1. And... we're back. You'll notice that all of your images are back as well, as are our beloved emoticons, including the infamous :foo: We have also worked with our server folks and developers to fix the issues that were slowing down the site.

    There is still work to be done - the images in existing sigs are not yet linked, for example, and we are working on a way to get the images to load faster - which will improve the performance of the site, especially on the pages with a ton of images, and we will continue to work diligently on that and keep you updated.

    Cheers,

    Fok on behalf of the entire Styleforum team
    Dismiss Notice

Supermodels -- Who's the hottest?

Discussion in 'Entertainment, Culture, and Sports' started by funk_soul_brother, Jul 22, 2006.

  1. GQgeek

    GQgeek Senior member

    Messages:
    17,933
    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2002
    Location:
    Canuckistan
    translation: i can't refute a single point, but maybe if i just make a blanket statement, some people might think i actually know what i'm talking about.




    translation: dang! i can't argue with this, but maybe if i just denouce it no-one will notice that i didn't give any reasons.


    bottom line: you can lead a fool by logic, but you cannot make him think.


    Congrats. first person ever on my ignore list, and I'm even tolerant of Connie, Ed, and Matt. :p

    Your posts are making me [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG]
     
  2. RJman

    RJman Senior member Dubiously Honored

    Messages:
    18,647
    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2004
    Location:
    In the not too distant future
    Wow, guys, it's just a silly thread...
     
  3. GQgeek

    GQgeek Senior member

    Messages:
    17,933
    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2002
    Location:
    Canuckistan
    Wow, guys, it's just a silly thread...

    Yes but you should see how much shorter the thread just got for me. Some people are just annoying without having any redeeming qualities.
     
  4. Tokyo Slim

    Tokyo Slim Senior member

    Messages:
    19,179
    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    Location:
    Where Eagles Dare!
    i can't refute a single point, but maybe if i just make a blanket statement, some people might think i actually know what i'm talking about. ... i can't argue with this, but maybe if i just denouce it no-one will notice that i didn't give any reasons. bottom line: you can lead a fool by logic, but you cannot make him think.
    You actually summed up my entire argument against you much better than I probably could have here. I'll just go ahead and let it stand for the record.
     
  5. lightsky

    lightsky Senior member

    Messages:
    123
    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2007
    How ULTIMATELY IRONIC is it that you blast me for talking about attractive proportion in my previous post, and yet here you are flip flopping and DEFENDING the idea of attractive proportion???? What a dunce.

    uh, slim: your "thing" isn't the only thing that's a little short: your memory ain't so hot, either. it's been my position from the very beginning that there ARE universal laws of physical attraction. YOU'RE the one who denied that such a thing exists, and that's why i pointed out to you that your statement about "proportions" contradicted your stated position.

    you can add your brain to your growing list of diminutive assets.
     
  6. lightsky

    lightsky Senior member

    Messages:
    123
    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2007
    You actually summed up my entire argument against you much better than I probably could have here. I'll just go ahead and let it stand for the record.

    translation: i give up.
     
  7. lightsky

    lightsky Senior member

    Messages:
    123
    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2007
  8. RJman

    RJman Senior member Dubiously Honored

    Messages:
    18,647
    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2004
    Location:
    In the not too distant future
    Yes but you should see how much shorter the thread just got for me. Some people are just annoying without having any redeeming qualities.
    Wait, Connemara's been posting in this thread?
     
  9. GQgeek

    GQgeek Senior member

    Messages:
    17,933
    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2002
    Location:
    Canuckistan
    Wait, Connemara's been posting in this thread?

    Connie has redeeming value. Every time I strike-out with a chick I think "it could be worse, I could be connie." He makes the rest of us look good. [​IMG]
     
  10. RJman

    RJman Senior member Dubiously Honored

    Messages:
    18,647
    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2004
    Location:
    In the not too distant future
    Connie has redeeming value. Every time I strike-out with a chick I think "it could be worse, I could be connie." He makes the rest of us look good. [​IMG]

    You think of Conne when you're with women? I think you need some de-Connefication therapy...
     
