Supermodels Are Not Hot

At least, not the ones who work as fashion models on the runways of Paris and New York. Check out the weird combination of masculine jawline, flairing nostrils (the better to snort four lines at once), and uberfeminine saucer plate eyes on this chick, model Masha Tyelna.

if she made a baby with billy joel how big would its eyes be?

if she made a baby with billy joel how big would its eyes be?

Clearly, the gay guys who run the fashion world are choosing curveless, geometrically angular androgynoids to model their clothes. So the next time some dude brags that he’s dating a supermodel ask him which industry — Victoria’s Secret? Playboy? SI Swimsuit Issue? He’s banging a winner — those kinds of models are chosen for their direct appeal to men or their ability to model very feminine clothing (i.e., lingerie). Milan runway? He’s banging a prepubescent boy.

I don’t want to mislead the typical woman into thinking that she’s hotter than catwalk models. She is not. The haute couture model, despite her strange appearance, is still hotter than 80% of all women, given that most American women are plain-looking at best and ugly fatties at worst. Quite simply, the obesity epidemic is skewing the 1 – 10 looks scale upwards, so that the 7 in the above photo can afford to get paid like a 10. But compared to the cute hipster chicks and WASPy blonde darlings I see daily, Masha would get lost in the shuffle. I saw at least ten girls hotter than her in one hour this past Saturday night. Of course, I’d never tell them that. Their heads are already big enough.

I once got into an argument with Clio that makeup can, at best, raise a woman’s looks score by one point max, and that a woman’s true score can’t stay hidden from a man for longer than a few dates or one night together. The makeup-less cold hard light of morning after analysis reveals all.

I based my judgment of the value of makeup in boosting a woman’s looks on personal experience. I have rarely been with a woman who gained more than one point by makeup. Part of this reason is that having been with enough women, I can more accurately assess when makeup is hiding something. Another part of the reason is that women consistently overestimate how much makeup can help them. Call it the wishful thinking syndrome.

But after seeing before and after photos of runway models like Masha, I have to make an exception. Makeup goes a long way to feminizing the looks of odd-looking, yet not necessarily unattractive, androgynous girls like her chosen for their peculiarly striking looks. For instance, Gisele Bundchen looks like an 8 without makeup and hits 10 with it.

In the interest of clearing the confusion on the matter of makeup, here is a handy chart I’ve devised (it’s been a while since I’ve done a handy chart):

Looks Rating                Makeup Boost by Points
0                                   0
1                                   0
2                                   0
3                                   0.5
4                                   0.5
5                                   1
6                                   1
7                                   1.5
8                                   1
9                                   0.5
10                                 0

Conclusion: Ugly women have no use for makeup; theirs is a lost cause. If anything, makeup can actually draw more attention to their unfortunate condition. Magnificent ugliness radiates out from the face like blast of cosmic rays, overwhelming even the best makeup applications.

Around 3 and 4, where ugliness shifts into mere unattractiveness, makeup provides a minor improvement. For the girl, it could mean the difference between being ignored and savoring the glorious experience of getting pumped and dumped by a beta.

Makeup really hits on all cylinders for semi-attractive girls who aren’t quite in the running for genuine hotness. The 5s and 6s will see a solid 1 point boost. The biggest effects are on the 7s — those girls who are attractive enough for girlfriend material but have one or two facial flaws that keep them out of the “Props, man, you’re dating a hot chick!” category. Interestingly, when you move up the ladder to 8s and 9s, the trend begins to reverse and you don’t see the same major boost from makeup. By the time you are at a bonafide 10, makeup can add nothing to her already perfect beauty, and oftentimes will detract from it.

The catwalk models are an exception to the above chart. As far as I can tell, they receive a 2 to 3 point boost from makeup. Their angular boyish faces respond well to the softening effects of makeup.





Comments


  1. Just read this article today:

    “Judgments of attractiveness (of ourselves and of others) depend on the situation in which we find ourselves. For example, a woman of average attractiveness seems a lot less attractive than she actually is if a viewer has first seen a highly attractive woman. If a man is talking to a beautiful female at a cocktail party and is then joined by a less attractive one, the second woman will seem relatively unattractive.”

    Liked by 1 person


  2. Another thing is that too much makeup can detract from any woman’s looks.

    Agreed, that pictured supermodel is ghastly.

    Like


  3. There’s something to be said about make up put on my the woman herself (most women in general) and the make up put on by a professional makeup artist for the supermodel/ tv actress blah blah blah

    Like


  4. In my case, I will be forever thankful for concealer as it covers over a few unfortunate acne scars.

    google artefill

    Like


  5. I’d still fuck her…

    Like


  6. 2 notes:

    1) Runway models have the world’s best makeup artists. even a very good amateur is unlikely to have the same repertoire.

