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. whacked

    whacked Senior member

    Messages:
    7,364
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2006
  2. DNW

    DNW Senior member

    Messages:
    10,526
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Location:
    Recession, Baby
    [​IMG]

    ......

    [​IMG]


    I [​IMG] her. From a certain angle, she looks quite average. But, there's something about her. Man, I remember the first time I saw her in the SI swimsuit issue some years back.
     
  3. lightsky

    lightsky Senior member

    Messages:
    123
    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2007
    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!



    hmm, this is a pretty long message there, slim. sure you're not compensating for something?

    i'll respond to your rant in detail tomorrow, but for now i gotta tell ya you're a regular rhetorical tease, you know that? you posture and talk like you wanna argue, but on the few occasions you actually put out, you come up way way short.
     
  4. denning

    denning Senior member

    Messages:
    1,292
    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2005
    Location:
    Canada
  5. Tokyo Slim

    Tokyo Slim Senior member

    Messages:
    19,179
    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    Location:
    Where Eagles Dare!
    i'll respond to your rant in detail tomorrow, but for now i gotta tell ya you're a regular rhetorical tease, you know that? you posture and talk like you wanna argue, but on the few occasions you actually put out, you come up way way short.
    I'm curious as to how you think that is, considering that I've logically refuted and disproven pretty much everything you've said so far in this entire thread that doesn't automatically fall apart under the weight of its own faulty logic. (which is most of it) So far you have no retort other than to change the subject, call me names, and post aggravating nonsense until people ignore you. I look forward to your next incoherent, ill thought out, and ill written post, troll! No doubt you will have no further point and nothing else to contribute other than your own self aggrandizement. As usual.
     
  6. RJman

    RJman Senior member Dubiously Honored

    Messages:
    18,647
    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2004
    Location:
    In the not too distant future
    EDIT: And I sure hope you're not billing a client right now. Damned lawyers. :p

    Ed has me on retainer. To make sure you're his alone.
     
  7. amerikajinda

    amerikajinda Senior member

    Messages:
    11,599
    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2006
    Location:
    Virginia, USA
    I have a headache now...
    Just throwing this out there given the current discussions regarding proportions. http://www.wwtdd.com/post.phtml?pk=2597
    She's not perfect... her nipples are too big, but more to the point, she's not Asian! [​IMG]
     
  8. DNW

    DNW Senior member

    Messages:
    10,526
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Location:
    Recession, Baby
    I have a headache now...



    She's not perfect... her nipples are too big, but more to the point, she's not Asian! [​IMG]


    Those nips are purrfect!
     
  9. amerikajinda

    amerikajinda Senior member

    Messages:
    11,599
    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2006
    Location:
    Virginia, USA
    Those nips are purrfect!

    Really? They're not huge to you? They scare me a bit...
     
  10. DNW

    DNW Senior member

    Messages:
    10,526
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Location:
    Recession, Baby
    Really? They're not huge to you? They scare me a bit...

    What can I say...I like big nips and I cannot lie...
     
  11. Manny Calavera

    Manny Calavera Senior member

    Messages:
    2,744
    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2006
    Location:
    New York
    [​IMG]

    My...precious...
     
  12. amerikajinda

    amerikajinda Senior member

    Messages:
    11,599
    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2006
    Location:
    Virginia, USA
    What can I say...I like big nips and I cannot lie...

    (Lightsky)

    "...You other brothers can't deny
    That when a girl walks in with an itty bitty waist
    And a round thing in your face
    You get sprung, wanna pull out your tough
    'Cause you notice that butt was stuffed
    Deep in the jeans she's wearing
    I'm hooked and I can't stop staring
    Oh baby, I wanna get wit'cha
    And take your picture
    My homeboys tried to warn me
    But with that butt you got makes me so horny
    Ooh, Rump-o'-smooth-skin
    You say you wanna get in my Benz?
    Well, use me, use me
    'Cause you ain't that average groupy
    I've seen them dancin'
    The hell with romancin'
    She's sweat, wet,
    Got it goin' like a turbo 'Vette
    I'm tired of magazines
    Sayin' flat butts are the thing
    Take the average black man and ask him that
    She gotta pack much back
    So, fellas! (Yeah!) Fellas! (Yeah!)
    Has your girlfriend got the butt? (Hell yeah!)
    Tell 'em to shake it! (Shake it!) Shake it! (Shake it!)
    Shake that healthy butt!
    Baby got back!"

    (Everybody else)

    "Oh, my, god. Becky, look at her butt.
    It is so... big. *scoff* She looks like,
    one of those rap guys' girlfriends.
    But, y'know, who understands those rap guys? *scoff*
    They only talk to her, because,
    she looks like a total prostitute, 'kay?
    I mean, her butt, is just so big. *scoff*
    I can't believe it's just so round, it's like,
    out there, I mean - gross. Look!
    She's just so ..."

    Sorry - had to post these lyrics as they're applicable to the direction this thread has taken...

