Controversial Kibbe Celebrities
Vložit
- čas přidán 27. 08. 2024
- BODY TYPE’S WARDROBE BOARD: pin.it/6oLOUrq
* Controversial Kibbe Celebrities
🎁 If you want to support me and get some exclusive stuff:
/ alyart
Even $1 subscription in Patreon makes a HUGE difference for me! Thank you!!! :)
If you click to JOIN me you will get early access to some of my videos and soon I will add some exclusives there too!
PINTEREST Body Types: bit.ly/2GR2iyq
MY MUSIC ON CZcams: bit.ly/2Ln0zjU
INSTAGRAM: bit.ly/2NUy9Q9
PINTEREST: bit.ly/2NpJgiD
PATREON: / alyart (get in touch with me)
Spotify: spoti.fi/2MlISFT
🎨 If you want to support me and my channel - you can donate here: www.paypal.me/... - even 1 or 2 dollars will be so helpful for me!!!
💋 WHAT TO WATCH NEXT:
BODY TYPES PLAYLIST: bit.ly/2usi3oK
BODY TYPES TEST: bit.ly/2zJ60sh
13 BODY TYPES: bit.ly/2zR570u
HAIR for the BODY TYPES (#9): bit.ly/2Amx1BQ
Hair Color for the BODY TYPES (#10): bit.ly/2vO05Nb
Signature Looks For The BODY TYPES: bit.ly/2LC00Hd
_______________________________________________
💌 MEET ME:
MY MUSIC ON CZcams: bit.ly/2Ln0zjU
INSTAGRAM: bit.ly/2NUy9Q9
PINTEREST: bit.ly/2NpJgiD
TWITTER: bit.ly/2JseP9n
FB - ALY ART: bit.ly/2L2NEYb
FB: bit.ly/2L4cPd5
VK: bit.ly/2uEiknR
🏦 If you want to work with me: alvayar@yandex.ru
________________________________________________
🙋🏼 ABOUT ME: Hi guys! My name is Alyona. I was born in Russia. I'm a musician. And I love art, makeup, fashion, style and beautiful environments. I love playing with makeup and fashion, but at the same time, I’m quite a minimalistic person. I don't like the idea of being fixated on the body too much. I have an alternative and unconventional viewpoint on beauty, the body types and face shapes. I love helping other women find their "it" and finally discover their beauty and boost their confidence.
I have several series on my channel that you might be interested in such as: Body Types, Contouring, Makeup History and Makeup Transformations. Also some random beauty hacks about skin care, hair, nails and beauty in general.
Love x x x
Aly
TAGS: Aly art, alyart, kibbe, romantic, theatrical romantic, dramatic, classic, flamboyant gamine, soft natural, boho, vintage, style, fashion, lines, clothes, shopping, accessories, hair, makeup, shoes, bags, jewelry, haircut, hairstyle, skirt, pants, sweater, cardigan, pear, hourglass, banana, apple, body shape, body type, how to determine your body type, curly, straight, curvy, fat, overweight, loose weight, slim, small, petite, tall, wide, no surgery, how to embrace yourself, love yourself, self-acceptance, self- love, self-respect, love imperfections, stylist, advice, shoulders, waist, hips, bust, boobs, size, face, structure, proportions, morphology, legs, arms, neck, brows, sweater, coat, trench, upper wear, cold, warm, winter, autumn, summer, spring, 2018, 2020, 2019, 2021 trends
MY MUSIC ON CZcams: bit.ly/2Ln0zjU
INSTAGRAM: bit.ly/2NUy9Q9
PATREON: www.patreon.com/AlyArt
PINTEREST: bit.ly/2NpJgiD
9:20 i think she's a theatrical classic.
Taylor Swift to me is obvious and when you see her next to actual models her body is much more narrow and angular than theirs. She's not broad enough to be a natural. She has to be a dramatic. I think people get tripped up cause she's feminine and Tilda Swinton who has a more androgynous style is always held up as THE dramatic, but nowhere does it say that being dramatic means you look less like a woman.
That is such an important comment. So many are too influenced by the way celebs looks and thinks I do not look like her (especially Tilda) so cannot be this. And many are disorientated by the general stereotype about the common words of the bodytypes (romantic, dramatic, natural,...etc.)
Facts
That's why I'd suggest adding a subtype known as "ethereal dramatic".
Dramatics can sometimes look cat-like and cats are very feminine.
Its begins to the fact that David kibbe called dramatic as yang (masculine energy) and treats romantic as the most feminine body type. Actually I think that the dramatic is as feminine as the romantic.
0:53 Madonna
5:37 Mila Jovovich
7:00 Debbie Allen
7:45 Sarah Jessica Parker
8:55 Charlize Theron
11:19 Taylor Swift
13:17 Ashley Graham
14:48 Lily Cole
16:00 Zendaya
17:32 Shakira
Thanks! 🙂🌻
Always happy to help ☺️
How come I see Madonna as more yang? DC?
@@dandee6604 too restrictive on her
Jada Pinckett needs to be on here too. Maybe some kind of gamine.
If you do a second part I’d love too see:
Beyonce
Rachel McAdams
Hedy Lamar
Audrey Hepburn
Rihanna
Victoria Beckham
Megan Fox
This is by the controversy I’ve seen on r/Kibbe
why hedy lamar?
Beyonce is no way a romantic for example. She gives me soft dramatic vibes even if she's short. Look at her stage presence. She's powerful, sensual and fierce at the same time.
Ce Rise she’s 5’7” yet typed as TR
Ce Rise Because she’s one of those celebrities, like Fran Drescher in The Nanny, that is borderline SD and can pull off so much SD fashion looks that it’s uncanny. Hedy gets TR even though she has not only a longer vertical line, was 5’7” but dressed exclusively SD for the most part (but in her defense SD was the beauty standard of the 1940s anyways). With SD-TR I’ve noted there’s a fine line and so has everyone. For me for example, Fran Drescher looks SD but because of her height she’s technically TR. Same thing happens with Hedy, she looks SD, but for some reason she’s TR.
@@nesminra8982 so a romantic cannot be a badass leader/ENTJ ? Don't confuse personality and essence with body and bone structure
And even if you work your body the bone structure won’t go narrow, look are Jennifer lopez. You can change the muscle, not the bone.
Jennifer Lopez is a transgender with fake pregancy. All celebrities are secret transgenders. Thats is why there bones and jaw dont look like us humans.
Jim Dim most of them are secret transgendered. Charlize Theron, Karlie Kloss, Cara Delavigne, Pink (an obvious one), etc. I can’t believe people still cannot see this. She has based a whole system that is flawed because real women will never look like these celebrities.
@@goddessglow6996 its all of them, including most youtubers (like pewdiepie ftm and marzia mtf) stars and politicians.
G Glow they are not transgender, they are very different kind of woman and they are all beautiful
Secrets and Colors by Miriam Llantada sorry to burst your bubble (I too was deceived one time) but look around you and notice real women who take the bus, go to work and go to the groceries why do they mostly never look like these ‘female’ celebrities? I realized and woke up to this deception when I started noticing that many ‘women’ celebrities have huge manly squared jaws, linebacker shoulders, and a pelvis so thin there is no chance of children coming out of them. There is a pattern, they mostly all look the same, same strong manly features. Try to use your discernment.
Yessss how people are typing Taylor Swift and Zendeya as gamines is beyond me! Their strong vertical line is their most dominate characteristic!
True, Katerina. I also fell into the trap and typed Zendaya as Flamboyant-Gamine. This video really helped me understand some things.
I completely agree! How people cannot see the long vertical line on Taylor Swift and Zendeya is baffling to me. I think people are too stuck on their style (ie. Taylor Swift wearing gamine-outfits) and not actually looking at their frames/bodies.