  11. Tokyo Slim

    Tokyo Slim Senior member

    Messages:
    19,179
    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    Location:
    Where Eagles Dare!
    uh, slim: your "thing" isn't the only thing that's a little short: your memory ain't so hot, either. it's been my position from the very beginning that there ARE universal laws of physical attraction. YOU'RE the one who denied that such a thing exists, and that's why i pointed out to you that your statement about "proportions" contradicted your stated position. you can add your brain to your growing list of diminutive assets.
    Learn to read first, then argue. your position as you've stated= that there is a "universally attractive standard body type", and that its bigger than a supermodel. (who in your opinion, look like boys) Thus, in your opinion supermodels are universally known to be unattractive. (or like boys) You posted pictures of Kim Kardashian, while occasionally fetching above the waist, is freakishly large below the waist. Your claim that you have been arguing "proportion" is ludicrous in retrospect. She is "a proportion" in the strictest definition of the word, yes. But she is far from a universally pleasing proportion, as evidenced by this thread. my position as I've stated = The idea that there is a universally attractive body type is garbage. You want proof? Ok, I don't think Kim Kardashian is that attractive, and neither do at least half of the guys in this thread. There you have it, proof! AFTER I mentioned proportion ratio, which up until that point you had been fighting AGAINST (Kim Kardashian butt does NOT look proportionate to the rest of her body) Your main point - the waist to hip ratio is great (although it is fringe science, and very disputable), but like I said, applies equally as well to the morbidly obese as it does to any model. I do not find morbidly obese women with a 0.7 waist to hip ratio attractive. Only slim, otherwise attractive girls with a 0.7 waist to hip ratios are attractive to me. Thus, the ratio itself is subjective based on individual taste. You cannot have mathematical evidence based on a criteria of totally subjective observation. The fact that attraction can sometimes be broken down into mathematical formulae falls short of defining what makes someone attractive to an individual, and certainly can't explain the wide variations in what defines "beauty". Your continued assertion that you have a bigger penis than I do only serves to make you look like an idiot who can't properly formulate a logical argument, which you have egregiously failed to do repeatedly. Why are you so interested in the size of my penis? Does the knowledge that you might have a bigger one make you feel better about being verbally and logically outclassed by me in this thread? If so, I'll let you continue to overcompensate for your brains with your penis. Who am I to shatter a dream? I'm perfectly comfortable with the size of my dick AND my brain. If people give up and ignore you, its not because you have out argued or outsmarted them, since obviously your statements are incoherent, ignorant, contradictory, and juvenile to the extreme; It's because they feel like they are wasting words on someone who doesn't have the capability to grasp the meaning of them. Its like talking to a three year old. I don't have the patience to draw you a picture, and frankly, you have annoyed almost everyone in this thread to the point where they have put you on ignore. You are probably a troll, who just sits there and gets his kicks by antagonizing people online. In which case congrats, you have succeeded. But one thing you should know about me is that I don't give up and I don't ignore people, so you are stuck with me until YOU quit. [​IMG] Cheers!
     
  12. GQgeek

    GQgeek Senior member

    Messages:
    17,933
    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2002
    Location:
    Canuckistan
    You think of Conne when you're with women? I think you need some de-Connefication therapy...

    Ouch. I was more just saying.... I don't ACTUALLY think of connie. [​IMG]

    EDIT: And I sure hope you're not billing a client right now. Damned lawyers. :p
     
  13. gorgekko

    gorgekko Senior member

    Messages:
    2,121
    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2004
    Location:
    The Dominion of Canada
    ...[T]he waist to hip ratio is great (although it is fringe science, and very disputable)

    It is interesting to note that Kate Moss actually has a 0.7 waist to hip ratio herself, kind of deflating lightsky's use of it earlier in this thread. The "Golden Ratio" of W/H is pretty much useless in my books because it can cover a huge range of women, many of them not attractive as you mentioned later on in your post.
     
  14. Tokyo Slim

    Tokyo Slim Senior member

    Messages:
    19,179
    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    Location:
    Where Eagles Dare!
    It is interesting to note that Kate Moss actually has a 0.7 waist to hip ratio herself, kind of deflating lightsky's use of it earlier in this thread. The "Golden Ratio" of W/H is pretty much useless in my books because it can cover a huge range of women, many of them not attractive as you mentioned later on in your post.
    If I were lightsky, this is what I'd type next: Ah, but remember, numbers lie! (unless they prove the point I'm currently making, otherwise, if they contradict me, they lie) Anything you say, in effect, I can just argue the opposite without actually having to maintain an actual position. In my next post I will talk about how small your penis is, and pretend I'm winning this argument! Maybe someone will believe me!
     
  15. Ambulance Chaser

    Ambulance Chaser Senior member

    Messages:
    9,790
    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2002
    Location:
    Washington, D.C.
    Less talk, more pictures.

    Take a number, boys. She's back on the market:
    [​IMG]
     
  16. Tokyo Slim

    Tokyo Slim Senior member

    Messages:
    19,179
    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    Location:
    Where Eagles Dare!
    Less talk, more pictures.

    Take a number, boys. She's back on the market:
    [​IMG]


    Who gave her that nasty scar on her arm? Or is that a smudge from your chocolate covered lawyer fingers?
     
  17. itsstillmatt

    itsstillmatt Senior member Dubiously Honored

    Messages:
    14,384
    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2006
    Location:
    The wild and the pure.
    blah, blah, blah

    Dude, you are so bad at this. Please stop.

    We all like women with curves, you seem to prefer them with a little cottage cheese. We get it. Thanks.
     
  18. DNW

    DNW Senior member

    Messages:
    10,526
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Location:
    Recession, Baby
    Dude, you are so bad at this. Please stop.

    We all like women with curves, you seem to prefer them with a little cottage cheese. We get it. Thanks.


    +1. This is getting silly.
     
  19. seanchai

    seanchai Senior member

    Messages:
    948
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    iammatt made an unflattering allusion to her "tummy". and slim said her ass was "huge!". and how do you know it's "fake"? i've seen white chicks with butts like hers. and they were real.

    I dated a Latvian girl with a shelf of an ass like that, it looked fake but it was very much real. She was otherwise slim. It's a very confusing state of affairs.
     
  20. acidboy

    acidboy Senior member

    Messages:
    21,170
    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006

Share This Page

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by