Category: Human Behavior and Cognitive Science

Reality: There are tens of thousands of women more beautiful than ‘beautiful’ actresses, which is obvious from looking around at any college football game. Browse through the top twenty modeling agencies, and there are dozens of women (for example, Ford’s Johanna Schapfeld) and more in the Direct set that tend to be less ‘severe’.  When sitting outside a restaurant in St Petersburg or Moscow  – not so much Kiev any longer – on any summer evening, and packs of flawless women walk by together. (And there are cities in certain countries where the very opposite is true.) Modeling takes a little work, and acting more so, and capturing the audience’s attention harder than those outside the field. So beauty isn’t enough so to speak for modeling or acting. There was a definite German-Scandinavian preference earlier last century for stronger squarer faces (ie: Rita Hayworth), instead of the slightly softer ‘perfect’ shape we see below. (Scandinavian women looked more masculine in the early middle ages, we don’t know why the shift has occurred.) The present trend is more androgenous and tilted to women less fit for repeated childbirth. Add that we used more stoic and subtle facial expressions in the past, and were ‘less desperate’ for attention. So facial muscles have changed, and so has diet. And women are not aging well for reasons we don’t understand. Also, the post 1950’s ‘slumming’ of the movie industry favors oddities rather than qualities. Worse, there is a long-standing war by our ‘local enemies’ that seeks to trash classical beauty (genetic perfection) just as they have trashed our arts, literature, history, values, institutions, religion, and laws. Also, genetic beauty ages well. Oddity doesn’t. The current fashion trend remains excessively thin women, with wide eyes, and long faces. So that trend ‘obscures’ women that are genetically perfect. That said, a study of beauty is easier with well-known characters. But trying to find a picture of a woman as we can see on the top left as Florence Colgate, with natural lighting, and limited or no makeup is almost impossible. Example of Golden Ratio Conformity

Florence Colgate UK Mathematically Perfect	Grace Kelly Irish-German American Gold Standard	Charlize Theron Dutch South African Gold Standard
Sienna Miller UK	Valentina Zelyaeva Russia	Naiomi Watts UK
Nina Loseth Norway, Skier Perfect	Johanna Schapfeld Ford Models
	Candace Bergen Swedish American	Catherine Deneuve French
Anita Ekberg Swedish (Questionable inclusion)	Jean Seabring Swedish American Another that’s perfect but it’s impossible to find a photo.	Vivian Leigh (Hartley) UK Another difficult one to find a good photo.
	Audrey Hepburn
	Emily De Ravin More Gracile

  Can’t Find This Woman’s Name: Jacksonville Jaguars Cheerleader “Jessica K.” first half of 20 teens. She’s from Phoenix AZ, and went to Arizona State University.

Reality: There are tens of thousands of women more beautiful than ‘beautiful’ actresses, which is obvious from looking around at any college football game. Browse through the top twenty modeling agencies, and there are dozens of women (for example, Ford’s Johanna Schapfeld) and more in the Direct set that tend to be less ‘severe’.  When sitting outside a restaurant in St Petersburg or Moscow  – not so much Kiev any longer – on any summer evening, and packs of flawless women walk by together. (And there are cities in certain countries where the very opposite is true.) Modeling takes a little work, and acting more so, and capturing the audience’s attention harder than those outside the field. So beauty isn’t enough so to speak for modeling or acting. There was a definite German-Scandinavian preference earlier last century for stronger squarer faces (ie: Rita Hayworth), instead of the slightly softer ‘perfect’ shape we see below. (Scandinavian women looked more masculine in the early middle ages, we don’t know why the shift has occurred.) The present trend is more androgenous and tilted to women less fit for repeated childbirth. Add that we used more stoic and subtle facial expressions in the past, and were ‘less desperate’ for attention. So facial muscles have changed, and so has diet. And women are not aging well for reasons we don’t understand. Also, the post 1950’s ‘slumming’ of the movie industry favors oddities rather than qualities. Worse, there is a long-standing war by our ‘local enemies’ that seeks to trash classical beauty (genetic perfection) just as they have trashed our arts, literature, history, values, institutions, religion, and laws. Also, genetic beauty ages well. Oddity doesn’t. The current fashion trend remains excessively thin women, with wide eyes, and long faces. So that trend ‘obscures’ women that are genetically perfect. That said, a study of beauty is easier with well-known characters. But trying to find a picture of a woman as we can see on the top left as Florence Colgate, with natural lighting, and limited or no makeup is almost impossible. Example of Golden Ratio Conformity

Florence Colgate UK Mathematically Perfect	Grace Kelly Irish-German American Gold Standard	Charlize Theron Dutch South African Gold Standard
Sienna Miller UK	Valentina Zelyaeva Russia	Naiomi Watts UK
Nina Loseth Norway, Skier Perfect	Johanna Schapfeld Ford Models
	Candace Bergen Swedish American	Catherine Deneuve French
Anita Ekberg Swedish (Questionable inclusion)	Jean Seabring Swedish American Another that’s perfect but it’s impossible to find a photo.	Vivian Leigh (Hartley) UK Another difficult one to find a good photo.
	Audrey Hepburn
	Emily De Ravin More Gracile

  Can’t Find This Woman’s Name: Jacksonville Jaguars Cheerleader “Jessica K.” first half of 20 teens. She’s from Phoenix AZ, and went to Arizona State University.