Reading some of Emily's posts/claims are funny, because Indians have much more smaller noses than comparatively bigger-nosed Swedes, the average Indian nose height/size assessed by anthro. studies ranges 41-45.6 mm (for women) and average Swedish/European nose height/size is 48-53 mm (for women). So Emily/Brazilian/Visitor assuming, "since all browns are the same let's lump Indians and Arabs" and incorrectly name the former as big and hooked nose. Well, now, what does that make Swedes/Europeans?
Indians also tend to have a more higher nose inclination/nasolabial angle than Europeans and Swedes, which means a more upturned nose. Not a hooked or drooping one like Middle-Easterners, nor a straight one like Europeans/Swedes. Though Indians also have broader noses than Swedes, giving them a mesorrhine index. Indians generally have softer/blunter less pointy/projected noses than Europeans and Swedes, as well. We Indians are more generally accused and insulted as being "pig-nosed," "short-nosed," "flat-nosed" in Greater South Asia and the Middle East, so seeing her calling us the opposite was actually something new and refreshing. Our general nose shapes, in order of frequency in India: upturned/concave (tie); straight; gently hooked a la Aishwarya in some in the south. And the only big, hooked nosed people are Muslims and/or Kashmiris of any religion.
Indians generally have more narrower faces (120-130mm for both the sexes) than Europeans/Swedes (130-140mm for both sexes) so the broad faced claim is one again laughable and imaginary. OTOH, funnily in some of the photos Emily posts the Indian men (and some women when she actually posted group shots, rather than repeating those same 5 again) tend to have the same size or smaller noses than Swedish women she posts, and just as or more feminine faces than them, too! Since, Emily liked to post Borrebies and Brunns rather than Halstatt Nordids which most Swedes are (I can confirm this through my visit there). The posts of Indian women's photos (she only had about 5/6 of them) are repeated A LOT since she can't find many Indian women with big noses unlike Swedes which are far more easily found, unfortunately. Some of "Indian women" she posted weren't Indian, but Pakistani and Middle-Eastern (yes, there is a HUGE difference), which I know since those photos were stolen from peoples' facebooks and anthropological forums I used to frequent. It's so sad to see a woman so insecure. I'm glad she doesn't post anymore here on this site, maybe she found some sanity and peace. OTOH, Swedes obviously do have much longer and oval faces than Indians, which I am glad about. Since many Swedes and Europeans strike me as overtly longfaced (i.e. horsefaced). This perception is based on comparing what I am used to seeing with Indians, so they may not be very "horsey" to most others. I am happy Indians have much shorter/smaller faces which tend to heartshaped, than oval. And that we have much bigger eyes than them, too. Those are my preferences.
But Erik why didn't you correct her for mistakes and misrepresentations in anthropology? You are not an idiot, a troll, you have a fair grip of reality, and as far as I know, haven't made any anthropologically fallacious remarks. Her calling Eastern European women having hooked noses when they have more likely more upturned noses than Swedes, and her constant fallacious remarks on Indian features didn't strike you as needing correction? You don't have much time, of course, but Emily repeated her rubbish time and time again (apparently, even Italians and Mixed Latinas have big, hooked noses!?) and you couldn't take one minute to correct her? Since you could for other posters.
You're not give this reply, neither do I want one. But I hope you read it.
You could take this site a cut above others by simply having low tolerance for people who troll and/or are willingly misinformed. You have your preferences which seem strongly geared towards Nordic women and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that, but maybe you should stop patronising fallacious, racist nonsense or trolls on your site. Not only does it bring the site quality down, but brings your image down bit by bit. It made me quite angry and upset to read those comments and I later acted in a reactionary manner in my comments on this site, which I regret.
Most Indian women have smaller noses than their Bollywood counterparts, so I find your posts funny. Most Indian actresses are also fully Indian. Oh, and Indians have smaller noses than Europeans, again. But whatever helps you sleep at night.