    2) runway models are chosen as much for their bodies as for their faces. so a 6-foot-tall, very skinny 7.5 is much more valuable, in general, than a legit 10 with curves.

    Like


  7. Runway models never seem to smile in their photos. They always look so gloomy, with either a frowning stare or a blank expression. Hollywood actresses, by contrast, are often seen either openly smiling or have a hint of smile in their photos. Masha Tyelna looks much better here:

    Like


  8. Wow, a smile goes a long way!

    Like


  9. Masha Tyelna looks much better

    her nose is still unacceptable

    Like


  10. freak show, that stuff is for wrinkles…I fortunately do not have any yet, though I sure as fuck will being botoxing myself to hell once they appear.

    Masha looks like a member of the underworld…straight up.

    Like


  11. Wow, a smile goes a long way!

    Yes it does. This effect is most pronounced in photographs, because it is a moment frozen in time, whereas in moving film or in person the subtle changes in a person’s eyes or breathing distract the viewer, and there is more to see so to speak. Personally, in my own photos I look like crap when I don’t smile, but actually cute when I do. There are some women who look heart-wrenchingly beautiful when photographed frowning or expressionless, but they are rare and far in between.

    Like


  12. freak show, that stuff is for wrinkles…

    sweetie, that stuff is for a lot of things, including acne scars. it can deal with potmarks. ask a dermatologist. it can easily solve your problems with scarring, but it’s expensive.

    Like


  13. her nose is still unacceptable

    Oh, and noses look much more noticeable in photos (and sometimes film) than in person. A large nose will dominate a photo, but in normal settings it is barely noticeable. This is why so many people in Hollywood get the nose job.

    Like


  14. Sweetie, a POCKmark is different than a scar.

    Like


  15. 1. I think I have said before here that makeup can sometimes boost a girl 2 points. Sometimes.

    2. We agree that girls in the middle who get the most out of makeup. However, it is 5s and 6s receive the most. Going from a 5 to a 6.5 means going from dumpster dive to potential greater Beta GF. Going from a 6 to a 7 means going from being a Beta GF to potential serious relationship with an Alpha. For most high quality men the minimum attractiveness threshold is a 7, so getting over that hump from 6 to 7 is crucial.

    3. The true test of prettiness is jeans, t-shirt, no make up, and hair pulled back in a pony tail. The true 10s shine brightest here.

    4. Make-up on a 9 or 10 will often actually pull a girl down. The difference between an 8 and true hotness is in the details and make-up on a 9 can often obscure those details. On a 10, a make-up artist has to be incredibly skilled to NOT obscure them.

    Liked by 1 person


  16. I actually think that modelling is the one entertainment industry where the higher the person is ranked, the worse they look. I find the bottom feeder C and D-list models littering the streets of NY and LA to be almost universally hotter than the A-listers. Plus their self-esteem is way lower, making them much more manageable.

    Like


  17. For most high quality men the minimum attractiveness threshold is a 7, so getting over that hump from 6 to 7 is crucial.

    I don’t disagree, but as a side-note, how do you explain super-alphas of their day, John Lennon and Paul McCartney, marry Yoko and Linda?

    Not that John Lennon was a high quality man by any stretch of the imagination, but presumably he had many choices.

    Like


  18. lemmonex, you really seem to disbelieve me for some unknown reason:
    http://www.yourplasticsurgeryguide.com/injectables-and-fillers/artecoll.htm

    filling a pockmark is the same as a bigger acne scar. i guess if your acne scars are the non- depressed type that might be different, but most acne scars are (to varying degrees) depressed; artefill (artecoll) handles that, but it’s expensive.

    Like


  19. “Supermodels Are Not Hot – At least, not the ones who work as fashion models on the runways of Paris and New York.”

    I have had plenty of great nights with Models in Milan, Barcelona, Paris and NYC. And I am always happy to share the same alarm clock as them. Generalizing just shows inexperience.

    Masha Tyelna has more of an “art house” appeal than a Hollywood Blockbuster.

    Not everyones taste. (Nor Mine).

    – MPM

    Like


  20. Mine are not depressed. I actually know what my face looks like. Thanks for your concern.

    Like


  21. on September 29, 2008 at 5:42 pm Usually Lurking

    There is a good website that documents this topic: www[dot]FeminineBeauty[dot]info.

    Like


  22. Lost in all this discussion is the fact that models are hired for a single, specific purpose – to display clothing in the best way possible. They are not hired to appear in beauty pageants. Stunningly beautiful women might take attention away from the clothing and for that reason would not be considered desirable.

