home, just like prostitutes or teachers or physicians.
You are such a bunch of sick disgusting racists. Probably some ugly ass skinheads. You can't post a picture of a unattractive middle aged black women who happens to be frowning and put her next to a picture of a beautiful white women. There are beautiful black women and ugly white women, and no those black women don't ahve to be mixed there are beautiful women who are all blacked. I would say mixed in general is attractive, doesn't have to be mixed with European per se. Because of colonialism Europeans have gone out and mixed with a lot of people, but I have seen mixed race people of many backgrounds who are gorgeous as well as non mixed people. You all are so full of shit it amazes me. Are tall blondes from Sweden attractive sure many of them are but there are other attractive women in the world too. You say you are fighting the fashion industries views of beauty and yet you actually seem to agree with them 95 percent. And different people have different preferences in looks and they are not all wrong for disagreeing with the sig heiling morons who run this site. I also love how you're examples of attractive woman mostly come from porn, porn star is really your ideal of femininity grow up and remember porn stars can't cook worth a damn probably can't even operate a microwave. It cracks me up that at the end of the day you white pride fools like to sit around beating off to exploited white girls being filmed by a bunch of Jewish pornographers.
Erik:
Thank you very much for your explanations. I didn't answer to this post until today because I wanted to try some of your advice (or the advice in your page) before. I went to a wedding yesterday and I thought it would be the perfect excuse for some decent changes: I asked my esthetician for some small brown lash extensions and ask her to dye my eyebrows a little bit darker (light brown). It really worked! At the wedding, I got compliments from old friends and some people I meet every week, but no one realized what I had done exactly. They all agreed thought that I looked "healthier" than usually (not so pale, I suppose) and that my eyes already looked more blue (so I definitely won't try the contact lenses). The right dress and flats did the rest!
I find your comment on prostitution very interesting. Prostitution has never been illegal in Spain, so I had never given it a second thought, but it is a fact than since about 2000 all prostitutes have become immigrants and that made the prices sink so much that it no longer payed out for locals, who were mostly drug-addicts that made this to buy drugs. The only locals who still work as prostitutes are some so called "high-class escorts" (if such a thing can possibly exist) who insert their adverts in newspapers highlighting that they are Spaniards and college students. In the place where I live (no big cities, not many immigrants) prostitution exists but is not a big issue. But I imagine that what you say much be more acute in big cities and more touristic regions.
I try not to overvalue the role of prostitution here. I suppose that the fact that it's not forbidden makes it less interesting somehow to young men. Most men talk about it like something that must exist because there are unattractive or old men that cannot find a woman who would sleep with them and they "need to pay". I would say Spaniards don't have a very high opinion of men who pay prostitutes ("puteros") and these are seen somehow as losers among young people (in the "old good times" paying a prostitute was tolerated because men wouldn't sleep with their fiancee until they were married - Spaniards used to be very catholic - and that was the only legal way an unmarried man could have sex). On the other hand, it's clear that there are always more young Latin-American or Rumanian girls here in Asturias who marry (usually older or not so attractive) Spanish men that they have barely met and I am sure in some cases that could be described as almost socially accepted prostitution.
Anyway, that was not the point of my post! I just wanted to thank you for the refreshing ideas on your site and I wish some other women focused on that too - almost everything you post could have a practical application for women who are willing to improve their feminity and I can already talk about my small success (a lot of compliments and the numbers of two attractive men who would like to date me ;-)).
Don't listen to the haters and the race obsessed their just Nazis and everyone hates Nazis. I don't see whats wrong with having a round face. You don't look Gypsy to me at all. Gypsy people tend to be much shorter and stockier and of course darker skinned than you but there is nothing wrong with being Gypsy(I am and am proud of it.) Lots of Eastern European people have Asian blood I suppose but that is also not a bad thing. Maybe you can't make it in modeling I don't know I am so not an expert on that. Most of the people in the fashion world are superficial yes and they are often gay, I am not anti gay just not sure why they should be the judges of female beauty seeings as how they are neither women nor interested in women. But on a purely superficial level of my own as a man I think you are attractive, you're hot and I am sure you have noticed a lot of men think so. And I bet you have a sexy accent too lol, nobody thinks they have an accent but everyone does to people from another country. . I guess I don't understand the dream of wanting to be a model, so I don't see it as a big disappointment. Its understandable to want to be attractive looking but you can totally do that and have an awesome career of some kind. Just being a model idk its like just being a decoration.
