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.
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
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.