    Actually I hope no women are reading this thread because we're actually arguing over whether a woman (who, by most definitions is as perfect as a woman can ever hope to be) has nipples that are too long or not! [​IMG] I can hear women around the world screaming as they read this... they must be thinking, "are you guys actually serious? she's not perfect enough for you because her nipples are too big? give me a f*cking break!!!!!"
     
  13. lightsky

    lightsky Senior member

    Messages:
    123
    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2007
    Learn to read first, then argue.

    you should follow your own advice, slim.

    your position as you've stated= that there is a "universally attractive standard body type",

    actually, what i wrote was this:

    principles, slim. not "body types".

    indeed, nowhere have i even implied, much less said, that there is "one universally attractive body type". in fact, i acknowledged that there are several. for example:

    some well known gals who are built like real women:

    actresses:

    -selma hayek ("From Dusk Till Dawn")
    -julia roberts
    -j lo (especially in her selena days)
    -halle barry
    -scarlett johanssen
    -sarah polley ("the sweet hereafter")
    -racquel welch
    -gene tierney ("laura")
    -ingred bergman
    -sophia loren

    singers

    -dolly parton
    -shania twain
    -selena
    -beyonce
    -annie lennox
    -diana ross
    -angela gheorghiu
    -maria callas
    -isabel bayrakdarian ("lord of the rings")



    do these women all have the same body type? NO! yet they all have wide appeal to many men.

    like you said, slim: first, learn to read; then argue.


    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)

    i said that there are principles specific to individual cultures, and i believe models are an example of this. they are a recent cultural phenomenon and a direct result of the unusual affluence of our times. however, the widespread aversion to the uber-thin profiles of models is the result of principles laid down by evolution that have obtained since man's earliest steps on this blessed planet.

    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.

    proportion is one principle. but it isn't the only one, as you seem to think, or even the overiding one. there are times when it is superceded by more important ones.

    also, i said there are principles specific to individual cultures. for example, many cultures prefer women with curvy hips and butts. kim k would be considered very attractive to those people. the japanese culture, otoh, prefers women who look like boys (with short, stocky, crooked legs). and so they don't find kim k attractive.

    see the point?


    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!

    sure. and that would explain why YOU spent $$ and at least 40 minutes of your time watching that kim k video, right?

    care to explain that little contradiction?


    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.

    the golden rule would be one example of the principle of proportion. but, like i said, there are other principles that can and do supercede it. in this case, it is the principle that there should not be so much (or so little) body mass that it impairs an individual's chances for survival and reproduction. in the types of environments in which we evolved, "morbid obesity" would have done just this, affecting not only a person's mobility, but also his ability to secure enough food to sustain his larger body mass. in warmer climes, a large body mass would have hindered heat transfer and significantly increased the chances of heat related death. and then there are the health issues associated with being too fat, especially for women and its effects on childbearing.

    "morbid obesity" did not have positive survival value; therefore, it was not considered physically attractive.

    now, most of us don't live in the conditions that our ancestors did, but nevertheless we've inherited their "prejudices" because they proved to be so reliable for so many years.

    hence, the common aversion to very fat people.

    the same principle and a similar argument apply to people who are too thin. up until this century, the struggle to secure food has been a perennial problem. most people lived on the verge of starvation and famines were not at all uncommon. (this situation still exists in some parts of the world.) people who were too thin did not have the bodily resources (ie, fat, etc) to survive the inevitable episodes of scarcity. they were literally one step removed from death.

    therefore, an AVERSION to thinness evolved as as a natural defense against this vulnerability. (the fact that thin people tended to die more quickly and in larger numbers also helped to prune their representation in human populations.)

    in short: people found an excessive thinness UNATTRACTIVE because it had negative survival value.

    now, turn the clock forward to modern times. the industrial revolution has pretty much solved the food supply problem in the west. people here no longer face the specter of starvation as a real threat. and being skinny, therefore, no longer represents a health risk.

    hence, the emergence of the modern, uber skinny model as the new ideal of feminine beauty.

    but you can't erase thousands of years of famine and disease. this is etched into our dna, and our cultural and (if you're into jung) our collective consciousness.

    hence, the persistent and widespread aversion to skinny models.

    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".

    you'll never be accused of writing elegantly, thinking concisely, or arguing cogently, slim. i can guarantee you that.


    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.

    you're trying too hard, slim. the last time you got this worked up you walked right into a trap and told everyone about your wee wee thing. you don't wanna repeat that mistake again, now, do you?


    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;

    stating something is not the same thing as proving it. you've done none of the latter, and far too much of the former.

    It's because they feel like they are wasting words on someone who doesn't have the capability to grasp the meaning of them.

    no. in their case, it's because they've been out-argued. in yours, it's because you've been out-argued AND outclassed. that's why you can't accept defeat gracefully and keep inventing silly excuses for your inadequate performance.

    oh, and then there's also that "little thing". you need to keep up this charade to SAVE FACE, an uber japanese thing.