They csn pull off gamine stuff though because of their faces and Essene s
I didn't realise Zendaya was tall
Zendaya is Dramatic, not Flamboyant Natural, she's too narrow for FN and her square face is more prominent. Not all dramatics are White. Dramatics can be muscular too. I know because I'm also Dramatic myself 😅
I didn't finish the video yet but I am glad you adress Taylor Swift's body type, when I heard someone typing her as Gamine I got really really confused because she doesn't look like a Gamine at all, she is a textbook Dramatic.
Lol, that’s hilarious for someone to say. She’s like, 6 ft tall!!!
Merriam style typed her as gamine. Her opinions are questionable
@@kshwi3215 exactly , she s not Kibbe , only Kibbe can identify ppl's type as he knows them best
@@youngboydan4153 For godness sake it is VERY understandable when you only work with the test from the old book and are not deep familiar what the system is. David Kibbe himself cut the face out for exactly that reason. Thanks to all the points from angelic or ingenue face the overall test results seemed strong opposing yin yang aspect = gamine. Same mistake with all the people getting TR when they do the test. You have to know deeper theory behind it and how to read bodies. Merriam never claimed being DK himself and always lets the comment section open for discussion.
@@kidaria1333 Merriam just panders to tall people who wants to feel dainty and small by typing them as gamine
There were multiple pictures of Madonna in the 80s. We had magazines. She did have a very nice curvy figure. The phrase "frame dominant" rather than "flesh dominant" has helped me out a bit here.
Taylor does not even look good dressed as gamin when she has that very short skirts and a mixture of paterns. Dramatic looks best on her
I think she looks amazing with those very shorts skirts, she looks like a real life barbie
The thing is the very short skirts work with dramatic. Her long legs are shown and they are creating a vertical which is essential for D. Her legs become part of the outfit so to say.
Well said! Tall, slim, young person with model like image can pull off anything. But, once you see her wearing D lines which actually fit her properly (not cherry picked images of her wearing wrong pieces from men's department) you realize that she is a D with softer face - which can be played out in order to achieve harmony. Image below: D lined tailored suit with soft edges, soft geometric patterned sandals, geometric bob with soft bangs and dramatic make up. Perfect soft/sharp combo to address her yang frame and height as well as her softer facial features.
i.pinimg.com/originals/d6/1e/93/d61e933d02c95cee35190096911cbc49.jpg
@@FriedToiletDuckRice Your opinion is not only rude but also untrue
I loved this!
Yes love you channel!
Loved your body type video 🥰
No system is perfect and thus surely has its limits. My opinion is that pure types are rare. The rest are percentages of more than one type with one being dominated. That's why not all romantics for example can pull of the exact same outfit to the same degree.
I think it it's better to honer the different characteristics in the way we dress according to how evident they appear. I also think having a different face "type" than the body has its impact and should be taken into consideration.
Kibbe typing could be used as a starting point. However, I don't think it gives the whole picture.
Perfect comment! Kibbe typing opened many doors for me, as I couldn't understand the basics of bone structure, muscles and fat distribution, and so on. I can now see how different and beautiful people are and it's fascinating! However, humans are such a mix, it's impossible to categorize every single trait. For example, I believe I carry a lot of TR in me, but I'm not too womanly, there's definitely a bit of SG there. What I try is rocking delicate outfits in lightweight fabric, sometimes with bits of humor, sometimes with a lot of skin showing. Once I saw a blog post about how the types are more in a spectrum in a person, with rihanna as an example. She rocked mostly romantic clothes, but when added the other bits she had in herself - a bit of gamine and dramatic, she truly shinned. I'm sorry if my response is long, I don't know a lot of people who know about typing and I'm very excited about the subject. But yeah, it's not perfect, but is very fun! ;)
This! So true. So well thought comment.
Absolutely agree. I think that is how Sarah Jessica Parker is able to be a FN despite her height: even though in that aspect, I find it unjust that taller women cannot be categorised in one of the stereotypically "shorter" groups (even classics). I am 1m76, which is quite an average height in the Netherlands for a woman. My shoulders are not as broad as most FN and my bones are not as angular and my arms are not as long as most D's. My facial structures and skin are quite soft but I don't have a full chest or exotic features as SD's. Like you said, I think no one is really one type and you can totally combine and play around.
@@melien This! Thanks. I've been commenting on this for some time now. The entire system caters to petite people like David himself, his spouse and all of his mods/admins from his private FB group (to join in, one has to pass an absurd and disturbing application form, cult like), taller ones are squeezed in 3 types basically. I've had a chat with one person who is obviously from Kibbe's private FB group here in comment section, also with few gals on Lily Cole. The entire system has turned into it's opposite - instead of helping people get some practical value from it and get confidence or simply dress better, it's been brought to it's own absurd opposite - mystified with ornate narrative and utterly confusing, inducing even more insecurities to young people with body image issues, who are now struggling with understanding something that is not really that deep nor complicated, just made to look like philosophical, almost divine essence searching quest accessible and understandable only to selected ones. Utter rubbish.
@blueice the base is: you’re absolutely wonderful as you are!!! - the sole takeaway from Kibbe is (for me at least) to recognise the different forces (yin-yang) and to use them to your own pleasure. Categorisation is psychologically interesting (and very pleasing to many) but always leads to grouping, idealisation and like you say, cult-like following. Thanks for reacting, love a nice exchange :)
Also I like that you adress Body/Face thing. You are right, some people might have some softness ("romantic") on their face but when you see their overall (sharp) body their face looks way less soft. You shouldn't separate face and body, it goes together you can't really say "I have a Gamine face on a Dramatic body" or "I have a romantic face on a Flamboyant natural“ because it doesn't make any sense in my opinion.
Jasmeen exactly! I agree. No one has a “gamine face on a natural body” it’s a natural face because it is apart of a natural body.
Yes and no. It is true that you will not have strong opposed features in the face compared to your body ID (bones and flesh are the same in one body) but often people are between two types near too each other and it can be possible that an SN has a more SD face but that does not matter much then. On the other side a yang body with a strong ingenue(childike) essence in the face has to be respected strong in the choice of cloth and the normal Kibbe System is not enough here. Examples of such persons are Lily Cole, Gemma Ward and Sabina Altynbekova. But such kind of people are rare. And people who claim essence doesn't matter are just plain wrong. It does matter and there are tons of blog and examples out there in the internet. Kibbe is a good symste but it is by far not a perfect system and it is annying how many extremes from people how do not want to understand and accept what is meant with the system and on the other side die hard followers not thinking for themselvs and not wanting do understand where is lacking.
@@kidaria1333 I agree with what you said but when you read comments under other Aly's videos, you see a lot of people saying that their face is the opposite of their body. When you face and body are close you shouldn't think about it too much. I also agree with the second part of your comment.
I was waiting for Rihanna controversy, hope you will clear this point on a different video.
Good job!
Same!
What’s the controversy with Rihanna? Do people think she doesn’t look TR because of her height?
Yep Rihanna is an SD no doubt...if every single person who sees themself as TR and gets told that at 5’6” they’re too tall, she’s not an exception...she’s never looked small
@@elizabethblanford8569 Yes!
Same, I was looking forward to her being in this video as well. She’s 5’9 but everyone says TR
Thank you for the part on Madonna. It makes so much sense to me why her style seems to clash with her. No shade, she’s amazing. But to use a word you introduced me to that makes so much sense, she just seems “separate” from her style.
Thank you so much about this video- my favorite part about this is your saying "Kibbe is not a style". Know your body type is a good thing,but also we should approach it in a relax way(sorry cant find the right word) and dont be too stress about it . I definately have fun on my journey of finding my body type,even though im not sure what my style is yet😄
David Kibbe is not god. He can make mistakes. In my opinion, Madonna has never been a romantic, too much sharpness, especially nose, limbs etc.
I don't see it either. If romantic is considered to be on one side of the spectrum with dramatic on the other side. And they are full yin, the moment someone has some yang, they can't be a romantic. They might be a theatrical romantic or other type that implies to have some yang, but not pure romantic.
