Why are supermodels ugly…

[kilésengati]

or at the very least, why do most average women look better than the models at fashion shows?

What are your thoughts?
If you are not into women, how're you thoughts on average men vs. male models?

[steven1mac]

I think most models are designed to show off the clothing, so they end up being as skinny as a clothes hanger, add that to the fact a camera will make you look like you weigh more, most look severely malnutrition.

[kilésengati]

Originally posted by steven1mac:

I think most models are designed to show off the clothing, so they end up being as skinny as a clothes hanger, add that to the fact a camera will make you look like you weigh more, most look severely malnutrition.

Okay, got it. So those fashion show models are specifically designed in a lab to be as attractive as a coathook. How's that still legal?

[L1qu1dator]

Except they're not.

[ṼṏẌṏḭḊ]

The lizard overlords like their models to look like aliens.

[Q-T_3.14.exe]

Sir, please leave the skeletons alone.

[Your_White_Knight]

Originally posted by kilésengati:

Why are supermodels ugly…

or at the very least, why do most average women look better than the models at fashion shows?

What are your thoughts?
If you are not into women, how're you thoughts on average men vs. male models?

Because it's social media... it's the tempest in the tea cup... it doesn't imitate life it mocks it.

Originally posted by jones-jay-:

Because it’s an industry ran by sociopaths who are too soulless to recognise genuine beauty, so their standards are based on textbook definitions.

That too... agree...

[Tsubame ⭐]

Well, standards of beauty vary from people to people.

In a nutshell, because they have what the industry believes is the perfect face, perfect body.

The problem for me is that such industry and models have a lot of influence over teenager girls and young women, often destroying self-esteem of many, who may go to long lengths to achieve that "standard of beauty".

[kilésengati]

Originally posted by ᠌ ⁧⁧Tsubame ⭐:

Well, standards of beauty vary from people to people.

In a nutshell, because they have what the industry believes is the perfect face, perfect body.

The problem for me is that such industry and models have a lot of influence over teenager girls and young women, often destroying self-esteem of many, who may go to long lengths to achieve that "standard of beauty".

I never get when younger women make themselves look like absolute clowns to imitate models or even worse, physically harm themselves.

>90% of the time, I'd like to shout at them: Lass, you look beautiful the way you are born!

[ZZZZZ]

ugly people are easy to keep in line, if a model would be too sexy/cute she could just drop the brand and make her own

[Affronter]

Most need to eat more sandwiches. Unfortunately they'd tend to break a wrist just lifting it.

[Kamiyama]

I thought Pamela Lee had a nice body back in the day.

Kate Upton seemed like she could have filled her role as a buxom blonde bombshell but she got married and decided not to go the stardom route.

Yeah I can't think of anyone who has really filled that void.

Hollywood is all screwed up these days. Priorities are all wrong.

[Downtown DK Company ✅]

I've seen models on the reality TV show Survivor and some look average or worse without all that makeup and lighting.

[Grand Ayatrollah]

the average woman is not 6 feet tall for starters.

also theyre actually there to do a job. for example, cara delivigne covers the big bushy eyebrow look some clothing lines want to use to market their items.

now go find an average brushy eyebrow girl who other attributes are all above average. also. ;)

[Messy]

They don't look ugly imo, you're just not a fan of cheekbones.

[Tonepoet]

I am not sure exactly how true it is, but I it is often rumored that homosexual males have a relatively high degree of influence in the modern fashion industry. Regardless, you have to remember that fashion magazines like cosmopolitan are marketed towards heterosexual females. What these two demographics share in common is that they find masculine features attractive.

That kind of makes sense given some of the model choices, because we often tend to get models who look a bit more androgynous. The term "beanpole supermodel" is thrown around a lot in reference to the fact that many of these girls lack much in the way of the feminine curves that make up the hourglass figure and the facial features look more masculinely squared off. That is not to say that they do not look feminine enough to be recognizably female, and I would personally not go so far as to say they look ugly, but just that they look less feminine than what a heterosexual male might typically prefer to see in a woman. Aside from that many of them are malnourished and it shows. Those figures can be pretty darned well skeletal.

Like, Sir-Mix-A-Lot half-jokingly says 36-24-36, in reference to the ideal hourglass figure, only if she's 5'3 in his song Baby Got Back. The joke being that this is only enough meat on the bones of a woman if she is short enough to make those features look relatively wide on her.

However, he has somewhat of a point. The hourglass figure does not usually make reference to height, and it t is actually pretty close to what the ideal woman might have looked like in the 1950s. I'm particularly basing this off of Luz Marina Zuluaga[brazilianpop1957-1964.blogspot.com], who won Miss Universe in 1958. She actually did have 36-24-36 measurements, although she was 5'4[en.wikipedia.org] rather than 5'3. Not quite his ideal woman I suppose, but she is only off by an inch in height. She is a stunningly beautiful woman who probably deserved the award. I'm not particularly fond of the makeup job she has in the picture where she is wearing gloves though. She looks better in the picture with the three other girls with the trophy in the first link I provided, which has her sporting a more naturalistic look.