I commented previously on the need to look to 1950s models for examples of feminine beauty; in particular, I drew attention to the fact that Playboy once contained some decent material.
Alizee Jacotey is one of many superior examples of feminine beauty that may have been overlooked by this site. Her dance routines exhibit some of the most enthralling exploitation of an optimal waste-to-hip ration ever accomplished. There is no doubt if my mind that her facial structure is beautifully ultra-feminine, although I fear that Erik will be able to refute my view. If there is any dispute about whether her breasts are real, it should be noted that a nude video of her was once available on youtube that proves them real. Let us not let her poor quality music distract us from the beauty she has displayed to the world.
Evidence:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mn6NrWsaZU8&feature=related
I dont think erik gets my train of thought. its ok,he's not a scientist :) one must look at people from a biological perspective to understand how genetics influence a persons appearance. it has evertyhing to do with it. see, asian women, are smaller, more gentle in build....therefore appear thiner..nordic women are known for being tall and strong in build. its common sense, why slavs tend to be thiner looking. they're just more petite. every race has its perks! every subrace. we all wish we had what we dont have
I agree. I study human genetics, and if anybody is interested, there is a documantary called "Journey of Man" its a study done by doctor Spencer Wells, and in fact it was russian people who gave birth to the northerners, hence,such western nations like the british, germans and danish, are a product of slavs migration to the west, seperating themselves further from darker groups, like hindus,middle easterns and mongolians. the closer to the middle east and asia, the more exotic features, the further away, the more white. notice, most slavs dont turn red in the sun, they have a slightly olive skin tone, not to mention south slavs. and the famous cheekbones, u can deny that. almost every girl in eastern europe has high cheekbones, its like a trade mark. the gene polalso indicated that slavs have mixed background.
Apollyon, the first Slavic tribes in the world, around russia/ukraine/belarus were all blonde and blue eyed( or some type of light features) FYI. No one is copying North europeans because even if Eastern European girls are blonde blue eyed their features are still slavic. Natasha Poly, Sasha Pivovarova Natalya Vodianova etc. are prime examples.
Eastern European woman are popular in the fashion industry because of their unique features, that seem exotic/new/fresh to western europe, america, etc. All this talk of poor or cheap are excuses coming from insecure and jealous woman that wish they had an ounce of eastern european looks. It's very sad.
http://www.girlfolio.com/natalie.html
http://peachyforum.com/t/natalie-t-onlytease-231283.aspx
http://www.facebook.com/NatalieTaylorOfficial
Just wanted to say.... you jammy bastard lol :)
Cecilia: So you think that posting pictures of Frida Gustavsson refutes any significant argument offered by this site? In her we see an individual who does not look like an adolescent boy and, at 17, is approaching old age for a high-fashion model. She will look more feminine as she matures. She is not going to be a top high-fashion model.
A number of descriptors you have used—classy, unique, elegant, symmetric—have nothing to do with masculinity-femininity. The relationship between slenderness and femininity is not straightforward; you can find both feminine and non-feminine slender women. And, richness of lips is not necessarily a feminine characteristic. Northern Europeans such as Swedes, such as your example, often have naturally fleshier lips compared to the generally thinner lips of many European populations; this is an ethnic feature that has nothing to do with femininity.
The one feature you have attempted to justify is the thinness of high-fashion models. I have posted a large number of pictures of attractive slender women who do not look anything like adolescent boys and would never make it in the high-fashion industry. You have attempted to account for the androgyny by saying that it adds a cool touch to the femininity of the models, which is a nonsense statement. And, you have completely ignored the age preferences of the dominant fashion designers—they prefer to use teenage girls (younger than late teens) as opposed to young adult women to market clothes to adult women, even if they are middle aged or older. You cannot bring yourself to admit to the obvious explanation—that the dominant fashion designers prefer to have their female models look like boys in their early adolescence—and come up with poorer arguments that, at best, can account for only some observations.