I've always seen her as more of a TR. She can pull off a lot glamour and ornateness.
Madonna is romantic, her eyes are so romantic too. She always looked her best in glamorous and feminine outfits. Even with super muscles she looks petite and fragile.
Lyndsey Williams it’s more likely he’d just never seen her in person. Photos can make anyone seem any type I’ve learned. Photo angle and lighting plus posing, styling and never having seen the person irl would all make it incredibly easy to mistype someone even for kibbe when he’s just giving off the cuff answers without a chance to research.
I see her as TR
Vertical line makes sense, but height makes ZERO sense to me. I thought the typing was done by comparing yourself to yourself, with height you have to compare to people near you. Does ones’ type change if they move to a country with taller/shorter people? When people ask about someone’s height what are they comparing it to? 5’8 is considered tall in the US but not in the Netherlands. I’m a 5’5 average height American woman. If I moved to the Philippines, I would be considered tall. Would I turn into a dramatic or natural in the Philippines? This doesn’t make sense to me.
Tainara Jansen I can understand the logic of that! ❤️ I think there are still contradictions in the system though, because some celebrities that are tall get typed as more Yin. Someone in the comments mentioned that Audrey Hepburn is tall yet she is the quintessential Gamine type. I can’t really see her fitting in anywhere else tbh? Also, just the fact that so many tall women don’t feel like those lines work for them. It seems ESPECIALLY common for people typed as FN for some reason. There is definitely some room for improving this system, I think the frustrations tall women are feeling with this system is justified!
Not necessarily. I'm from the Philippines, I'm about 5'6. People here consider me tall because of my age, I'm quite tall for a young teenage filipina. I do type myself as a flamboyant natural, not because I'm considered tall but rather, it is because of the bluntness and drama in my bone structure. I appear to be vertically long yet horizontally wide. I remember being insecure with the width of my body/bone structure despite being skinny. I also have large hands, medium hips, slightly defined waist, moderate bust, broad (but not too broad) shoulders, my face is long; a bit wide with straight eyes, slightly wide, slightly straight nose. and a pair of wide full lips. I think it's all about the overall appearance, your yin and yang balance, and most importantly, your bone structure. FN lines really work for me. So, I really think I'm one. I don't think it's about how people see you from some country, I think it's about what suits you best, and what would flatter your body most✨
and also let's try to consider our inherent essence/aura.. it really helps. I'm a free spirited person. And I'm also straightforward and genuine, it has always been like this. And that's very FN.
I personally think that no country can change one's image id/body type. People are still very much aware if someone's tall vertically, no matter where you are at. Your body will remain the same, even if culture/standards around you changes, it wouldn't change anything, physically.
@@jessierasberry3082 yeah, I agree, there are still flaws in the categorizing in this system. I personally think that perceived height, although it's an important component of the overall look, is at the end of the day still only one component. I think it depends from person to person whether it can predetermine possible types or not. As an example imagine a person who in their own proportions is extremely yin. Let's say most E answers in general but tall or tall looking, no A or B answers other than their height. Would they have to be a natural or dramatic? With only 1 yang answer? I know this might be an unlikely case but theoretically the possible combinations of answers in ones body are endless. So if we give one answer in the test the power to exclude other possible types, we'll end up with a lot of categorizing that doesn't fully make sense.
@@jessierasberry3082 yeah the system has flawess but it is good for beginners to learn to think about bodyimages not only in the sense of form but also other aspects likeflesh, certain proportions in detail to each other,...etc. However the est way to understand the height topic is when comparing FN an SN. Because the boedies are very similar the only big difference is the height and a bit the flesh.
The problem with FN is that many do not like the disrecptions with words like "wide" and do not think they look "aethletic". People have stoing emotional about the Kibbe ID names because of the common meaning of the word (but this is not meant for the system). Bt there is definitly one extra bodytype missing for taller bodies and definitly one in the moderate to small section with people having lots of opposing aspects in their body but not strong enough for being gamine. And kibbe hardcore squat always says that we do not know the real height of celebs and Audrey Hepburn very likely hasn't been 170/5'7 like written in the internet.
Image ID rules doesn’t change depending on country. If the majority of the population is shorter than 5’5” then there will be more of the smaller image IDs in that country and vice versa. For instance, in Sweden the average height is 5’6” and that only means more people are yang dominant. The image IDs are not distributed evenly. The typing is also not done by comparing yourself to others, but sometimes it can help you. Kibbe doesn’t recommend it however.
I’m so happy to see you type Ashley graham as Flamboyant Natural! People all over Kibbe Subreddit day she’s SD but she’s got no narrowness to her 🤷♀️
@@user-ms1ue8bd8r Yes, Soft Dramatics' body structure is narrow, with long and narrow bones. Tricky even so. I often have problems typing.
blueice Wrong, all image IDs can have an hourglass body shape. Being a FN is about vertical + width and being frame dominant. SD is about vertical + curves. What is the first impression of a FN regardless of hourglass shape? Frame. They’re frame dominant. SD can have frame but their curves are always dominant.
blueice That’s quoted from the book. Which he doesn’t even follow himself anymore. His system has advanced far beyond his book. So no, he doesn’t say that FN cannot have an hourglass figure. In fact, when he talks about hourglass figure he even has his own definition. In current terms that would be curve dominance. A flamboyant natural can have traditional curves like Lynda Carter, but she cannot he curve dominant in Kibbe’s definition. All women have a baseline of curves, of yin, so they don’t always need to look muscular or even wide. A lot of times frame is what matters. That’s why Aly says Ashley Graham is most likely a flamboyant Natural despite having curves, because she’s frame dominant.
blueice He didn’t abandon the principles of yin and yang, he only abandoned the body features test and disregarded the face. That being said, he focused more on dominant features rather than individual features. Those features are vertical, curve dominance, width, frame and petiteness. Hence why FNs can have a tradition hourglass or a big WHR. They won’t have an hourglass or curves on Kibbe’s own definition. Lynda Carter is a “curvy” FN, but his celebrities verifications doesn’t really matter in terms of individual yin/yang balance. (There’s also FNs with hourglasses in his Facebook group). Anyhow, they’re supposed to represent the image ID and match the persona or the archetype. Kibbe has claimed himself that celebrities supposed to be inspiration rather than guidelines to determine ones image ID. They represent the persona of the image ID, not the actual body features.
I see. He disregarded 3 of his basic types, face as a criteria, body features test and verified body images among celebrities (thus accessible to public as guiding examples), keeping his own personal vision of yin and yang which, obviously means that personal consultation or membership in private FB group would be necessary since nobody else can possible get practical value (I.e. self type in order to simply dress better) out of his system. Fair enough.Thank you.
Zendaya is a Dramatic for sure.She doesn't look FN she looks elongated,sharp and long which is more D.
Shes Flamboyant Gamine to me personally
@@somebody7070 she can't be FG, she is to tall...have you even watched that video?
I see FN sometimes because of the shoulders but I could see an argument for dramatic
I think people understand Kibbe wrong.only shoulders are not a determinant for people's type.The main thing is general vibe.When I look at her I don't see bluntness in general.
Cola482 Watch Merriam Style’s video on Zendaya. She’s a FG. There are several inconsistencies in the Kibbe system. I love Aly but height isn’t as important as how someone looks in a type’s lines.
I’m really confused, if a tall woman can only be dramatic, soft dramatic or flamboyant natural. How is Rihanna a theatrical romantic? Isn’t she tall? Please help I’m more confused than I was before.
She could have a bigger head compared to her body ,making her have a short vertical line but idk
She's 173 cm, which isn't _that_ tall in my book
First because at a certain height around 170-174/5''7-5'8 there is elongation by instant and that does something with the way how cloth look on you. However David Kibbe himself does mistakes as well, changed celebs in the offical list and the die hard squat following everything what he says without thinking by themselves (internet height about celebs is not confirmed,,...etc.) . There is a reason why he is not publishing a new book despite internet already quarantees a big audience thank to channels like Alys. The Kibbe system is good, but it is by far from perfect. It seems already complex for outsiders but once you understand it, it is not. There are other systems out there which go much more in detail but this is even more confusion.