Emily,
Why do you always post single-person pictures of Swedish models (most of them come from fashionmodeldirectory.com) rather than group pictures of non-model Swedish women like you do with east Asians? Are you insecure the way most Swedish women look like? hotswedishchicks.com doesn't exactly have the representative sample. I've been to Sweden and I can't I was impressed...
I know right, Brazilian/Emily! Indians totally surpass Arabs and Jews in that separtment all while having much more smaller, upturned noses than Europeans and Swedes as proven by every anthropological study known to man! Man, Swedes and Europeans must have huge, big noses! You are known for the in India along with Arabs!
I've read through the FAQ section of the website and now I have a clear comprehension of why ethnicities other than white are not featured (I was unaware of this section). Please disregard my question in the last comment I made.
To all the but heads claiming that romanian women are ugly, look at some romanian women pictures on Matrimoniale Romania, one of the biggest romanian dating sites.
looks like sophia jannok, a sammi-lappi singer.why don't you post a picture of a true caucasian women? we all know they don't have a small nose and wide set eyes..
come on stop lying yourself. most of women from domei are russian or kazakh women. they look like eurasian people. I living in europe and I know how majority of white women look like. they don't have such a flare nasal and small eyes like this.
original scandinavian women have very robust facial features, strong jaw-line and large face.
i am a bit concerned over the arguments made over this. i agree on all terms that there shouldn't be one-sidedness to certain magazines or the fashion world as it appears, but everything depends on the time and place. feminity holds much beauty but so does masculinity. that is equivalent to saying "men with feminine features" should not get publicity and that they are not desireable. unless the rules don't apply to guys, then that it unfair to women. in reality, holding these preferences just creates an equal amount of inequality in the world. women should be able to have their magazines, just as homosexuals and lilewise, your fellow men. do not worry! don't hold too much frustrations for the fact that in reality, you're seeing what you do not like to see. you have the power to choose. just don't give too much attention to what you don't like. eric is just being honest in his pov. this one-sidedness from all of these arguments has got to go! unless equality is of little or zero importance, carry on.
No one likes a chauvinistic pig. I have small breasts and, quite frankly, I see nothing wrong with them. If you don't like that, so be it because I will never change them for pigs like you.
Erik: How come you haven't posted woman of different ethnicities other than Caucasian in your attractive women section? Don't get me wrong, the majority of the white women that you have posted are breath taking, but don't you think it would be fair if you posted feminine women of different ethnicites in your section? There would be a fair representation of all women if different races were posted.
This is an EXCELLENT and INFORMATIVE site...anyone with an intellect can see that. Thank you for spending the time and effort to put it together. It really makes so much sense and I know you are actually helping women raise their self esteem, not lower it. Kudos to you whereever you are!!
Matters: A jaw is more or less regressed compared to something, and unless this something is specified, the question cannot be answered, but the question is not important in that there are many factors aside from masculinity-femininity that affect jaw protrusion. Hence, whereas feminization corresponds to more shape-wise protruding jaws (side view), a more feminine woman could have a less protruding jaw shape. An example would be a short (hence small-skulled) and feminine woman having a less regressed jaw shape than a tall and less feminine woman (because with larger skull sizes, the jaw shape becomes more protruding). Another example would involve genetics unrelated to overall size and masculinity-femininity that are responsible for both individual and ethnic variation in jaw protrusion.
She may not be the most glamorous woman in the gallery, but I think she's among the most appealing nonetheless. Such a sweet, honest face - irresistible!
Erik, correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Amy have a regressed jawline? Judging from her pictures, it looks like she does. I suppose then, that it is possible for women that are otherwise feminine to have regressed jaws?
Eastern European Gal: I do not believe that I have equated uniqueness to masculinization. Whereas culture shapes/influences preferences, where does it come from? Culture is not free from biological influences. Adriana Lima does stand out with her atypical looks among fashion models, but when it comes to femininity, she did not depart very greatly from high-fashion models in general when she was discovered.