    I don't have the patience to draw you a picture,

    if you're rhetorical ability is any indication, you don't have the talent, either.

    and frankly, you have annoyed almost everyone in this thread to the point where they have put you on ignore.

    well, it is annoying to lose an argument, isn't it? especially when it's a sacred cow that's been sacrificed...

    You are probably a troll, who just sits there and gets his kicks by antagonizing people online. In which case congrats, you have succeeded.

    another excuse: so everyone who disagrees with you must be a "troll"?. hmm, how droll.

    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.

    now i can see why the imperial navy was able to recruit kamikazes.

    enjoy your mission, slim. cause you're going up in flames, pee wee...
     
  14. lightsky

    lightsky Senior member

    Messages:
    123
    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2007
    i was still confused about something...

    first, slim put down kim k...

    You posted pictures of Kim Kardashian, while occasionally fetching above the waist, is freakishly large below the waist... she is far from a universally pleasing proportion.

    Ok, I don't think Kim Kardashian is that attractive,...I guess I'll go ahead and let you have all the deformed broads with disproportionately large asses because my penis just isn't big enough to get the job done. [oops! did i really say that!]


    then, he confessed that he watched kim in that sex video (who knows how many times!)...

    Anyone really that interested in seeing her nude has already seen her screwing Ray J and being a vapid, shallow bimbo for fourty boring minutes Go watch her porno yourself... She just lays there like a dead fish the entire time.


    and that just didn't make sense.

    but then i remembered this...

    OK... if this is what a boy's backside looks like, I must be a flaming homosexual. NTTATWWT.

    and this...

    Here's a supermodel for you:
    [​IMG]



    and that's when it clicked!

    slim was checking out the black dude in that video!

    i mean, what other reason could he have for watching that thing? not kim k, cause he says she's "ugly!".

    yoohoo, slim! come out, come out, wherever you are!!!
     
  15. lightsky

    lightsky Senior member

    Messages:
    123
    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2007
    there are other ways in which skinny chicks are naturally unattractive. women are differentiated from men by their wider hips and larger deposits of fat under the skin. the latter helps the woman carry a child during pregnancy; the former helps her give birth. wide hips and fat (in the right places) are indicators of a woman's SEXUAL MATURITY - ie, men are programmed to find these things attractive. women who don't have curvy body parts don't look sexually mature; and men generally will NOT find them attractive, because the purpose of physical attraction is procreation.

    now, in defense of models, they do have two characteristics that are also indicators of sexual maturity: long legs and height. just look at the disproportionately short legs of toddlers and little kids to see what i mean. long legs (and the height it produces) are both indicators that a woman has matured. and this is one big reason why many men find tall, leggy girls sexy.

    but uber narrow hips are a definite sign of sexual IMMATURITY.
     
  16. lee lin

    lee lin Senior member

    Messages:
    267
    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2007
    on a different scale i think pierce brosnan's wife is still extremely beautiful. now she's definitely overweight and above being just curvy.
     
  17. gdl203

    gdl203 Senior member Dubiously Honored Affiliate Vendor

    Messages:
    36,649
    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2005
    Location:
    New York
    lightsky - this is a thread about who's your favorite supermodels. You don't like supermodels. WTF are you doing in this thread posting 50% of the posts? This is obviously not a thread for you. Why do you insist on being so blatantly off topic and irritating at the same time? Can't you at least be a douche in a thread where you're on topic?
     
  18. Alter

    Alter Senior member

    Messages:
    4,539
    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2004
    the japanese culture, otoh, prefers women who look like boys (with short, stocky, crooked legs). and so they don't find kim k attractive.


    [​IMG]

    Here is a good example of a short, stocky, crooked leg beauty:

     
  19. Brian278

    Brian278 Senior member

    Messages:
    3,820
    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2006
    Location:
    West Palm Beach, FL
    How fucking antagonisitc do you have to be to go railing on for nearly a weekabout how guys aren't attracted to supermodels in a thread dedicated to appreciating those same women. It should be obvious by the opposition to your points vs. the support for them by the members here that your thesis was disproven before it hardly got started. The models who've had they're picture posted in this thread that you've called sexually immature, boyish, and unnattractive have generated billions of dollars based on the fact that men are attracted to them. There are many cultures and people in every country that are attracted to women with bigger asses, hips, and chests than the supermodels pictured here, but this ain't it, and I'm guessing Europe and most of Asia agree with us. It's just ridiculous to argue what people are or aren't supposed to be attracted to especially when there's so much overwhelming evidence that a least a billion men each have a preference for one or the other. This was supposed to be a great thread, and you fucking ruined it.
     
  20. Christofuh

    Christofuh Senior member

    Messages:
    2,929
    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2006
    Location:
    Sarcasmograd
    Originally Posted by lightsky
    "the japanese culture, otoh, prefers women who look like boys (with short, stocky, crooked legs). and so they don't find kim k attractive."





    Catch this [​IMG]


    [​IMG]
     

Share This Page

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by