We Bite Back

I think this topic goes here
Page 1 of 1

Author:  MelusineBeauty [ Mon Nov 05, 2007 1:16 pm ]
Post subject:  I think this topic goes here

Being a model I frequent a modeling site quite often. Another model friend posted this link to a site about high fashion models, their androgeny and why these type of people are chosen. It gave me alot of insight with the high fashion world and why those girls on the runway look the way they do and why they have to look a certain way. (Also check out the section of the Victorias Secret model, you will feel WORLDS better about yourself after looking at Giselles ugly ass).
This is a very intellectual site with intellectual language, with information that is "backed up" by actual scientific research. That wasn't even the most impressive part. What impressed me the most is that it was layed out is such a professional, non demeaning mannor.
Please read this stuff. Read as much as you can because it is a slew of really great information. I also want your feedback on this.

Also, some of the images are taken from adult entertainment sites for comparison purposes only and might not be suitable for work. I looked at it but I had to be very careful. I figure if the moderators didn't want me to go there, it would have banned the site entirely! Enjoy!



Author:  Imperfect Tense [ Mon Nov 05, 2007 1:42 pm ]
Post subject: 

I found this article to be quite interesting and was impressed by the layout. However did not find it all that unbiased.

On one hand I completely agree that the 'standard' set by super models is by no means realistic or overly feminine. It is certainly interesting just how boy-ish the models are in porportion and often face-shape. Yet on the other I'm not sure using a more porn standard is exactly a fair contrast either. The 'andorgynous' body-type of the models seemed to be strongly disfavoured.

Perhaps I am not being fair and am equally, if not more biased. In many respects I am built like a boy (but in NO respect like a model, I am a good 5 inches to short and 25lbs too heavy)....broad shoulders, no boobs or curves and a flat butt...the most feminine part about me is I gain weight primarily on my stomach and thighs.

In all i just found this article to be somewhat two-sided, not as far as an either/or senerio but felt it lacked room for any in-between body types and variation.

Author:  willow [ Mon Nov 05, 2007 3:12 pm ]
Post subject: 

According to that website I am not a woman at all!

Except perhaps for my decent sized arse and tits.


I'm not really sure what I thought of it to tell you the truth...

I would feel better if "normal" women were used instead of women from adult sites. Thats like one extreme to the other...

Author:  MelusineBeauty [ Mon Nov 05, 2007 3:20 pm ]
Post subject: 

let me clear this up then. Understand they are using the adult site models for a base of comparison because they are what are called "glamour models". Glamour models are what more people recognize as classic beauties, robust sexy, lingerie type women. Glamour models are geared more toward men because of their sex appeal. Hence Playboy, lingerie ads, Fredericks of Holly wood are all really great examples of glamour models and so much more. My signature picture is concidered to be slightly glamour because of my sex appeal.

This is what the artical also touches. That fashion models are created from the eye of gay or homosexual men. They do not feel as if a reubenesque sexy woman is attractive and natrually would put them in their clothes...... even though the rest of the world knows they are beautiful and natrual..the fact that they are on an adult site shouldn't make a difference because most woman are shaped more like a glamour model then a fashion model, you understand? Woman are natrually curvy, and not straight up and down. that is also why fashion models start at 13 tap out at 21 or so because they get too curvy by that age.
So if you are focused on the fact that they are on adult sites, you might be missing the point. please dont take offense. Did you see giselles backside compared to a glamour models?
Personally, I don't care how much VS models make. I rather be a glamour model anyday if I never make it in the fashion world.I do plus size, glamour and artistic nude.

I am sure Giselle's income makes up for any bad feeling she might have about herself hell, Elle McPhearson said she wouldn't get out of bed for at least $10,000. I would sit in bed and chill.
Also this article is meant for models to see and understand the industry a bit beter. I just thought it would be great on this site too because finally someone was tired of all the "thinspiration" misleading girls to have ED, and decided to expose the fashion world for what it really is.