Mary: Heidi Montag ended up looking more feminine after her surgeries. Some of it went bad, but it was not the surgery itself but the choice of shape change. I find her better looking than Tori Spelling and most porn stars.
Whether posting pictures of nude women—where the women have posed nude voluntarily, with the understanding that the pictures will be accessible to the public—is disrespectful toward women is a debatable issue. I do not believe that this activity is disrespectful toward women.
The nudity within this site does create a problem when it comes to persuasion or even getting some people to read the arguments. Whereas I have cleaned up this site a little and will continue in this manner, a process that is time consuming and slow, I think this site is beyond salvaging with respect to getting a variety of people who would not presently read the arguments here to read it. This is because nudity is not the only issue. This site is filled with “homophobic” and “racist” content” that would scare or repel many people. I have been meaning to come up with a new site that is without the negatives of this site, which is a better idea than attempting to clean up this site for most people, and may do it someday.
I have not argued anything so simple as “women go for the most wealthiest men that can provide and that men go for the most feminine/fertile looking and prettiest that can be best child raiser and/or arm candy.” If one discusses how important a man’s financial status is to his dating or mate value then this does not mean that this is the only factor that counts. The same argument applies to a discussion of women’s attractiveness.
John K.: This is a very belated reply. In your first comment (Tue, 04/14/2009 - 03:38), you showed a picture of a woman and asked why I have called her masculine or why is she not feminine. I never called her masculine. I posted her picture here to illustrate that wider faces are not necessarily more feminine; how the width is achieved is important. The woman in question does not have low-placed cheekbones. The arch of her cheekbones (upper-side region) is prominent and the cheekbones are nowhere as low as in the computer-outline of a very feminine face.
One of your comments (Tue, 04/14/2009 - 03:47) showed the picture of a woman from the feminine and attractive woman section of this site. There is no such section. The referenced section is what I call the attractive woman section and does not exclusively focus on feminine women. The model you took specifically appears on a page that is marked as featuring somewhat masculinized women.
You referenced the effeminate Kaulitz brothers and said that girls worldwide swooning over them refutes my “whole theory that masculinity makes men attractive and femininty women attractive,” noting that there is much more to the equation. The Kaulitz brothers have stardom to overcompensate their effeminacy. Their example would invalidate my argument if I maintained that masculinity-femininity is the be all and end all of appeal, but if you read around you will come across me mentioning many factors apart from masculinity-femininity that influence physical attractiveness. Then there are factors influencing appeal that do not involve physical appearance. In the case of men, I have never portrayed a simplistic masculine-appearance-in-men-equates-to-attractiveness argument (see this).
You posted pictures of Scarlett Johansson and wondered why I am not a fan of hers. She is undoubtedly feminine, but I do not like her face.
Nightingale: I said about the composite, “the composite is also somewhat masculinized compared to many feminine women out there (some examples here….” In other words, I talked about “more masculine than,” not “masculine, period.” Compare the composite with the women featured at the link and you will see what I am referring to (note lip width, chin width and squaring, etc.).
Reading some of Emily's posts/claims are funny, because Indians have much more smaller noses than comparatively bigger-nosed Swedes, the average Indian nose height/size assessed by anthro. studies ranges 41-45.6 mm (for women) and average Swedish/European nose height/size is 48-53 mm (for women). So Emily/Brazilian/Visitor assuming, "since all browns are the same let's lump Indians and Arabs" and incorrectly name the former as big and hooked nose. Well, now, what does that make Swedes/Europeans?
Indians also tend to have a more higher nose inclination/nasolabial angle than Europeans and Swedes, which means a more upturned nose. Not a hooked or drooping one like Middle-Easterners, nor a straight one like Europeans/Swedes. Though Indians also have broader noses than Swedes, giving them a mesorrhine index. Indians generally have softer/blunter less pointy/projected noses than Europeans and Swedes, as well. We Indians are more generally accused and insulted as being "pig-nosed," "short-nosed," "flat-nosed" in Greater South Asia and the Middle East, so seeing her calling us the opposite was actually something new and refreshing. Our general nose shapes, in order of frequency in India: upturned/concave (tie); straight; gently hooked a la Aishwarya in some in the south. And the only big, hooked nosed people are Muslims and/or Kashmiris of any religion.
