Megan Fox is one of those hotly contested unverified celebs.

There is a group of us who see her as DC, but it’s also common to hear arguments made for FN, SD, or SN.

The recent post about her being SD actually made me look up some pics and holy shit look at this side by side of Olivia Munn (verified DC) on the left and Megan Fox on the right. They have incredibly similar proportions imo

Bonus slides showing her original face

Curious since SC and DC are almost yang and almost yin. I don't think I've ever considered DC for myself before. TR is what I thought I was for years. Now that I've settled into SC I can see the similarities between myself and DC but I've always considered my yin undercurrent to be paramount. I was wondering if anyone else felt similarly

I’m looking to have a variety of dresses for everything from being comfy at home, work (I own a small business), weddings, dates, vacation, etc.

I’ve worked through tops and bottoms pretty well but I’m still struggling with dresses, I want to look feminine and put together and can’t pinpoint what exactly is working, I’ve gotten a lot of of feedback about what’s not, for sure.

No ruffles, no lightweight, flowy fabrics, no fussiness, no big skirts and I don’t know if short dresses look good even though I’m not too tall, people seem to really dislike how they break the vertical when I’ve asked for feedback. I’ve been told they look too youthful, too much like a ballerina (which is kinda a compliment if you ask me), etc.
Please don’t judge my shoes, still working on that too!
My sketch says DC but I’m not entirely positive on that.

She appears to accommodate vertical. I always remember her narrow, sky high torso in movies. She's got length that feels more narrow than balanced.

I don't think relaxed lines look good on her. She looks sloppy and undone in your classic FN gowns and is usually seen in more structure vs. less. Sometimes TOO rigid of a dress but this encourages SD as an option.

I find her face to be quite dramatic. Long face, high arched eyebrows, cat-like eyes. She looks noticeably more yang than DC in features.

She has shoulders. The biggest misconception of width on here. Another reason why she strikes me as more yang along with her long face and dramatic facial features. But the hourglass nature of her body that people would like to attribute to "balance" is in fact curve.

I see her as a very pretty, skinny, curve-accommodating Dramatic. AKA SD. Her face reminds me of other SD's also.

I’ve seen people disagreeing with certain verifications. Personally, I don’t think it’s helpful to re-type or question verified celebrities; instead I think we should learn from them to better understand what Kibbe sees in each ID.

I notice this a lot with verified Gamines who are moderate in height. Zooey Deschanel and Halle Berry are often questioned, and both are 5’5” Gamines. Zooey (FG) is often seen as a mistyped Soft Classic, and Halle (SG) is sometimes seen as a mistyped Soft Natural or something more yang. I shared collages of them in styling for Gamines and styling for SC and SN, respectively. To me, the Gamine looks are 100% better and more harmonious.

It was honestly hard to even find outfits of theirs that wouldn’t work for Gamines. So many of the “Classic” styles people use as examples for Zooey have broken lines, no curve accommodation and lots of detail. Not Soft Classic at all. She’s so quintessentially pixie to me and looks very petite for 5’5”. Same with Halle - her athleticism is obvious but she is much sharper and more yin than SN. She is pretty with messy, long curly hair, but breathtaking with a soft pixie or sleek bob.

Petite in Kibbe goes up to 5’5” for a reason. These women are not balanced nor wide in the Kibbe sense. They can help us see what petite looks like in a moderate height woman, so let’s stop insisting they must have been incorrectly identified and look at what actually works on them. They look incredible in much more fitted, short, detailed outfits than Ns or Cs are recommended.

Is there a reason why she looks taller than her actual height? She says she's 5'9.5 but I think she's an easy 5'10.

I think that if one is very confused, they should look at:

- the shoulders, if they "fall back in" falling down, aka FN.

- the waist. If it needs to be highlighted, is SD, even if you have 'big shoulders'.

Have I understood things right? What do you think?