@@jeannedarc9222 True. But for many and especially in the Kibbe system tall starts at 170/5'7.
She is probably a SD, Kibbe could have been mistaken. That has already happened with other celebrities.
What would make a Romantic feel like they look older than they are? Could you make a video on what makes each type appear more youthful vs mature? That would help a lot! Love your videos:)
I'm 5'11" and I'm not a flamboyant natural. I am super tall, but I don't actually look tall. I don't look good in flamboyant natural clothes. I look good in pure natural clothes. Height isn't the be all end all.
I'm in the same boat. I've had people tell me that I can't be a 5'9" SN. However, I don't quite fit either SD or FN. I don't think that vertical line and height are the same thing. I don't look my height in most photos unless I'm with other girls.
@@americanfairy same. I was typed by Merriam style as a pure natural and I felt so free. I kept trying to make flamboyant natural lines work on me and they just never did. Height doesn't matter as much as vertical line.
I totally agree!! I'm 168-169cm (between 5'6" and 5'7"), and I look shorter than I am. Every line/ bone structure and features on me, from face to body are small and soft and delicate. I have small and sloped shoulders so wearing backpacks is a feat.
People notice my curves first, and I am within the healthy weight and BMI range.
The only type of clothes I look really good in are clothes with delicate lines and decoration and waist emphasis. Anything bold or loose makes me look bloated (loose silhouettes) or washed out and even smaller (bold designs).
I type myself a Theatrical Romantic and everything described in that type aligns so well with me.
Hedy Lamarr was also a Kibbe verified TR but 5'7"
I'm on the same boat as her, except I'm even curvier and has softer lines than her.
It has been super frustrating hearing from others that I CAN'T be a TR for my height alone. And yet people don't notice my height first.
Like how others here mentioned, I still tried and forced myself into other more vertical types (D, SD, N, SN, FN, DC, C, SC, FG, you name it), but they all made me look washed out or small or bloated.
Exactly!! I find it so annoying that kibbe doesn't use "pure" naturals anymore. And what's worse is that it's actually hard to find good clothing recommendations that aren't all boho style. There's a ton out there for soft naturals though, but not enough for us pure naturals.
I look drowned in D, SD, FN, SN lines. I look bigger than I am in G lines. I look frumpy in classic lines. I look my best, feel my best, express myself the best and stand with confidence in TR lines, even though I'm slightly taller than the category.
sorry but i will keep repeating that Audrey Hepburn and Twiggy being FG contradict everything Kibbe says about Gamines and height!
17:00 in all those pictures Zendaya is wearing huge heels, of course she looks very tall
Yes I’ve seen so much about this on the kibbe sub..considering that they’re the quintessential FGs yet both are tall is very confusing. I have seen people type them as DC
@@dalaciaj i think its totally fine, cause they dont LOOK tall. i feel like thats way more important. im the same way, 5'8 but people always assume im shorter online, and i feel my absolute best in FG lines... yet this height thing is constantly throwing me off 😭
I’m 5’5 but everyone always thinks I’m taller because I’m really thin. I’m not even flamboyant gamine though I’m just regular gamine lol
I don’t fit in ANY of the taller types so I know I can cross those out. I don’t like how the kibbe thing is so strict about height when it should be the whole look and what you feel comfortable in
Aubrey Allen yes I’m in the same boat...being 5’5” and discovering kibbe is the worst lol... I consider myself to be SC after thinking I was D, DC, FG, etc. because people think I’m taller due to my short torso/long legs combo and not understanding what Kibbe’s definition of Curves.. I feel my best in SC lines and always have before discovering Kibbe, I’ve tried “ sharpness” and high contrast but its a hard no. it’s funny bc SC is what I typed myself as initially haha
so height is very important, unless you are Sarah Jessica Parker ..
You misunderstood. Very tall women can only be dramatic, soft dramatic or flamboyant natural. But it doesnt mean that only very tall women can be those types
@@raygin6581 my problem is with vague descriptions like "very tall". But anyway, Kibbe insists that short women can't be D, SD, FNs... I mean, honestly I don't care that much, I know what I am :)
In simpler words (based on kibbes MOST recent posts on facebook): shorter types or those below 5'7 may fall under any body type (R up to D) HOWEVER when youre past 5'7 then theres a very big chance youre only FN D OR SD
Haha this! to me this doesn't make sense either. If she is that short, she cannot have a long vertical line. And Aly goes and says essentially the same thing in a different way: if a woman is tall, she cannot appear to have a shorter vertical line. And yet a woman who is 5'3 can appear as tall as a flamboyant natural? This is the one thing I will not agree on. To me, Ashley Graham does not look natural. even in her younger slimmer pictures, she looks curve dominant. She doesn't look powerful or muscular, and her arms aren't super long. Her shoulders are not super wide. Her face is not super blunt.
I don’t think the actual height measurement should matter...what should matter is the relative height. If you took someone from a “tall” category who measured 6 feet, and shrunk them down (proportionally!) to 5 feet, I think they would still be the same type, ‘cause they would still have the same proportions, and therefore the same relative height.
Me, a 5'3 person with long vertical line and baby face I got even more confused about my type.
My head size is what throws me off, shoulders too. I fit most of the Romantic type characteristics and I'm just shy of 5'4", but my head is quite small in comparison to my body and particularly my quite prominent shoulders. People have told me that I look taller than I am. Sometimes I complain about being short and they say you're not that short and then they stand next to me and say yeah you're short. I go back and forth between Theatrical Romantic and Soft Natural.
Comparing myself to Shakira though, I think I am more curve dominant, so I think I am TR. I often wear items that have drape over dance wear and you still see a curved shape through them. You wouldn’t think rounded rectangle or square.
Sound like you might be a soft natural.
I had a similar dilemma between romantic soft Gamine and soft natural. What might help is trying maxi skirts and baggy cardigan together. I looked very frumpy in this combo so was able to rule out natural all together. If you look put together then you're probably soft natural. Rn I believe I'm romantic but I'm also despite having a small head, people often find me short and I get the most compliments in romantic lines and fabrics Vs soft Gamine lines and fabrics.
@@tsuronhema3235 I definitely can’t pull off two baggy long garments together. One has to be form fitting if I want it to look cute or put together.
Typically I look best if my baggy item is cropped or hits close to the waist, and if it’s a bottom I look best if it’s fitted at the waist or ankles.
hey, Aly! I was wondering if you could make a " poses for the body types" or something along the lines. It would be great!!!
thank you and much love
Madonna doesn't even look good in romantic clothes...There is some softness in her, but romantic is 100 yin-it is PURE softness and doesnt matter how slim you are, romatic is always soft. So I completely disagree on this one. I actually have a romantic friend and even when she was super slim and fit she was still soft, rounded, so yin-Madonna has never beven even close to this... Besides-your type will always be your type, doesnt matter diet or exersize-it cannot change, so if Madonna doesnt look romantic now, she has never been a romantic.
Agreed. But I would take it further, I don't think Madonna is slightly soft, she may have yin in her size but everything else is angular. I grew up in the Madonna era and saw her music videos over and over, she came across has rather masculine, in looks and even more so in essence. I just had a good look at Madonna when young in a wide range of images, one batch of photos when she was only 18, not soft at all. Not that I care too much, even though I enjoy Aly's videos, I say forget Kibbe - I find him and his whole system bizarre. If you want to look good wear what suits you and if you want to be happy wear what you like ;)
Diet and exercise absolutely play a role..Ex, A Romantic or Fleshy type can exercise, build muscle and cut, to the point where you can't see ANY EXCESS flesh. It is very possible.
I agree.Even when she was younger and fleshier she didn't look good in romantic clothes. She would wear clothes like Marilyn's, but they didn't look right on her.
