Comments on: Supermodel Cameron Russell and the gene pool lottery

By: TheTruthHurts@Bren

TheTruthHurts@Bren — Wed, 20 Feb 2013 04:44:07 +0000

Kat it is genetic lottery. If it wasn’t, why don’t they let short ugly girls model?Or even short pretty girls? There are plenty of gorgeous females much better looking than her even, that will never be on the cover of vogue because they are too short.

That is genetics, not every person has Dna that allows them to be gorgeous or tall. Not every female has small bone structure either.

She is telling the truth and if we weren’t obsessed with looks, she wouldn’t be famous and we wouldn’t be talking about it.

By: Vallerie

Vallerie — Tue, 19 Feb 2013 20:39:27 +0000

Insecurity is part of the human condition, the reasons for our insecurities may vary, but no one is completely immune.

By: Jackie

Jackie — Fri, 15 Feb 2013 16:11:34 +0000

I thought it was very sad that even someone as conventionally pretty as Cameron Rusell would feel insecure. It makes you want to yell, “WHAT IS WRONG WITH THIS WORLD?!” We have children starving themselves near to death, and being fat is our country’s main concern?

I found the photo comparisons to be very striking, and understand why some men don’t understand why women would want to aspire to look that way. It’s partly portraying a fantasy, but it also just makes a model look alien. It’s so rare we see images of women normally, that now when we do see one we’re struck by the novelty of it and how beautiful women look in reality.

Also it would be hard for most people to differentiate some of those photos from something pornographic. Yes sex sells, but if you’re going to sell sex at least have the woman look close to natural, instead of all this eyeliner and lipstick. It’s become so ridiculous now with photoshop, that it’s looking like we’re never going to see a natural realistic woman portrayed in ads again. The uncanny valley never has and never will be sexy.

In regards to inherited cheek bones, David Bowie has been blessed with amazing cheek bones, it’s genetics not weight.

By: Ashley

Ashley — Thu, 07 Feb 2013 16:13:46 +0000

A lot of it is height, but that’s mostly for high fashion models. I’m 5’2 and have gotten promo and commercial modeling work.

But I disagree with Kat that “most models are average who starve themselves.” Many women are in fact born with those cheek bones and other features that can never be acquired other than genetically, unless you get some serious surgery done.

By: vallerie

vallerie — Sat, 02 Feb 2013 19:37:57 +0000

Why are people not acknowledging what is right in front their face, that it is height. If she had that face and was only 5’2 as I am, she would not be in this priviledged occupation or have anywhere near the astronomical pay for her time and work as she gets now.
There are many pretty females around who are only average height or shorter and they do not live a priviledged existence because they are prettier than the average person. In other words, it is height that decides whether you have won the genetic lottery. Even a 3″ difference between 5’7 and 5’10 can matter.

People don’t acknowledge that very TALL and pretty women have it made. Often getting better job opportunities beyond just the modeling profession and are also more apt to be promoted to supervisory positions within a shorter space of time. To reiterate HEIGHT is the key to winning this unacknowledged by society yet mysterious ‘genetic lottery’ as Ms Russell aptly labeled it.

By: Kat

Kat — Sun, 27 Jan 2013 16:57:04 +0000

That’s all very well, however I doubt models are really winners if “a genetic lottery” . It’s arrogant of her to say that. Most models are really pretty average white girls who starve themselves which accentuates their cheekbones etc. She said herself they don’t look like they do in magazines and most of it it’s photoshop. And while she does look beautiful and there are some fantastically gorgeous models out there I wouldn’t put it down to “98% genetic lottery, 2% hard work.”