    Like


  23. Here’s how I see it:

    __age__ _benefit of makeup___

    10-25……………0
    25-30…………….0.5
    30-40……………1
    40-55……………2
    55-70……………1
    70+ ……………..0.5

    Like


  24. dude, wow. masha tyelna is so ugly that i almost acted like a supermodel myself* while looking at her. there’s no way that a fully straight, red-blooded, testosterone-addled man would rank her above a three.

    and it’s not just that photo, either; i was masochistic enough to do a google image search.
    sweet god, it’s as though the aliens from ‘communion’ are real. i’m going to have nightmares tonight.

    *i.e., lost my lunch.

    Like


  25. Anony is right, teen girls barely benefit from makeup, unless they are covering up pimples or acne.

    Like


  26. I have linked to this before in a different post, but here is a great site with comparisons of models with and without make up:
    http://www.thefashionspot.com/forums/f47/francois-nars-make-up-your-mind-647.html
    It also shows just how unattractive many high fashion models are.

    Adriana Lima is the ultimate test case for how make up can actually make a 10 look worse. The make up in the picture at the above link obscures the adorable little curves on her nose and cheeks. Her eyes pop out a little bit more when she is made up, but overall she looks better without. Maggie Rizer, another favourite of mine, also looks better au natural.

    The only truly hot girl in this set who improves with make up is Aurelie Claudel and even there there are both gains and losses.

    Like


  27. There’s no way Gisele Bundchen is an 8. She’s hideous. Her fame is all about Photoshop.

    Liked by 1 person


  28. Runway work is really about presence and the ability to look like a living clothes hangar for a designer’s shit. They are not hired for their beauty. Print models are different from runway but the industry is still very fickle, no surprise there. Nevertheless, make up doesn’t do much but its a business that needs to sell that idea and there is no shortage of women that need to believe that.

    Like


  29. I don’t disagree, but as a side-note, how do you explain super-alphas of their day, John Lennon and Paul McCartney, marry Yoko and Linda?

    John was seriously fucked up and Linda was a 7 who Paul just clicked with (once married they almost never spent even one night apart).

    Like


  30. once married they almost never spent even one night apart

    That’s the “Rock & Roll History” impression I had.

    As I’ve said elsewhere, a woman’s looks are not that important for long-term happiness, as long as they are above the man’s attractiveness threshold.

    Like


  31. J,

    That was the “worst” picture you could find of Gisele? Ha ha ha, you’re going to have to come way harder than that to make your point

    Like


  32. “Playboy? He’s banging a winner”

    Playboy models are very often time very plain looking in real life. Or ordinary. Like a girl from your local Hooters.

    And I have done an unofficial case study. Hooters girls are a incubator of Playboy Models.

    But I am always happy to share the same alarm clock as them.

    – MPM

    Like


  33. on September 29, 2008 at 6:33 pm Large Hadron Collider

    Processes that enhance beauty like freezing warts waste liquid nitrogen.

    Like


  34. on September 29, 2008 at 6:35 pm 6 Martini Lunch

    “I don’t disagree, but as a side-note, how do you explain super-alphas of their day, John Lennon and Paul McCartney, marry Yoko and Linda?”

    No doubt some sort of mental problem. Seriously.

    Like


  35. I don;t think Gisele is hideous but she is terribly overrated, especially for a Brazilian. I regularly meet run of the mill Brazilian tourists that are way hotter than her, it shocks me they scouted talent in that country and that was the best they could come up with

    Like


  36. This is why Gisele is the top model in the world. Her face isn’t quite perfect, but that is the body to end all bodies.

    Like


  37. Virgle Kent, no it’s not her worst picture, it’s just a picture where she looks like herself. She could easily be a man.

    Like


  38. Gisele does not and should not represent the apex of the Brazilian talent pool. Besides, Adriana Lima, Ana Beatriz Barros, and Alessandra Ambrosio are more attractive than her anyway. Few women can do print and runway because of the height requirement for runway modeling. It just so happens that these VS models can.

    There are plenty of women that are hotter than most runway models, they just may not be as tall and I don’t know many guys with a specific height requirement.

    Like


  39. I’m sorry, even if you take body into account I still think Gisele is way overrated. I won’t go as far as some to say she’s unattractive, and it is a good body, but still, I think she’s overrated. To me Tom Brady could land WAY better in the looks department.

    Like


  40. That model looks like….an alien.

    Like


  41. “”Men do not see right through makeup to facial bone structure”

    “A lot of men do not. Some people actually think that someone like Ann Coulter is hot, when all she is is a thin blond with flowing blond tresses. For some men such an approximation of beauty is enough, and, therefore, crude make-up can be very effective in attracting certain men. But they will tend to be rather crude men.”