@Liza James 💯 👌👌👌
My opinion. Madonna just loves her Romantic looks. And her FGs looks are just badly made. Madonna doesn't like them, Doesn't feel them. The elements of her FG looks were not chosen to go together. No archetype used in those looks. Archetypes give the magic to the look. No good posing. She doesn't feel those outfits, clothes. It didn't include, honer Madonna's personality. That's why FG that particular looked bad on Madonna. But what if the FG looks - Were made by different stylist and designer. It would look amazing. FG looks - Can be as sensual, glamorous, As just possible, Too. - My opinion
This really answers so much. SJP is super interesting! She’s so short but looks amazing with the big hair etc!
what helped me figure all this out is to look objectively at you vs another person like a friend at the opposite spectrum. I thought I was just a tall soft gamine until I looked at the differences b/w my body and my friend's. seeing how she had a much smaller and graceful frame emphasized my more clumsy but powerful frame that led me to fit immediately within fn. everything fell into place after that
Same
I love your hair color and cut!
kibbe : typing celebrities a certain body type without knowing their height, but adding height into the criteria list
also kibbe : omg, some celebrities i've typed don't fit in the height limit i have established! let's just change their category and ignore their face and bone structure!!!
17:44 why doesn't he use naturals, classics and gamines anymore?
yeah, I would like to know about that. I always go back and forth with the idea of being a natural or a soft natural . I would like to see how the classification goes now.
I'm definitely a pure natural. I went back and forth between flamboyant and soft natural, because some of recommendations of each looked good on me, but not all. Once I settled on pure natural, I found the recommendations to work for me pretty much all the time.
Because a true natural, classic, or gamine is quite rare. Most people typically lean more towards the softer side or the flamboyant side
So everyone is either dramatic or romantic now? Just when I thought this couldn't get more confusing lol
@@0nlyAnEntity I think she meant the pure version of each type
A video on what makes each type appear more youthful vs mature?? Love your videos!
Milla was gorgeus. Still is beautiful
For a long time, I though that I was Theatrical Romantic (I'm 1,77m and I'm overweight), then recently I discovered that I'm Flamboyant Natural actually. This made so much sense to me! Thanks for the explanation 🙂
Really thank you Aly Art!!! This is a verry insightful video!! I personally think if i was as tall as zendaya, taylor swift or Lily cole, i would prefer an image Id that would celebrate my height and i would use this striking feature as one fondamental component for my overall look instead of ignoring it. I think Kibbe journey is a personal journey that helps you connect with your true self, instead of trying to shape you into something you are physically far from.
Such a nice comment and so true. So many feel limited and opressed by the kibbe system but in the end it should be the opposite, helping you understand you body better and how you to dress in harmony with yourself.
This video is going to break Merriam’s heart!
Lol that's what I thought! Honestly Merriam's videos about Lily Cole and Zendaya make sense to me. I don't see Zendaya as very tall, as an FN would be, her face is very prominent to me.
@@beebikinis I’m not good enough at this to have an opinion. I just feel like my parents are arguing.🥺
beebikinis they both look extremely tall with long limbs to me 🤷🏽♀️
I couldn’t take her seriously after she typed Taylor Swift as gamine. Also I don’t think she’s typed herself honestly.
Kalie Shwiyhat I don’t think most kibbe you tubers have typed themselves correctly. They’re all magically gamines. Other than aly i haven’t seen one real gamine on CZcams. Style by Rita is the only other kibbe youtuber that has a good grasp and that’s because she saw kibbe in person.
How is Zendaya not a dramatic? She doesn't have much width to her.
Sometimes it's hard to distinguish between a slim flamboyant-natural and a dramatic.
Those shoulders are very prominent
There is zero yang in her face. We can just ignore her facial features. There is definitely a blend to her. Dramatic is completely yang energy and zendaya just doesnt have that
Thanks everyone!
Merriam Style has a video on Zendaya saying she’s a Flamboyant Gamine and I still believe it. Zendaya is too narrow for FN clothes. Dramatic would be my next choice but her face looks so gamine to me.
Very interesting topic and detailed explanation with great photo examples, thank you very much Aly! Pretty much agree, maybe I would've typed Madonna as TR, Zendaya as FG and Sarah Jessica Parker as pure Natural, but I see your points. Great video, thanks! :)
I agree with you especially SJP as natural
I think zendaya is too tall to be FG and she also looks tall and u can’t look that tall to be a gamine. Perhaps she has gamine essence I think.
could you please make a video on the difference between a fleshier flamboyant gamine and a short soft natural? i relate to both shakira and debbie allen's bodies, and I'm struggling to understand what the exact nuances are between these two types. thank you as always for your great work!
I was always confused about Beyoncé and Riri
Beyonce is a complate romantic
She is a little bit taller and on a slimmer side and also she trained her body, she has a delicate essence to her, even after all that training we don't see a much muscular development in her, but rather a toned appearance you may not see her in stereotypical romantic silhouettes because of her profession
She is not a controversial romantic in my opinion as compared to Madonna
Also there are less examples of romantics with tonned bodies
Metabolism and functioning is also a factor
I think Beyoncé is actually Dramatic Classic, her features are actually quite sharp for a black woman
I think Rihanna is also a Dramatic Classic, her drama being her height and longer limbs
And Solange is totally dramatic, there’s no possible way a 100% dramatic person would be sister to a 100% romantic person
_______________ and no romantic would look like that either, they’d look much lighter
You can see Beyoncé’s shoulders in the first photo, her elbows, her hands, everything is a bit too sharp to be romantic, she jumps out too much in romantic lines
Yeet Yeet It’s would be confusing because of her height. She doesn’t come across as “small” or petite. She’s listed around 5’7 and i know they lie about celeb height all the time but she looks a bit taller than 5’5. It’s vertical line doesn’t stick out though because she’s curvy. But, I can see her romantic but, in my opinion it was cutting it close which caused confusion
@@suricato151 solange is FN
17:43 Wait what? Kibbe doesn't use Natural, Classic or Gamine categories anymore?! Why not? And what does he use instead? Can you do a video explaining that?
I think he skips the pure types and just uses like soft natural and flamboyant natural but not pure natural anymore
Honestly I’m starting to think this system is too confusing to be useful, especially with the examples being celebrities who are often thinner and it depending spo much on styling. It would be better if the test asked for measurements for example and decided on ratios like proportion of torso versus legs or bust size. Like, obviously there is a core of ideas here that is useful and I like that it finds positive traits for all bodies but at this point it’s feeling more like horoscopes
I agree, what's the point of finding "My type" if everybody is going to percive me in such many different ways. I still watching this videos because it's entretaining but every time I get more confused. Im just going to wear whatever I like and have fun doing it.
Kibbe himself says that people shouldn’t use celebrities as strictly for these reasons. They’re supposed to be style inspirations.
I'm seeing that either one gets it or they don't..I think the folks that don't get it, try to poo poo the entire system because they can't wrap their head around it.
Agree about the system being too confusing, specially since what was stated in the book has considerably changed to what Kibbe says today. Hoewever the measurement suggestion is kind of one of the reasons his system exists, measurements aren't good indicators on how fabrics and clothes fall on our bodies. You can have 3 women of the same height standing in front of you with the same chest and hip measurements, and they will still look completely different from each other, they will need to acomodate different things.
@@evea4527 hey this things wont work for us real women. All hollywood is transgender. They ALL have wider shoulder than hip and prominent features. All "woman" in hollywood have a jaw vs in real life there are no women with that. Just open you eyes you will see. Archeologits look at the bones and skull to determine the gender. The poking jaw is a male only threat. The famous people are all satanists. Their religion is to worship their transgender god baphomet, so they mimic that goat.