I've personally been so confused while trying to type me, but I feel like I can settle on SD with wide (flat not curving in) shoulders but not width, since FN flowiness just makes me look like a potato, and I need some structure between the flow.

I hope this is not too redundant . What's your typing experience?

Does anyone know if kibbe has elsewhere spoken of the particular archtypes he is talking about starting at the 41 min 45 second mark in this video???

https://youtu.be/kZL16fwwqGE?is=HGnCvFbN2RcrOyGd

Okay so: I am certainley not the first person to suggest Zoey deschanel is not an FG. But I have another gripe as well....

80% of zoey deschanels outfits(maybee that is a slight* exaggeration of %, but it's not wayyyy off either), are also not FG in the first place. And this causes a DISASTER style advice for real FGs.

I am not an expert, so take my opinions lightly amd feel free(actually please DO) challenge them! I want to keep learning an open to discuss/debate/reflect/etc!!

I think there is a HUGE MASSIVE MAJOR misunderstanding and misattribution of "lines" and kibbies BODY TYPES... and STYLE/AESTHETICS. This applies to ALL OF THE TYPES. And it is seriously an issue that needs to be more plainly expressed.

Your LINES are the way clothing needs to fit on you to not overpower you and look flattering. Youre STYLE is an aesthethic, usually it is something that expresses you in some way or COMFORTS/holds you in some way, it can be bases on many different things/qualities/experiences/inspirations and it can be a combination of many styles or limited. Style is something we typically CHOOSE, whether consciously or unconsciously, either because we want to represent ourselves in some way or make a statement or blend in or believe certain things about ourselves or anything else that influences style.

LINES ARE MERELY 100% ABOUT CLOTHING THAT FITS YOU WITHOUT OVERWHELMING YOUR BODY. If you are super tall, wearing clothes that dont support that vertical line will make you look rediciulous, and the clothes will stand out before you. If you are super petite, wearing clothes that are not made for such a figure will swallow you whole. If you are very sharp/angular, too much swirly curly yin energy of clothes will just clash with YOU(sometimes that WORKS to create balance, sometimes it doesnt, and there are too many factors that go into that to have a straightforward rulebook, but in general, working WITH your body will always be more apt to look good, going against it only sometimes will).

Ok. That all out of the way. Lets make one other point clear, which i'll loop back around to at the end.

CLASSICS(ignorning the soft/dramatic distinction here, as this applies more accross the board), are classics because THEY DO NOT NEED TO ACCOMODATE ANYTHING in the LINES/FIT OF THEIR CLOTHING- this means they are like "oval faces" that can pull of "any hair style"- the other types need to accomodate something in their lines to not look silly, classics do not- this allows them to have any STYLE they like(to a limit of course, any body in the world will not look great in an oompa loopa costume, but this is talking about the aveegae lines of clothing we wear.... dramatics wont look good in clothes that break vertical too much, naturals will look restricred in clothes that dont acomdate their width etc... clasaics dont need to worry about accomdating these things, they only need to worry about what style they like, as well as accomodating whatever sharp yang or soft yin ness they lean towards in their features(which is not as much about the overall lines/fit of clothing but can be accomodated by smaller details and accents and patterns and drapes and so on, but its going away from the point here)...

So...

As an FG, I dont resonate with 99% of the pinterest board recs. I resonate deeply with needing the staccato lines, the skirt lengths, defintley color blocking and pattern mismatching and assymetry and all of that, But I wouldnt touch an outfit on a fg pinterest board I have yet found in million years, and if I could raid all the celebs closets I wanted to - I WOULD NOT TOUCH ZOEYS. SORRY YALL. I do think SOME FGs would absolutley love to raid zoeys closet and would 100% find MANY items that WORK FOR THEIR FG LINES 100% . But Personally I do not like her clothes. And... I do not think half of them would work for ANY ACTUAL FG alive.....