    In my observation, the kind of woman most likely to get an undeserved “hot” label is the women who is heavily made-up in the “Cosmo girl” way (as opposed to a high fashion way), with either really big or really long/straight hair, preferably blonde, and a big bosom. If such a woman is also relatively young (under 30), she’s almost certain to soak up most of the male attention in a bar, even if there are many women there with better bone structure and better-proportioned figures. That’s esp. true in blue-collar bars as opposed to trendy hipster places.

    Clio

    Like


  42. What does the market say about attractive women?

    It seems like there are several tiers of “types” of women that men find attractive.

    There are the Playboy/SI Swimsuit models, very curvy and attractive, like as noted Giselle Bundchen and the like.

    There are various actresses, what’s odd is that the “girl next door” gals seem to do “more” or are rated higher, higher demand for them by guys than the knockout-swimsuit models above. Examples would be Kari Byron from Mythbusters, Alyson Hannigan, Michelle Trachtenberg, etc.

    Then there are the various actresses like Megan Fox, Angelina Jolie, Jessica Alba, Anne Hathaway, and Scarlett Johansson. Who are often pushed by tabloids and such, often (in the case of Hathaway or Fox, with self-exposing tabloid confessions about personal sexual habits — wont’s say more to get past content filter). These actresses seem tabloid fodder, men sorta like them but less (IMHO, because of image, “skanky” perceptions etc)

    It’s funny, google searches and rankings of actresses like Hannigan and Trachtenberg, the modern “girl next door” out-do more classical “beauties” such as Alba, Jolie, Fox, etc.

    I do think that our hyper-sexual culture has put a premium on male fantasies for the “nice-geek-girl next door” who would in fantasy terms, not have a lot of partners.

    It certainly seems in the fantasy marketplace that the “girl next door” is more desired by the aggregate of men than the “sexy” super-model or “hot” actress/starlet with a “slutty” image.

    On the lowest end of the scale, look at Paris Hilton, and men’s reaction to her. I think behavioral cues matter as much as physical beauty once a certain “floor” has been reached.

    Like


  43. The look here in this particular pic, aside from meeting the basic and easy criteria of tall, youngish and skinny, seem clearly to be chosen with that singular desiderata that so animates modern art generally in it’s various forms.

    She looks controversial, or “interesting”. There’s something to talk about, re: her. She’s “not just another boringly beautiful girl”. Not just “same old same old”.

    Instead she embodies a single abstract idea or two. Like much of modern art. I.e. it’s a critics thing. She’s different from her predecessors in these easily written up — critiqued — ways.

    Models for fashion critics to write about. Like art for art critics to write about.

    Ah our current world. Such a reliable producer of artistic dreck promoted by critics as the height of au current high art.

    Like


  44. In my observation, the kind of woman most likely to get an undeserved “hot” label is the women who is heavily made-up in the “Cosmo girl” way (as opposed to a high fashion way), with either really big or really long/straight hair, preferably blonde, and a big bosom.

    I agree with you completely on this, Clio. Coulter was someone I thought everyone might know. The kind of girls you describe are rarely the kind that get much media attention, though Pamela Anderson might qualify.

    Like


  45. Fabien —

    That model looks like….an alien.

    That reaction, and one’s like it, are PRECISELY what I was talking about.

    That is exactly the sort of abstract concept reaction that you can talk about, that the fashion critic sensitive promoters of this particular high fashion model had in mind.

    Living in their frontal lobes much, are they?

    Like


  46. Clio 47,

    Pupu agrees with your assessment except that brunettes seem to be more desirable these days.
    http://www.gnxp.com/blog/2008/07/maxims-audience-prefers-brunettes.php

    In terms of preferred height, the female sex symbols tend to be only somewhat (about 1.5 inch) taller than average.
    http://www.gnxp.com/blog/2007/04/female-sex-symbols-somewhat-taller-than.php

    The supermodels may be too tall for most men’s taste.

    Like


  47. men are highly attuned by the forces of evolution to detect the tiniest differences in female facial morphology that separate genuine beauty from the less attractive amongst a crowd of humanity.

    I have to agree more with Clio on this one. As in all things, some men are easier to fool than others.

    And some men just have crude taste in women, just as some people prefer macs and cheese to filet mignon.

    Like


  48. And some men just have crude taste in women

    We all know what my taste in women involves.

    Like


  49. It’s funny, google searches and rankings of actresses like Hannigan and Trachtenberg, the modern “girl next door” out-do more classical “beauties” such as Alba, Jolie, Fox, etc.

    Most men know in their heart of hearts that they have more of a shot at getting a cute but not spectacular girl like Alyson Hannigan than the likes of Megan Fox. Fox and her ilk are associated in the