Indians generally have more narrower faces (120-130mm for both the sexes) than Europeans/Swedes (130-140mm for both sexes) so the broad faced claim is one again laughable and imaginary. OTOH, funnily in some of the photos Emily posts the Indian men (and some women when she actually posted group shots, rather than repeating those same 5 again) tend to have the same size or smaller noses than Swedish women she posts, and just as or more feminine faces than them, too! Since, Emily liked to post Borrebies and Brunns rather than Halstatt Nordids which most Swedes are (I can confirm this through my visit there). The posts of Indian women's photos (she only had about 5/6 of them) are repeated A LOT since she can't find many Indian women with big noses unlike Swedes which are far more easily found, unfortunately. Some of "Indian women" she posted weren't Indian, but Pakistani and Middle-Eastern (yes, there is a HUGE difference), which I know since those photos were stolen from peoples' facebooks and anthropological forums I used to frequent. It's so sad to see a woman so insecure. I'm glad she doesn't post anymore here on this site, maybe she found some sanity and peace. OTOH, Swedes obviously do have much longer and oval faces than Indians, which I am glad about. Since many Swedes and Europeans strike me as overtly longfaced (i.e. horsefaced). This perception is based on comparing what I am used to seeing with Indians, so they may not be very "horsey" to most others. I am happy Indians have much shorter/smaller faces which tend to heartshaped, than oval. And that we have much bigger eyes than them, too. Those are my preferences.
But Erik why didn't you correct her for mistakes and misrepresentations in anthropology? You are not an idiot, a troll, you have a fair grip of reality, and as far as I know, haven't made any anthropologically fallacious remarks. Her calling Eastern European women having hooked noses when they have more likely more upturned noses than Swedes, and her constant fallacious remarks on Indian features didn't strike you as needing correction? You don't have much time, of course, but Emily repeated her rubbish time and time again (apparently, even Italians and Mixed Latinas have big, hooked noses!?) and you couldn't take one minute to correct her? Since you could for other posters.
You're not give this reply, neither do I want one. But I hope you read it.
You could take this site a cut above others by simply having low tolerance for people who troll and/or are willingly misinformed. You have your preferences which seem strongly geared towards Nordic women and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that, but maybe you should stop patronising fallacious, racist nonsense or trolls on your site. Not only does it bring the site quality down, but brings your image down bit by bit. It made me quite angry and upset to read those comments and I later acted in a reactionary manner in my comments on this site, which I regret.
BTW two studies on Indians which proves them to have much smaller noses than any European group: https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0B5yi_UiwcP2SY2E1NTE4NzktOWVhMy00ZWUxLWIxYzYtYWI5NjRkYzhkNWU4&hl=en&authkey=CJuE4L4O
Second one; yeah, yeah, it's repeated but most haven't even read the material offered by this site: http://www.femininebeauty.info/farkas.pdf
I have some Swedish ones; I'll post them later when I get the time.
Apollyon/Emily (since you all seem the same),
Most Indian women have smaller noses than their Bollywood counterparts, so I find your posts funny. Most Indian actresses are also fully Indian. Oh, and Indians have smaller noses than Europeans, again. But whatever helps you sleep at night.
Emily,
Why do you always post single-person pictures of Swedish models (most of them come from fashionmodeldirectory.com) rather than group pictures of non-model Swedish women like you do with east Asians? Are you insecure the way most Swedish women look like? hotswedishchicks.com doesn't exactly have the representative sample. I've been to Sweden and I can't I was impressed...
To return your favour on behalf on East Asians:
"What most Swedish women look like!"
I know right, Brazilian/Emily! Indians totally surpass Arabs and Jews in that separtment all while having much more smaller, upturned noses than Europeans and Swedes as proven by every anthropological study known to man! Man, Swedes and Europeans must have huge, big noses! You are known for the in India along with Arabs!