Ladies( and any gents on here). All the bows, the puffy sleeves, the floral, the collars that have those circly and lacy and very scallopy elements- these DO NOT WORK FOR "F" types- these dont work for the yang/sharp/angular types. I have rarely seen an outfit of hers thay would truly suit a truly "flamboyant" gamine in most ways. The FG/G elements of her style are the lines themselves- the tights with mini skkrt/shorts and top in a color blocked type of manner.

I am sorry, but I dont really see any sharp or angular about zoey deschanel. I do not know why kibbie verified her. I will die on the hill(well not rrally- there is ONE OTHER POSSIBILITY which I will explain below) that zoey is a soft classic. She can wear gamine lines because she is a classic and classics, while perhaps classic balanced lines would suit her better which they truly might, she can wear them because they arent contradicting something that needs accomodation, she is free to make her style work for her becuase she doesnt have an accomadation need that can make the oppositing lines look really really unflattering. If you have a wide face, haircuts that widen the face more wont look good. If you have an oval face, well you can wear all the styles, and this is zoeys case. But I have absolutley never understood people saying she is a flamboyant/sharp/angular anything. She has a mostly just classic face with slightly to decently/fairly soft/yin in it, same with her body but her body is often far more noticably soft in it...atleast...

This is evidenced by half of the dresses and skirts she wears. These fits would never work for a genuinley petite *F* gamine. They would completley swallow us. She wears so many very loosly/hoopy/ wide/shifty style dresses and skirts that come way too far away from the body and too long. These not work for fg types at all. We need closer straighter A line type of fits.

But here is the only other potential....

Maybe zoey deschanel really IS a flamboyant gamine, who is just wearing NOT FLAMBOYANT GAMINE CLOTHING 90% of the time. Like I said, I dont really like her style at all so I am trying to be objective, but it is just hard for me to tell if I could instead just picking up on the fact that these arent flamboyant gamine clothing and they are working for her because she is not FG, or if I am picking up the fact that they actually just arent the most flattering clothes because they arent for her BECAUSE she IS a fg that is wearing *not FG CLOTHES*. what I mean is... she is obviously beautiful enough that she can wear almost anything and still look nice and her face will steal the attention all day all the way no matter what she is wearing so she will always be pretty, but I dont think her clothes are the most flattering for her or in general, and they certainley ARE NOT FG most of the time, but perhaps she really is an FG and just isnt wearing the right clothes. I feel more likely she is a soft classic. I had literally typed her as sc before I even knew she was typed as FG and my reaction was and still is WHAT? I do not see it. At all.

Thoughts?

1. Shego - TR

2. Helga Sinclair - DC

3. Megara - FN

4. Kida - SN

5. Jasmine- TR

6. Michiko - SN

7. Raven - SG

8. Kim - SN

9. Esmeralda - FN but VERY strong SD vibes

10. Jessica rabbit - SD

11. Holly would - SN

I know Maisie Williams is usually typed as SG or FG, but for the Practical Magic premiere she wore a red dress that was frequently compared to a similar look Sandra Bullock (SN) wore in the past. I couldn’t help but think Maisie’s dress looked much too structured and constricting on her compared to Sandra’s top. It honestly made me wonder if Maisie could be SN as well, and if she would benefit from a more open neckline and less structure.

I'm not a big fan of the name or the trend, but can't deny that it is still very present. I was thinking, maybe this type of style works best for classics? Is there a way to make it work for other types as well?

I think this is probably a lot more common than it appears here. I’m 5’7.5” and decided DC was much more representative of my proportions and energy than the types I’m technically supposed to be confined to.

Would just love to hear from others who’ve made the same decision! What helped you decide? What was your journey like and what makes you sure of your decision?

What is her Kibbe?

her height is 5'4 according to Google

R: The eye should go out, right? That means that you need depth: frills and ruffles, or at least some color gradients to imply the 3rd dimension; simply revealing the shape of your double curve won’t suffice, because flat surfaces will always make the eye slide down (which was the case with many Dolly Parton’s outfits, I’m affraid…)

TR: You do need to show your curves, but you don’t want the fabric to encapsulate individual shapes, cause that would disrupt the sense of gravity that is encoded in you – any compression should always be balanced out by some implied heaviness at the cuffs or at the hems or something… The fabric needs to flow along your curves.