Thank you for this! I really need to get stereotypes and style out of my head when I typed myself and other people
I typed Mai Davika and Liza Blackpink as tall FG before and they're obviously not FG lol
also, it's interesting how most of the taller types are in the "controversial" lists
I think Lisa is FN. The main tells for me are how wide and blunt her shoulders are and her nose is all one width all the way down. Her facial features are all large too. She just has a ton of softness to them.
@@ETFL13 I totally agree! again, I guessed she was FG at first because I was a dumb dumb 😂
Whenever I look at celebrity bodies, I look at them on the beach and then I look at them in casual clothes. Stage and event outfits are off putting. It's just easier to see their frame when they are in normal clothes.
Right, I look for a bikini photo
Can you just please let people submit their own pictures and make a video of you telling which type they are? It’s difficult to relate to these celebrities that you show because well they’re MODELS, normal people are more diversed and complicated
Ruby I agree! And aly is literally the only kibbe CZcamsr I trust to be even semi accurate
That would be fantastic
Merriam style has done this with diverse people if you wanna check that out and give you some insight. Reddit is another great place to look at too :)
Little Miss Frostbite why? So we can go look at a bunch of “tall gamines” 🙄😂 she can’t even type herself correctly.
Nicole Smith yeah I’ve tried to look into her channel, but it confused me more. Perhaps I’ll look into it again lol
Thank you for that, it buzzes me out that tswifts persona/vibe is always so open and almost gumby when the dramatic essence is more restrained and intense, you can feel it in her music but i feel she is trapped by maybe a southern belle stereotype gotta be nice and smiles, a fresh all american girl when really she is more bold and sweeping. I would love to see her settle in her essence. I do think its a real and lovely thing. Love this series thanks Aly x
Could you do a video detailing the difference between Soft Dramatic and Flamboyant Natural? I feel like many people get confused between the two!
SD (yang frame, narrow long ones, tall, with yin, very lush flesh - well defined, often hourglass shape, pronounced bust/waist/hips ratio).
i.pinimg.com/originals/f2/8a/26/f28a265455bac57e3930cae2253cfd64.jpg
FN (tall, yang frame, blunt, wide bones, moderate yang flesh, muscular, strong, athletic looking, no definition in outline, straight, waist and narrow hips, often inverted triangle, or wider rectangular, tip heavy, with broader shoulders and rib cage/back. Swimmer body type).
freeimage.host/i/flamboyant-natural.2Xo6lI
D/SD/FN: D (tall, lean, narrow, dry, straight)/SD (tall, narrow, very soft and lush, hourglass/defined)/ FN (very tall, blunt/broad, strong/athletic, muscular straight, top heavy):
freeimage.host/i/kibbw.2XyFhF
Yeah their needs to be an add section for flamboyant natural.
I don't know, at the same time it's not a good idea to type someone very young, but Madonna can be typed from her teenage pictures? :D SJP can be a small FN but Zendaya can't be a gamine, because she's tall?
Yeah I'm like you ,I'm not getting any of it
There are too many " exceptions " without any explanation
Madonna changed her body through extensive (overkilling) exercise. It's not that she just grew older. She "added" somewhat unreal sharpness onto her soft frame.
SJP is smaller in height but if you look at her limbs, they're super long (for her height), thus the body type she represents.
It's best to not look at faces at all, just look at the frame of the body. But mostly, you just have to feel it. Not everyone is able to see those nuances.
@@aniadziedzic6177 It also seems like a stretch that someone can alter their type so much and still be classed as their "original" type. In the video about Kim K Aly even says she has "changed" her type to a TR from SN via surgery etc.
edit: And about SJP, also FG and G and are described to have a leggy look. It's also possible for a C and even(!) a SN to have a leggy look. Seems like one of those ought to fit her better.
beebikinis It’s when you look best (as your original type). Kim K. wanted a dramatic look about her, but often times it feels like an act. Like she’s trying. When you see her older pictures, or the pictures where she’s styled as a softer type, there’s so much more depth and realness to her.
But her “young” photos aren’t all teenaged years, but young adulthood. She was in her mid/late twenties at Kibbes book time
Madonna.. hmm. Not even a theatrical romantic?
Really interesting, I totally agree with the analysis of Madonna. When she was younger you can really see her true type in her 80s music videos. Then came the weight loss and working out to sharpen her body and face.
I think there are some inconsistencies. FN can be short but FG can't be tall? I agree that Taylor Swift not only is tall but she also looks tall, but Zendaya imo only looks tall when compared to other people, when I saw her in the movies I was dead sure she was very short actually, the same when I see her in picture where she's alone. Her limbs look long but to me she doesn't look tall at all.
I think something similar with Lily Cole, she doesn't look too tall to me, even though she seems taller than Zendaya. I don't know what to think about Taylor Swift because to me she looks awkward no matter what she wears lol and her body is very confusing.
I also agree that we can't type someone for their face only, but I don't think we can just straight up ignore someone's face, and it's also a bit weird to type someone solely looking at one "dominant" characteristic (not saying we should ignore it).
Lisa from Blackpink is certainly a FN, even though she has that "baby face" syndrome (but if you look at her old pictures not so much). We can't just look at her face to type her, but if you look at her you can see that her bones underneath that softness is pretty wide, her mouth is wide, cheeks, cheekbones etc. She doesn't look too tall even if she is but her limbs are extremely long, she's very angular and her shoulders are very wide. She aoften dressed as a gamine and even if she's pretty she looks a bit awkward in them.
Idek what I'm saying anymore lol hope you got something from this comment
Actually, I was shocked to find out Lisa is only 1,67m tall, and I've seen many people say they were shocked too! Lisa looks much taller than she is to me. It's unbelievable that she's just 4cm taller than Jennie.
FN cannot be short. SN are moderate to short so maybe Lisa fits here. Dramatics can be moderate to tall and moderate with Kibbe means 5'5/165. So Zendaya fits. And careful with all the "How someone seems" when you didn't saw them in reality. When you search for casual bikini pics from Lily Cole the first impression her body creates is elongation. She looks tall and her whole body is soft/dramatic. But her head and face doesn fit well to her body image (what makes her looking odd for many people). But so extrem cases like Lily Cole are rare. Yang bodies with a strong ingenue essence creatig a false yin impression destryoing the overall harmony would also be Gemma Ward and Sabina Altynbekova.
The wrong results of long gamines is thanks to the old original test where the face is analysed as well. When someone has a very ingenue(childlike) face like with Lily Cole you get too much opposed results and strong opposing yin yang aspect = gamine. This is why david kibbe offical said cut the faces only focus on the body.
Same mistake with all the people getting TR or classic when they do the test first time because they think they are somewhat feminine but not extreme like Monroe and somewhere in the middle. becaus ethey do not know how to analyse bodies in detail and in comparison to each other.
I'm sure Lisa is FN, her face is softer than body but still looks very wide in bones
I'm Asian and we are shorter than people in Kibby's book generally. You should minus the height when typing. Lisa's taller than the average girl here
She also seems taller than her actual height, very long limbs and easily wears unconstructed clothes
That’s because it’s about proportions. A tall person cannot dress after shortness and petiteness because they need to accommodate literal length in limbs. A short person’s proportion can vary so much that they may need to dress for literal length. Now, that’s very unlikely but can still happen.
@@kidaria1333 I wrote a long a** comment and them my phone fell and I lost everything lol.
Long story short: I'm not convinced by the "ignore the face" attitude, because our face is part of our body, it could represent a smaller percentage but it's still there. I'm open to change though.
Lalisa Manoban (from Blackpink, I mentioned her, I advice you go check her out) favours both my and yours point of view:
-someone said she's only 1,67, that means I thought she was like over 1,70 but looked shorter, turns out she's 1,67 and looks definetely taller. That to me proves that she can be FN.
-her face is extremely soft (still kinda natural) but if she uses softness in her clothes she looks sooooooo awakward and all of her width and angularity is very evident. But she looks amazing in N clothing. So in her case I actually ignore completely the softness of her face.
