The girl on the left is the pinnacle of 3d female beauty.

>>35197076
Nah not really. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder though, so whatever floats your boat. Neither of them do anything for me.

>>35197102
This woman understands it

>>35197102
>>35197156
>trusting normies with looks

these are models. literally the top percentile of beauty. next your gonna say Francisco Lachowski is ugly

>>35197102
>>35197156
>being this in denial

I bet you convince yourself that having """"(((realistic)))"""" standards is better

>>35197076
she's aight. looks like a manjawed selena gomez.

>>35197076
they're both attractive but each probably 20 pounds too light
and they're so made up that it's hard to develop a firm feeling about them

>>35197259
>20 pounds too light

chubby chasers get out

>>35197318
>not wanting 20 more pounds of muscle on them

would it make you feel insecure?

>>35197376
you're a faggot

women aren't supposed to be muscular

>>35197156
>>35197206
>>35197210
They just aren't my type. I dislike brunette hair.

>>35197401
but they are supposed to be fatter than they

doubt they'd make it half a pragnant before fainting into coma

>>35197418
>aren't your type
>on r9k

shit taste confirmed

File: IMG_0095.jpg (158KB, 925x780px) Image search: [Google]

158KB, 925x780px

>>35197556
I like either way darker hair or way lighter hair. Brown is an ugly color.

Beyond that the models are too tall and not cute enough. My type might not exist naturally in this world but there are still better examples of it than those models, or even most models.

>>35197609
>calls runway model ugly
>posts animu instead
cringe

>>35197206
Models aren't beautiful as much as they fit the required look to model clothing and sell it. They look good in photos. But they look literally alien and malnourished IRL. Their limbs are funky long and they're clearly clumsy/generally bad at moving around. They walk a good catwalk... and they look good with make-up. But it takes watching one trying to walk like a normal person IRL to really see how weird they are.

File: 313rtjo.jpg (48KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 640x640px

>>35198187
so pic rel is actually ugly to you?

File: ana-de-armas-gq-0816-07.jpg (402KB, 1536x1958px) Image search: [Google]

402KB, 1536x1958px

Plebs all of you

>>35198265
Not really. But then again yes? There are prettier models out there that's for sure. She looks like Stacy on steroids (as in, like a bitchy cunt).

File: prime adriana.jpg (29KB, 300x375px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 300x375px

>>35198591
pic rel is my 3d waifu, what would you rate her?

>>35197076
No, she isn't at all

>>35198641
Tanned barbie/10?
There are prettier, way prettier models out there, in my opinion.

File: 5c51c30e74fee95e757a32b73f7024fa.jpg (162KB, 496x1200px) Image search: [Google]

162KB, 496x1200px

>>35198187
exactly. Models aren't 'top tier' beauty, you'd have to be a top tier retard to believe that. They are picked for the way the clothes hang on their tall bodies- so they need to be lanky, and their faces are usually quirky, but not necessarily pretty. All they need to do is stand out.

>>35198767
holy hell you have shit taste.

post a pic of your face, I really want to see the person that calls these people ugly.

>>35198767
examples?

orign

>>35197076
if you say so. she looks like a hungry skeleton to me.

>>35198799
This guy gets it.
>>35198830
I'm sorry I have the wrong opinion.
>>35198833
Phone posting over here so I can't post. The reality is that pretty models tend to be "plus size", which actually just means they're not malnourished. They look healthier and they exude a beautiful air of sensuality, they are allowed to have curves in their field (and I mean wide hips and large tits and a small waist, not talking fat over here).

>>35198799
every one of those girls in your pic is beautiful

>>35198924
post face since you're on mobile. you have triggered me and you need to take responsibility

>>35198924
agreed about body, but I kinda was just talking about the face

>>35199027
Face wise I believe models are chosen for their "look that gets attention" that is potentiated by their ability to enact an expression of aggressive flirting (aka come get me/this t-shirt). Some are pretty, others not so much.
That being said there alot of beautiful faces out there that belong to very tiny females... My personal pick for "possibly the sexiest thing ever" is Brigitte Bardot.

File: 926960-brigitte-bardot.jpg (164KB, 1024x1527px)

164KB, 1024x1527px

>>35199151
She has the cutest look of A G G R A V A T E D. Plus she pulls off innocently sexy quite like no one else ever did. Her pout is gorgeous.

>>35199243
actually agree with you anon, she's quite beautiful. What do you think of Brooke Shields in her prime?

File: tumblr_n8gledpWH41rmiu6lo2_1280.jpg (480KB, 1280x849px) Image search: [Google]

480KB, 1280x849px

>>35198999
maybe it's the photo, but there is something off and harsh about them, though. I just think natural girls are more wholesome and attractive generally. Models are used as hangers for clothes

>>35199261
She was fucking adorable. Less my type because she looks less cutesy/flirtatious/stylish... But her expression was ALIVE. Brooke Shields just had a gorgeous "depth" to her features. But she doesn't have the same look of knowledge and smurt that Brigitte does.

File: 1479672711757.jpg (777KB, 2880x1800px) Image search: [Google]

777KB, 2880x1800px

>>35197102
>beauty is in the eye of the beholder
It really isn't. Generally, people find the same sort of features attractive. It's one of those hardwired things. There's a biological drive that directs you towards those with great aesthetics.

The people who are attracted to weird faces tend to be freaks themselves. They're more of an anomaly, and not part of the rule.