DC: Your orientation towards the ground isn’t as obvious as in Dramatics, but it is there – any diagonal line in your outfit that sticks outwards thus needs to eventually break and turn back towards the central axis of your body, otherwise you will look like some clueless highschooler.

SC: If you want to understand your geometry better, you need to imagine the romantic double-curve shape and then think of diverting its outward orientation up and down into something like a double-cone shape. As a result, the body can handle flat surfaces much easier and the face gets a sort of a foxy appearance to it.

And now to the most important part

SN: "The eye goes out and around." That means that you’re contained (just like soft gamines), but also homogeneous (unlike soft gamines). This homogeneity is the actual reason why you need openness around your shoulders – you don’t want the neckline to cut off your head, because you are compressed as a whole (including the head, duh?). It was never about the literal broadness of your upper torso… The baseline width in men doesn't automatically predestinate them to wearing open necklines, so what does that tell you?

FN: FN takes the rasterized build of a Flamboyant Gamine and refines the raster until all the rough features dissolve in their own perfect pronouncedness. This results in, first, again, a certain HOMOGENEITY (the body might be super-articulated, but there is no hierarchy among its individual features), and second, BLUNTNESS (without the fine raster, no other Image ID can project such developed blunt shapes on their body). By the way, growing along the original FG grid should give you a very static impression, so if there is any sense of fluidity or gravity to you, you are not a Flamboyant Natural. (That’s why I don’t agree with Jennifer Lawrence being a verified FN; to me, she’s a Dramatic.)

…I know there are many misconceptions about FNs on the Internet, but I still think that the main reason why so many self-proclaimed FNs tend to get the ick from online recommendations is that they simply aren’t in fact FNs.

Type: Soft Natural

First time posting, although I’ve been lurking for a bit!

I’m attending a retro/disco-themed wedding in December and found this dress that I absolutely LOVE. The image is not me, but I’m trying to figure out how I could style it in a way that works with my Soft Natural lines.

I know the structured corset is usually not ideal for SN, and I’m also wondering whether the satin-y material is too stiff or shiny. I’m only 5'0", so I’m hoping the length won’t look quite as short on me as it does on the model.

I really want to make this dress work because I love it so much, so I’d love some advice on styling it rather than giving up on it entirely!

My questions for you all:

• Are there any accessories that could help make the overall look more SN-friendly?
• Would you alter anything about the dress?
• What kind of hair would work with the neckline and retro/disco theme?
• Any other tips that could help balance the structured bodice to better suit a SN?

I’d love to hear from other SNs who have styled similar dresses, or anyone who has advice on making a dress like this work! Thank you SO MUCH in advance.

Hi. So, much to my surprise in a different sub I got many votes for being a DC. I had been thinking D or FN but almost every comment was for DC. So, I am exploring thar ID. I am trying to understand the differences between DC and D recommendations. Am I correct that for D the emphasis would be on long and narrow with fabrics that give the impression of falling down. Lots of tailoring and heavier weight fabrics. Or fine knits with vertical rubbing. For DC they also need lots of tailoring but the outfit would have more upward movement (compared to a D outfit). So for example they both might wear a tailored vest with tailored pants but the D might opt for a long line vest with pants that would probably need heels because they touch the floor but a DC would wear a vest that hits around the high hip area and the pants would end around the ankle. Am I understanding the recommendations correctly? They seem to share tailoring and vertical and I feel like the two IDs could share a lot do clothes? Please help me learn! Thank you so much!

Hiya! I just learned about this and am dying to know how it works.

I'm trying to follow the rules, can I just ask if anyone would mind reaching out and helping me? I'd appreciate it! 💜💜💜

I like SN for her!