Any argument about clothes looking better on very thin models is readily refuted by showing pictures of feminine women who are slender or have a healthy body weight; just show examples such as those of these 9 models in Table 2 here to people and ask their opinion: http://www.femininebeauty.info/skinny-fashion-models (none of these 9 feminine models have fat legs and ankles, a big head, a big backside or the face of a 6-year-old)
What sense does it make to market clothes meant for women by using models that do not look much woman-like? If clothes hangars are better able to display clothes, do people buy clothes to wear them or hang them on clothes hangars in their closet?
And, being well-dressed is a very important aspect of sex appeal in social settings. So thinking that fashion is not about sex is misguided; it is in part, a part that is a big component.
Your other comment was on the page on the cheekbones comparison, but it does not compare “ugly models” with “beautiful women”; it exaggerates the differences between the cheekbones of high-fashion models and more typical cheekbones; the exaggeration helps clarify the differences.
Maria: Since the body and face, as they are, are being considered, it is incorrect to say that different countries have different perceptions of femininity; do not be misled by ignorant or off-topic discussions by people not affiliated with this site, which is everyone except me.
Hair and eye color will not necessarily trump overall looks when it comes to appealing to men. With blond hair and blue eyes, you will be at an advantage in southern Spain or southern Italy, even compared to more feminine women, but given that you live in Northern Spain, the coloring may not be an advantage that is strong enough to overcome not being feminine enough overall, assuming this is the case.
Your height should not be an issue, as you can read about here: http://www.femininebeauty.info/height-and-appeal-of-women
What may be an issue is that you are living in a country where prostitution is widely accessible to men, a scenario that is bad for women in general. In this scenario, a woman who is not so attractive and is unwilling to be lose with her sexuality is going to lose men to more easily available women whom they are aroused by, the minimum attractiveness requirements of which are much lower than the women men fantasize about—what is the point in courting a woman who is “Stuck up” and is not attractive enough to make up for the effort?
Most prostitutes in Spain are immigrants, which could partly account for your observation regarding immigrant women. Then, mixed ancestry people are presumably also disproportionately inclined toward promiscuity—a consequence of people with bipolar disorder II being more likely to develop a romantic relationship with and have a child with someone of a different geographic population; this mental illness is more often accompanied by abnormal sexuality and has genetic correlates—which could account for your observation that the unattractive mixed-ancestry women are more successful with men.
I would definitely advise you to darken your eyebrows and eyelashes to make your face more attractive and leave the scalp hair at its natural light color. Here are some relevant articles on why darkening the eye lining helps: http://www.femininebeauty.info/makeup-benefits
Regarding eye color, playing around with colored contacts is your choice. Contacts tend to redden the white of the eye and are not worth it if this happens.
Blue eyes tend to come in different shades. The lighter blue shades correspond to lesser amounts of melanin in the front of the iris, which is none in the extreme.
Markus: The age of the internet started years ago, and it is better in Japan. Uncensored Japanese pornography has been widely available to the Japanese, via the internet, for years. Where is the demand to see more of the labia unencumbered by pubic hair? How many are fans of blackened folds or lining?
#155 | link | Submitted by Ekaterina on Wed, 03/04/2009 - 19:02.
''...but in all honesty let's see your face. ''
''You see, Emily...you're too scared to post your own picture because you realize that you're not too great yourself, '
She's good at 'talking' her beauty but never 'showing' it which is ironic considering the number of photos of every other nordic women shes spammed the website with when she could have simply posted one of her own to make her point. It would not surprise me if the real reason she was not posting her pictures was because she did not truly hold a 'very high' opinion of her 'individual looks' as opposed to the 'high' opinion she appears to have of her ethnic group looks. She knows beauty is not an 'ethnic group'.
''lighting plays a huge part in how a person looks''
Northern europeans/europeans look good in 'image' 'photos'. Its not surprising 'image' is very central to european culture and why europeans take 'image' so far for it is a reflection of the 'global' admiration for there fine/straight noses. Magazines, television, billboards, newspapers, posters, catwalks, internet etc.... Nearly everything european, the core of european culture is associated with 'image' which could explain her 'endless' spamming of pictures.
Beauty though is MORE THAN just an 'image'. Looking good in 'image' is only one part of beauty and not the totality of it.