Conclusion: I'm confused yay but I like having these discussions.
Can u do one about confusion regarding classics??
Congratulations 👏 👏 👏 👏 👏 👏 you have definitely developed your eye and consciousness to a master level image consultant,I was working with David Kibbe in nyc in his high end penthouse workshop space for 5 yrs as a hairstylist and eventually his hair stylist,using his system of yin and yang is a wonderful idea with many amazing transformations,I'm lucky to have worked with a natural perspective and approach to insane ideals of what you are supposed to look like,this technique is a tool and a key to knowledge and self awareness that we are lucky to have in our life,thank u 4 sharing your great eye and knowledge in the world 🌎
I know taller women can't be gamine but Audrey Hepburn was a flamboyant gamine and she was 5'7".
And the average American woman in the 50s was only 5'2, so Audrey was 5 inches taller than average. That's the equivalent of being 5'9 in this day and age
@@meh5421 Very true however she was born in Belgium and was still 5'7" when she passed in 1993. I believe out of all the gamines, flamboyant gamine can be on the taller side of things but not taller than that. You should check out Merriam Style for her breakdown. I only point this out because I'm similar to Audrey and am certain I too am flamboyant gamine. Thank you for your information 😃
Your videos are always really engaging and informative! Thanks much for all of these! By the way, there were tons of celebrity magazines and tabloids in the 80s before the internet.
height cannot be a determinant factor. only bone structure is. a yin bone structure doesn’t magically becomes yang when over 170cm! this is common sense
I dont think you know better than kibbe
This was great! Thank you so much for covering this topic!
One question: where do you put the tall-short limit?
Likely 173 cm
This height is the last for being a Dramatic classic
5'5" (about 165 cm) according to Kibbe.
Thank you all!
I love your Kibbe series.
I am a petite woman 5'2 but I am soft classic. SO its like the Sarah Jessica Parker example- I am very narrow and look taller than I am. Height is not definitive for Kibbe type in terms of short women. But for very tall women it is. If you are super tall you can ONLY be Flamboyant natural, dramatic, soft dramatic.
@@blueice011 A 5'5" and 5'11" FNs won't look the same either, it doesn't matter. What matters is what their lines are. They'll both have long and blunt lines.
@@olgap1440 Of course not. That's why people with such difference in height and body mass, limb length shouldn't be the same body image nor wear the same lines. Just bra size matters a lot. A cup lady and G cup lady with identical height, weight and bone structure won't look the same nor will clothes fit the same. Stick can fit into anything, but stick with two balloons attached to it can't fit almost nowhere. Body geometry makes a lot of sense, but to me, just personal opinion, old systems used to make a lot more sense. There are certain lines that flatter tall or petite figure, short or long legs, arms, torso, large or small bust, bum, wide or narrow hips, shoulders, neck...Kibbe mystified his system excessively and abandoned almost all his initial principles. There is lots of inconsistency and the system appear biased and lacking logic. It's his prerogative, for sure.
11:19 - 12:35 She's the reason I think the "Dramatic" family should include an additional subtype: "ethereal dramatic". Her facial bones and features are quite delicate despite their sharp angularity, and she exhibits a more feather-weight grace of carriage than is typical for any yang-dominant type.
Completely agree, there needs to be another type between D and SD. I mean, who’s Taylor closer to, Tilda Swinton or Sofia Vergara? I’d say she’s very in the middle in bone structure, amount of flesh, lines she can pull off, all of it. Kibbe’s main flaw is the limited amount of options for women dominated by vertical, aka tall women. Being tall doesn’t automatically mean you’re yang dominant, look at Beyoncé and Rihanna. Him inisting that they’re so much shorter than what they say is actually a little ridiculous. It actually sits so wrong with me that a (male) stylist focuses so much on smaller, daintier women, describes them in much more detail and with more “good-sounding” words.
Thanks Aly for this video! I've been wondering for a while what type the Duchess of Cambridge could be. She's very slender and proportionate, could she be a dramatic classic?
A natural would be my guess. She is narrow and tall. A boyish figure, without much of a waist. She can wear many styles and Ally said most models are naturals so that’s my best guess. I’d be interested in what Ally thinks also.
I heard she is a Flamboyant Natural :)
Anna's Actuality Thanks. Yes she has the narrowness and long straight limbs of a natural. I’m getting the hang of this :)
I’ve seen her typed as a natural but I feel like she looks better in DC lines. FNs look powerful if that makes sense and I don’t really see that. Maybe it’s just because she’s so thin.
@@starminoui Exactly my point, I think she looks her best when she wears outfits that would suit classics best (she's slender and thin, but her narrow waist is often one of the key-elements of her outfits, along with her polished hair styles). She has the height to be a flamboyant natural, of course, but I don't see the width. Still, I'm not an expert so I could be wrong about it.
I saw a video in another channel that said that classics usually don't have an hourglass shape. I'm a classic an a thin hourglass as well. I'm very confused about it.
Where is Beyoncé? I’m really confused about her
She’s romantic. Despite her being tall, she looks shorter, and looks best in romantic lines
She’s not a romantic, she’s one that Kibbe actually thinks about moving. She is not delicate and doesn’t fit into the romantic archetype. She has longer limbs and vertical. She also wears outfits no romantic could pull off.
I don’t know that I agree with all of this, I should by all means be flamboyant natural, in every way I should be, every single way, except one thing. I look horrible in the lines, especially for the love of god natural hair 🙄🙄 I personally feel there’s a bit more that goes into typing someone than just height or vertical lines.
I'm 6'1", and I just cannot do bigger clothing. I feel pretty comfortable in SD but honestly, I would much rather dress in Gamine lines than pure D or FN because I am not that big nor sharp. I don't think this system is very inclusive for taller women - we come in as many shapes as shorter women do! All the women I know who are around my height look very different from one another, and I cannot imagine all of them being D, SD or FN because their overall look is just not in harmony with those lines.
right?? like, im not athletic like FN, im not sharp like D, im not regal and curvy like SD. im tall, have sharp shoulders, a baby face, wide hips and no boobs. wtf am i? mixture of opposites = FG, but i guess im too tall for that? it doesnt work...
Exactly! I'm 181cm and definitely not FN or SD. I guess I could be typed as a Dramatic, but the Dramatic style would drown me. I look best in DC clothes
thank you
Gamine lines dress for petiteness and shortness, if you’re 6’1” you automatically dress for literal length. So you’re not even dressing in gamine lines.
@@elektrakomplexet length and smallness are not things per se. they are relative. you can be a tall gamine, you'll look petite and small and short, that doesn't mean you are smaller than everyone else. you are gamine if you have some elements in your bone structure that are yin and others that are yang. that has nothing to do with literal height
Thank you so much for sharing Aly it was very helpful. I'm looking forward to the next video in the series. Also must add that I personally find it might be helpful to first think about Kitchener's Essences/Other when wanting to type someone. As an example on the list for Lily Cole if I remember correctly I remember reading she had ethereal essence so she looks very fairy like which has sprinkles of cuteness and looking young and such, however her body type will not be influenced by that.
Yeah Kitchner is great. Many start with kibbe but realise after a while the system isn't doing many bodies justice enough in detail and search of more style systems. And Kitchner is next to get into. However for beginners Kibbe isn't easy and Kitchner is even more diffiicult. One really has to learn first how to analyse bodies.
@@kidaria1333 Yes, indeed. You make great points.
So when you say that tall people can only be dramatic, soft dramatic og flamboyant natural, how tall in cm is ‘tall’? I am 173cm, would I fall in to this category?
check what matches your height in this video: czcams.com/video/hkf33PHuD-c/video.html
Yes, you’re considered tall. 173cm is 5’8”.