Author:  Isisdancer [ Mon Nov 05, 2007 3:29 pm ]
Post subject: 

That makes alot of sense melusine, but I think I see what willow is saying. From what I've seen, in general this man seems to have a restrictive view of beauty. I'm not saying that it negates his points about high fashion models but some of them can be quite beautiful.

And I feel that he wouldn't know quite what to think of me. I do some fashion yes. Mainly because I do have the striking, rather androgenous(though slightly on the female side) face, but I'm quite womanly shaped so do fitness and commericial mainly. But that's speculation and besides the point.

The site has some good points but something about his phrasing of things and some of the ideas leave me questioning.

If that made sense.

Author:  willow [ Mon Nov 05, 2007 3:29 pm ]
Post subject: 

thanks for your reply, it really did make me think about the site better. I was a little... confused by the site I must admit but I will go back and have another look at it again...

with a renewed perspective.

Author:  Krysi [ Mon Nov 05, 2007 6:39 pm ]
Post subject: 

Hmmm. That is really interesting. Still formulating an opinion, but it's definitely interesting.

Author:  SomeAussieChick [ Mon Nov 05, 2007 7:50 pm ]
Post subject: 


I liked this part:

Masculinized looks of fashion models as an artifact of selecting tall women

Are some seemingly masculinized skeletal proportions of fashion models an artifact of their height rather than masculinization? For instance, the gonial angle [marked in the top image shown in Table 3] becomes sharper with both masculinization and increased size. Therefore, one could say that the sharp gonial angles disproportionately seen among high-fashion models reflect their larger size, but not their selection for masculinized jawlines. However, high-fashion models are not randomly drawn from the population of tall women, and it is easy to find tall women with feminine jawlines (Table 3). One can easily find tall women who look feminine overall. For instance, see this 5-foot-9 woman, this 5-foot-11 woman, a more feminine version of Heidi Klum and a comparison of 6-feet-tall fashion model Elle MacPherson with an equally tall glamour model.

Table 3. Heidi Klum
Miss Universe 2004 Jennifer Hawkins
Charlize Theron
^^(clickable links)

From top to bottom: Heidi Klum, Miss Universe 2004 Jennifer Hawkins and Charlize Theron. These women have roughly the same height. Heidi Klum has a very masculine face overall and sharp gonial angles. On the other hand, the gonial angles in both Jennifer Hawkins and, especially, Charlize Theron are less sharp, which is in agreement with their greater overall facial femininity. Therefore, the sharper gonial angles seen in Heidi Klum compared to the average in white women are not entirely attributable to a large face size, but also reflect masculinization.

Im quite self conscious about my jawline. I have always wanted it to be more angular, "sticky-outy" as I say it... It's made me feel a bit better about my jaw.... especially after seeing Hawkins' and Therons'. It's made me think a lot.

Author:  MelusineBeauty [ Tue Nov 06, 2007 8:28 pm ]
Post subject: 

I am glad this article has helped you out. Isis, you are a toe head right? with very fair skin? if I remember correctly? yes, no maybe?...
I can't see images anymore while I am at work....

skinny aussie, I wonder if what the author says is true. In theory it would make sense for bones to become sharper and more angular when one becomes taller. But if one is comparing different races, I think heritage and genes is going to play a role. If they just compared petite euros to tall euros and asians to asians...then something could be said about the difference in bone structure.
But they went the extra step and started to compare different models and actresses with different background.
am I rambling?

Author:  Seekingnewpastures [ Wed Nov 07, 2007 5:40 am ]
Post subject: 

I think i've seen this site before...it's very interesting!

Author:  Isisdancer [ Fri Nov 09, 2007 10:50 am ]
Post subject: 

Yes I'm blonde and pale! :lol: Sometimes, brown with blonde highlights.

When I'm not working, I dye it weird colors or very dark.

Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 4 hours
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group