The camera could never do justice to a 'beauty'. 'Beauty' can never be fully 'captured'. It can only 'move' by being 'seen' with the naked human eye never the eye of the camera for the camera no matter how perfected will never be able to 'capture' what the naked human eye feels when face to face with 'beauty'.
''You're a joke on a stick, Emily. ''
Going by some of her comments that she sure is.
Erik, the reason why Japanese women are unshaven in porn doesn't have anything to do with the color of the labia. As a matter of fact, the labia cannot simply be shown, for Japanese Law forbids showing vaginas or penises in pornography. In Japanese porn, mainly addressed to Japanese men living in Japan, this parts are therefor censored (pixeled). It may be that you see the uncensored version in the United States, but we don't see them in Europe.
PEOPLE SERIOUSLY have a look at this hahaha: http://www.femininebeauty.info/fashion-model-cheekbones
Erik's view's on ugly vs, beautiful(ugly models vs beautiful women). It's HILARIOUS and truly shows how disturbed and obsessive his thoughts on feminity are.
Hello Erik!
I really liked this post. It's something that, as a woman, I find extremely useful, for I have very light and thin eyebrows and lashes, with pale blue eyes, and I think they make my eyes look less expressive and smaller. Your graphics will help me to know how to make up myself decently and still succeed to make them look bigger. Thank you for these kind of information, i really hope that helps me add feminity of my face.
By the way: I am shocked to see how three or two women who seem to have serious self-confidence issues insist on posting more and more off topic comments just trying to convince each other that people of their country/ethnicity are the most beautiful in the world.
I landed on this site because I was looking for advice on how to make myself look more feminine, as I consider myself an average looking woman (I don't have very common looks but I am not specially feminine/attractive) and I am not so confident about my physique. And I personally consider that if they were so happy about their own looks, they wouldn't be visiting this site so often and trying to convince people that they look good by talking. They would simply post a picture of themselves. Ok, you must be careful in the internet, but as long as your are dressed, I don't see what's the problem. Today, almost everybody who is employed as something better than waiter/cleaning lady has a picture of himself in the internet on the website of the company they work for or, in my case, on the website of the school where I teach. I mean, if i were as confident as they are, I wouldn't hesitate to post a picture of me and if I don't do it because I don't like my looks that much.
Well, just an opinion. I hope I didn't offend anyone.
It's fun how people in different countries actually have a different perception of feminity. I am Spanish (Spanish, from Spain, in Europe, not from some Spanish-speaking country in Latin-America), I am very tall (for a Spaniard, at least - 1'78, what is like 5 feet 10 or 11 I think), I am thin but not bony and I have blond hair and blue eyes. I have never ever felt that was an advantage for me in Spain when trying to attract men's attention.
On the one hand, I always think: Ok, I am special, only 10% of the Spanish population are blond with blue eyes (a little bit more in Northern Spain perhaps, where I live) and that should make me more attractive, but it doesn't. I see my male friends really prefer much more average looking girls, more petite and small-framed, let's say with light skin, medium brown hair and brown eyes. As there are virtually no foreigners where I live, even immigrant girls are more likely to have success among men, for instance bi-racial Brazilians (men are crazy about, even if they don't look that good). I really don't know what the problem is with me! Ok, I am tall, but males are usually taller than me anyway and despite of having blond hair and blue eyes I am not aware of having the "German" features some Spaniards say they find unattractive in women (strong jaw, strong cheekbones, "thin" eyes), much the opposite. When I ask male friends, they just say that I am not very feminine. Do you think that petite women are necessarily more feminine? My measures are actually close to 90-60-90 (supposedly perfect), but is it possible that they don't work in a woman my height? Do you find woman with very light eyebrows or eyelashes less attractive? I have the feeling that women with my hair and eye color who are models usually have darker eyebrows than me (maybe dyed?).
And do you find light/pale blue eyes more attractive? I have noticed that my brown and black-haired girlfriends with blue eyes have darker shades of blue, more "intensive" ones, that "pop-up" more than mine. Is there an explanation for that, by the way, or is it just random? Has that anything to do with melanin? can you give me some advice? Should I try some of those transparent contacts for light eyes that just "enhance" the color with a ring around the iris or something like that?
Thank you very much in advance for your opinions :-)
Having trouble with my posts, read the last one.
Pages