I agree with this mostly except for I see Zendaya as 100% dramatic. She is so so so sharp and narrow, and her shoulders don’t overpower her frame like say Kaia Gerber (extremely narrow but her shoulders are so dominant that they’re the first thing you see). I think people may think she’s FN because her face has that “open” look, but again I think that’s conflating essence and Kibbe. I think she’s a dramatic with natural and ingenue essence, and her height combined with essence enables her to pull off FN looks more easily
Soft naturals are actually described as moderate to slightly small, not moderately tall
I think 25 ish to know a woman's type without it shifting.
Thank you for making the comment about age and development. Maybe it’s about puberty, maybe it’s about childbirth idk, but it’s not always clear what your type is at 17, 18, even 25 years old
I think Madonna is gamine and because she is mixed she just plays up different aspects of the mix.
I think Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis is confusing. I think Kibbe considered her a dramatic classic but I read somewhere on an old blog, someone thought she looked best in natural lines and I think she has a Flamboyant Gamine look. But I also get confused by focusing too much on the face and just learned that the face can confuse the issue and one should just focus on the body. I think Jacqueline Kennedy Onasis’ face was a study of contrasts with her very strong jawline, wide cheekbones, small nose and large wide-set eyes.
I'm on the fence about Taylor Swift and Zendaya because I can see them as both D and FG. Right now I'm leaning towards D for Taylor although she rocks Gamine looks, but Zendaya still looks like "a small Dramatic" to me.
On another note, have you seen actress Anne Winters trying to score the Madonna role in her biopic? Aside from the wonderful makeup artists and stylists, she really resembles a young Madonna. I think it's because Anne is a TR and Madonna indeed is a R. Also, another R celebrity who overworked her body is Geri Halliwell. When she left the Spice Girls she wiped every bit of roundness and softness from her, but now you can see that her body bounced back to its original type.
Aly has spoken.
Madonna had tons of plastic surgery done and she started early. I think her nose job was first. She actively changed her body and face.
I feel height should be considered also in what is average. Dutchies are very tall.
I feel like fellow CZcamsr Loepsie is Gamine, but as she is average Dutch height (172) she is confused.
Chinese peoples average is 157. But yet still they might be dramatic.
I do not like these absolute numbers.
Yeah,I think that would be helpful for a lot of people.
Yes im a Dutch TR and 173 cm
I am so loving these videos Aly! I feel like each one confirms and clarifies why I think I am a flamboyant natural. I’m so happy I found out about Kibbe and found your videos. It has helped me understand why I love some clothing on other people but think it looks terrible on me or I’ll feel uncomfortable in it. Thanks for making these. ❤️
I think there are always exceptions to any rule. For example Mae West was a soft dramatic but she was very short (5’0”).
Incredible and super -helpful work Aly. I have been following you for years and I always learn something with each of your videos. Since I'm an English teacher, would you allow me to make a small correction? We would say "child-likeness" not "childishness". By the way, I could never speak a second language as you speak English SO well. I love your work, your intensity, your teaching style. Thank you so MUCH!
Thank you, this was very informative! I'm curious why in the analysis of tall women, you only considered that they could be: flamboyant natural, soft dramatic or dramatic - why did you omit dramatic classic? Doesn't it also include tall women?
I’m 5’2, but it always feels like my face is separate from my body- my face is heavy, big, & sharp but my body is boyish and small and sometimes soft.. I feel like I have a gamine type of body but with a flamboyant natural face, my mom use to study fashion, and told me that short hair doesn’t suit me because it makes my face look rounder, which is ironic because I have a long face?
There's nothing wrong with rounded faces. It's like your mom studied the "how to make everyone looks like they have agn oval face" kind of fashion wich is kibbe's system total oposite.
Okay that helped me narrow myself to 2 types possible: soft natural or romantic. Need to see more comparisons of these.
I would be really thrilled if you would cover both Diahann Carroll and Sade Adu. For the life of me, I can't see why she is able to carry the Soft Dramatic style like a true diva. Sade's sharp lines, angles, gentle curve, very full lips, all within the 5' 7" frame leave me confused, where Kibbe is concerned.
Seems there are so many ladies trying to force themselves to fit into the yin dominant type despite their heights being yang and that’s so sad because yang is so beautiful. I just don’t understand this “yang resistance.”
Agree; when someone embraces and works *with* their yang characteristics they look 1000 times better!
I completely agree! One type isn't better than another type. Everyone should just embrace their own type instead of wishing/wanting to be something else.
Agree; Yang has such nice qualities that women envy All day everyday, but just the slight mention of it being masculine..sends everbody to the bandwagon of being Yin/Romantic..even when they're not.
It's not hard to understand why really, when you hear that yang = masculine and yin = feminine, would you rather, as a girl, be called masculine or feminine? I agree with you. Just in this comment section I read someone saying that Dramatics look like they have Marfan syndrome if they don't cover up. All of this makes people scared of yang dominant types.
@@cunextthursday Well, you can say mean things about Yin types too 🤔 People who say that are jerks, their words shouldn't matter. If they see a healthy body and think of an illness there's something wrong with them.
I agree Ashley graham is FN also! I was comparing her the other day with some other rounder models of similar height who appear to be SD... yeah, she just has more power, she also looks better in more athletic swimsuits than super rounded ones with SD ornateness.
However I see lily cole and Zendaya as Dramatic. Their shoulders appear to be wider than the hips but this isn’t an indicator on its own (especially when young and slender, as the hips can just be really tiny making the shoulders appear wide comparatively), we have to consider the upper back width and the narrowness overall. Both the girls appear to have sharp and narrow shoulders to me!
I think Kibbe’s system would be a lot easier to understand if there was no classic category. Instead, each of the other categories could be studied as to how could they dress in a classic style when desired.
Good job, Ally. So interesting. I do think it’s important to distinguish measured height from vertical line. I know a woman who is probably around 5’10”, who has a large head and is very curvy, and from across a room she does not strike you as tall at all! So she may be quite tall by most standards but her vertical line is not long. Maybe she’s a romantic...
I’d love to see why scarlett johansson is soft natural .. it always confused me ! Great video !!
@@robinarman7300 Perfect described however I would like to add the shoulder, SNs have in general more width but especialy in the uper torso shoulder area. It is very obvious with scarlett in my opinion.
As a romantic, good to know that, if i work out like a crazy person, i would potencially be able to have some resemblance of muscle on my arms
Can you do a video talking about good plastic surgeries that have improved celebrities?
I feel she wouldn't make a video on such a subjective/polarizing topic. Aly always advocates for different types of beauty and accepting one's type of beauty.
@@anasonyc3983 what compelled you to write back? Did my comment offend you?
@@leilalani4540 It didn't offend me. I just cane across it while scrolling.
Anasonyc I was just trying to communicate with Aly. She gets so many comments I doubt she even saw mine. I understand it might be a subjective topic but she has done the how to look classy video which was polarising. I was only wondering if she could do an antithesis to that. Having plastic surgery doesn’t always mean they are not accepting their beauty or that they’re trying to conform.
@@leilalani4540 You might be interested in the channel Lorry Hill, if you've not come across it already. Lorry makes detailed analyses of celebrities' faces and makes an educated guess on all the work they may've done, explains the procedures, lists the prices etc.
What happened to tall people being a soft natural? Is that not possible at 5’10? When I saw Ashley Graham she looked soft natural
What happened to the categories Classic, Gamine and Natural? Why does Kibbe say they don't exist anymore? And where can I find what he has said recently? So many questions!
You are great alyona.
Thank you for this video! Awesome as always
I think you're correct about youth obscuring a person's kibbe type at least somewhat. Though I would say 18-20 still seems too early to me. Then again, I guess one could argue that if they haven't lost it by then it's probably just softness.
As well, I appreciate that you've taken accountability for using language that might have contributed to confusion over Kibbe's system. For myself, I understood it as your trying to express what you saw in a language that was not your first.
Very interesting
For explaining cases like Lily Cole a video on ethereal essence vs ingenue essence could be interesting
yeah but many do not realise that these aren't kibbe methods but kitchners (they work so well because essence and facial feature have an impact in the overall appereance).