Kibbe

Something I see posted and commented here often is the confusion as to why there is some "type resistance" to being in the Natural family when many celebrities and models are FNs or SNs. I've been thinking about this and I've come to the conclusion that it's probably because Kibbe terms don't necessarily align well with the meaning of those same terms used in general society. For instance, I've seen Ns here described as "wide, athletic, 'more powerful' looking" and it's been discussed that yin types, with "delicate bone structure, roundedness, softness, etc" aren't necessarily the general beauty standard.

However, I think that the current beauty standard is BOTH a yang frame (frame dominance, sharper or wider bone structure, etc) AND softness, curve, and delicacy. I think where some dissonance occurs is that people feel that the beauty standard is not to appear powerful, "take up space", etc, as some here may have said -- it's just that women in the Natural family (or other Yang types) are celebrated as BEING a soft, delicate, curvy type because those words don't correspond 1-to-1 to Kibbe definitions. If appearing delicate and "feminine" IS the beauty standard, this could explain why there can be so much type resistance to being told you seem more "yang", "sharp", "wide", "blunt", etc...because even though "yang" types are represented in media, they are SEEN AS and referred to as small, delicate, etc. As an example -- "sharp bones" which might indicate a yang bone structure, are often referred to as "delicate bone structure" when talking to people that know nothing about Kibbe. This could also explain why those that are yin types are insistent that they're not represented well in current media -- because while soft, delicate, curvy beauty is in, those definitions aren't necessarily what Kibbe means when he says soft, delicate, etc.

I think that the issue is that words like "delicate", "athletic", "powerful", etc are *subjective*, especially when not referring to bone structure. Delicate bone structure, in Kibbe terms, can mean having a smaller, softer bone structure (please correct me if I'm wrong about this), but "delicate beauty" in society doesn't necessarily refer to the bone structure, and can refer instead to essence, style, general vibe -- and some people, in my experience, even find the "stereotypical Natural look" ("athletic", "strong", etc) to be what they would describe as "conventionally feminine" and delicate.

Additionally, I've seen a sentiment in the community that if you're typed as a yang type, you need to embrace being more "powerful", "bold", etc, or that if you're a yin type to embrace being "petite", "delicate", etc, and I think this kind of ignores the diversity in IDs as well as the subjective nature of words such as powerful, delicate, etc. Some women with yang typings might find they appear bold/powerful, or that might be a part of their "essence", and that might be a way for them to express femininity (or not, if they prefer not to). Some women with yang typings might also find they appear more delicate or "soft" conventionally, even if they don't have delicate or soft bone structure, and that's also not out of line with having a yang ID because these words, when referring to how someone appears as a whole, are subjective.

Anyway, I've rambled forever, but please note that what I've said does not at all reflect my personal views on femininity, etc, nor am I trying to make a statement here on Kibbe's system itself. These are just my thoughts as to why type resistance to Yang IDs or confusion as to why someone might BE a Yang ID, when Yang IDs are commonly represented in media, is an issue. Kibbe has also kind of shown me how beauty standards for women (and in general) are almost a no-win situation. I'm also curious to hear what you guys think!