Aren't most Scandinavians light-haired (not necessarily blonde), though?
I've read through the FAQ section of the website and now I have a clear comprehension of why ethnicities other than white are not featured (I was unaware of this section). Please disregard my question in the last comment I made.
To all the but heads claiming that romanian women are ugly, look at some romanian women pictures on Matrimoniale Romania, one of the biggest romanian dating sites.
Really informative article about anorexia we must be aware about it. And we wish God protect us of every kind of disease
looks like sophia jannok, a sammi-lappi singer.why don't you post a picture of a true caucasian women? we all know they don't have a small nose and wide set eyes..
this women are not 100 percent caucasian.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/magnus3dphoto/4905300947/
take a look at this link. the feminine one in the middle has asian blood. the other girls who are 100 percent caucasian don't look like that.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/hey-helen/463498958/sizes/l/in/photostream/
come on stop lying yourself. most of women from domei are russian or kazakh women. they look like eurasian people. I living in europe and I know how majority of white women look like. they don't have such a flare nasal and small eyes like this.
original scandinavian women have very robust facial features, strong jaw-line and large face.
http://kleineprinsesjes.web-log.nl/kleine_prinsesjes/images/2009/04/03/mettemarit.jpg
http://allesoverroyals.web-log.nl/mijn_weblog/images/2009/02/21/mettemarit.png
http://picture.belga.be/belgapicture/picture/prev/13054819.jpg
http://www.christinesroyalty.net/specialoccassions/haakon_mettemarit/pic/huwelijk/kissing2.jpg
http://royalromance.royalroundup.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/haakonmette.jpg
Ulya.... :L
i am a bit concerned over the arguments made over this. i agree on all terms that there shouldn't be one-sidedness to certain magazines or the fashion world as it appears, but everything depends on the time and place. feminity holds much beauty but so does masculinity. that is equivalent to saying "men with feminine features" should not get publicity and that they are not desireable. unless the rules don't apply to guys, then that it unfair to women. in reality, holding these preferences just creates an equal amount of inequality in the world. women should be able to have their magazines, just as homosexuals and lilewise, your fellow men. do not worry! don't hold too much frustrations for the fact that in reality, you're seeing what you do not like to see. you have the power to choose. just don't give too much attention to what you don't like. eric is just being honest in his pov. this one-sidedness from all of these arguments has got to go! unless equality is of little or zero importance, carry on.
No one likes a chauvinistic pig. I have small breasts and, quite frankly, I see nothing wrong with them. If you don't like that, so be it because I will never change them for pigs like you.
Is there, than, that the body attractiveness conveys something differently than facial attractiveness.
Erik: How come you haven't posted woman of different ethnicities other than Caucasian in your attractive women section? Don't get me wrong, the majority of the white women that you have posted are breath taking, but don't you think it would be fair if you posted feminine women of different ethnicites in your section? There would be a fair representation of all women if different races were posted.
I meant compared to other feminine Northern European women - sorry, I should have specified.
But it's clear for me now; thank you for the in-depth explanation.
This is an EXCELLENT and INFORMATIVE site...anyone with an intellect can see that. Thank you for spending the time and effort to put it together. It really makes so much sense and I know you are actually helping women raise their self esteem, not lower it. Kudos to you whereever you are!!
Sincerely,
Ronni
Erik,
Glad to see you are posting again. I thought you had left for good!
- Apollyon
Matters: A jaw is more or less regressed compared to something, and unless this something is specified, the question cannot be answered, but the question is not important in that there are many factors aside from masculinity-femininity that affect jaw protrusion. Hence, whereas feminization corresponds to more shape-wise protruding jaws (side view), a more feminine woman could have a less protruding jaw shape. An example would be a short (hence small-skulled) and feminine woman having a less regressed jaw shape than a tall and less feminine woman (because with larger skull sizes, the jaw shape becomes more protruding). Another example would involve genetics unrelated to overall size and masculinity-femininity that are responsible for both individual and ethnic variation in jaw protrusion.
She may not be the most glamorous woman in the gallery, but I think she's among the most appealing nonetheless. Such a sweet, honest face - irresistible!
Erik, do you have an example of a woman who is overall extremely feminine, head to toe?
Is the right-most woman in this comparison chart from your "Feminine vs. Masculine" page such a woman?
Erik, correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Amy have a regressed jawline? Judging from her pictures, it looks like she does. I suppose then, that it is possible for women that are otherwise feminine to have regressed jaws?
Eastern European Gal: I do not believe that I have equated uniqueness to masculinization. Whereas culture shapes/influences preferences, where does it come from? Culture is not free from biological influences. Adriana Lima does stand out with her atypical looks among fashion models, but when it comes to femininity, she did not depart very greatly from high-fashion models in general when she was discovered.
Mary: Heidi Montag ended up looking more feminine after her surgeries. Some of it went bad, but it was not the surgery itself but the choice of shape change. I find her better looking than Tori Spelling and most porn stars.
Whether posting pictures of nude women—where the women have posed nude voluntarily, with the understanding that the pictures will be accessible to the public—is disrespectful toward women is a debatable issue. I do not believe that this activity is disrespectful toward women.
The nudity within this site does create a problem when it comes to persuasion or even getting some people to read the arguments. Whereas I have cleaned up this site a little and will continue in this manner, a process that is time consuming and slow, I think this site is beyond salvaging with respect to getting a variety of people who would not presently read the arguments here to read it. This is because nudity is not the only issue. This site is filled with “homophobic” and “racist” content” that would scare or repel many people. I have been meaning to come up with a new site that is without the negatives of this site, which is a better idea than attempting to clean up this site for most people, and may do it someday.
I have not argued anything so simple as “women go for the most wealthiest men that can provide and that men go for the most feminine/fertile looking and prettiest that can be best child raiser and/or arm candy.” If one discusses how important a man’s financial status is to his dating or mate value then this does not mean that this is the only factor that counts. The same argument applies to a discussion of women’s attractiveness.
John K.: This is a very belated reply. In your first comment (Tue, 04/14/2009 - 03:38), you showed a picture of a woman and asked why I have called her masculine or why is she not feminine. I never called her masculine. I posted her picture here to illustrate that wider faces are not necessarily more feminine; how the width is achieved is important. The woman in question does not have low-placed cheekbones. The arch of her cheekbones (upper-side region) is prominent and the cheekbones are nowhere as low as in the computer-outline of a very feminine face.
One of your comments (Tue, 04/14/2009 - 03:47) showed the picture of a woman from the feminine and attractive woman section of this site. There is no such section. The referenced section is what I call the attractive woman section and does not exclusively focus on feminine women. The model you took specifically appears on a page that is marked as featuring somewhat masculinized women.
You referenced the effeminate Kaulitz brothers and said that girls worldwide swooning over them refutes my “whole theory that masculinity makes men attractive and femininty women attractive,” noting that there is much more to the equation. The Kaulitz brothers have stardom to overcompensate their effeminacy. Their example would invalidate my argument if I maintained that masculinity-femininity is the be all and end all of appeal, but if you read around you will come across me mentioning many factors apart from masculinity-femininity that influence physical attractiveness. Then there are factors influencing appeal that do not involve physical appearance. In the case of men, I have never portrayed a simplistic masculine-appearance-in-men-equates-to-attractiveness argument (see this).
You posted pictures of Scarlett Johansson and wondered why I am not a fan of hers. She is undoubtedly feminine, but I do not like her face.
Nightingale: I said about the composite, “the composite is also somewhat masculinized compared to many feminine women out there (some examples here….” In other words, I talked about “more masculine than,” not “masculine, period.” Compare the composite with the women featured at the link and you will see what I am referring to (note lip width, chin width and squaring, etc.).
Pages