Donna, that's a great question about how ethnicity fits into Kibbe (or any systems that are developed with "Caucasian" assumptions/bias built into them - colour analysis, etc.). I don't know the answer except to say that Merriam has a video on Kibbe for African Americans, so she perhaps addresses the broader issue there (haven't watched it yet). I know I've seen people of Asian descent classified (e.g. Zhang Ziyi - classic; Sandra Oh - natural, Lucy Liu - dramatic); however, I don't understand the system at all well enough to know against what 'standard' they are evaluated (I can barely sort myself out lol!)

I can tell you that God himself could come and tell me to wear maximal outfits in loud palettes and I'd politely say no thank you ... so ultimately as rules-oriented as I am, at the end of the day I'm going to make my own choice too

In any case, when you are drawn to a style you love, you should milk it for all it's worth, regardless of how any system would comment on the matter ... the value of these tools is in their usefulness to the subject, and that alone imo!

Ha Donna and TG! Mothers and God himself! ( Male God?)
I agree about the Caucasian bias of many of these things. With Carole Jackson’s Colour Me Beautiful every black woman was typed as a Winter which seemed hardly fair- removed 3/4 of the colours from contention. Unfortunately when I was first into that in my early 20s I didn’t think about that... NZ was a lot less multi-cultural in those days.

Kibbe's system has been criticized for not considering ethnicity or gender identity or other cultures. It is very biased. Merriam and Aly Art do try to show non-White women in their videos. Kibbe does irk me for that reason. Look at his reveals.
TG, I agree that when a style seems right and works for you then go for it. The journey to finding a style can be an easy one or an uphill battle. There are lots of tools out there.

I found myself today looking at men out and about in the world and wondering how to assess what each guy’s balance of yin and yang might be.

A really interesting question for nonbinary folks, too.

Maybe we are all inclining toward that ideal balance!

Yes, the uncoupling of traditionally-gender-based traits from biology frees us all to just be ourselves! What a concept! And again, if typologies like this do nothing else but spread that idea, then they've done their job!

Ooooh torontogirl thank you! I have been looking for that website for a few years! I see it was originally published in August of 2016. I can almost exactly date the post. Toward the end of that month, my computer on which I had saved that same article as well as a variety of other interesting sites crashed and burned. To give it its due, it was a 2001 Dell, albeit heavily home-modified. I lost track of that site, couldn't recall the name of the blog, but I remembered the photos and the concept.
I'm so glad you provided the path back! I do agree with the examples she provides. For myself, there is a pretty marked contrast between my facial features and body "type." For me it's mostly age-related changes. My bod has pretty much stayed the same except for some southward shifts.
Probably people without so much contrast wouldn't need to worry about the lack of congruity she points out.
My clothing preferences leaned toward "ethereal" I think, and that definitely isn't working now. *sob* Then again, I'm not sure it ever worked. I think I'm one of those "visually ignorant" people Suz mentioned when it comes to analyzing myself!
ETA: E7s try to dodge labels anyway. Sooo restricting.

haha, Ophelia so true - whereas E6 wants the rules but then will question them until the cows come home

Glad the link was helpful!

Just popping into this thread again to agree that that Truth is Beauty post is fascinating. The Gwedonline Christie example is super compelling. Thanks for sharing!

Hahaha, sarahd8!!

TG, I want to thank you for the link to Truth is Beauty. That blogger certainly has several interesting points. One of them is, as already mentioned by you, that you should dress for your face, not your body. This point appeals to me, as I have never felt that the recommendations for "hourglass," "pear" or whatever are really relevant to me.

(In my case, the closets description is a slim 8 shape, which is a body shape that few other people than Imogen Lamport offer advice for. She also adresses some of my other body features like "long rise" and "long decolletage," and I have found her tips helpful and can warmly recommend her blog, insideoutstyleblog.com, for tips on such issues.)

However, up through the years, I have experienced that when I just dress as a mix of Classic and Gamine (without thinking too much of my body shape and body features), I get lots of compliments AND feel this style is very me.

Another fact, related to the recommendation of "dress for your face," is that your hair style is an important part of your style. This, too, is something I have experienced for decades. Whenever my hair grows too long, I "loose" a part of my Gamine style. OTOH, whenever my hair is cut (relatively) short, I get loads of compliments and feel much more like "me."

To those of you who are discovering your style or are contemplating changing your style: I strongly recommend taking your hairstyle into consideration, as your hair is a key element of your personal look. And do dress your (new) style when you go to your hairdresser! That will make it easier for him or her to "see" you and to help you get a hairstyle which matches your general style.

@TheCat I’m so glad you brought hair into the mix! I grew up with a Mom who insisted on cutting our hair short every summer until we were able to take care of it ourselves. It totally makes sense as she prefers short hair herself - I’ve never seen it longer than the base of her neck. But looking at those pictures, it is SO not me.

I’ve wondered if I will be drawn to having shorter hair as I age, remembering comments about shorter hair giving more lift to the face. But the only time I’ve gone short in the last 15 years was an attempt to be more “serious” and it was not remotely a fit for me. And maybe that’s part of the TR Kibbe type for me — emphasize the hair as part of the romantic look!

On the other hand, I have a dear friend who had volumes and volumes of hair when we met. She cut it all off in a major change 10 years ago, and now I can’t imagine her in anything other than a pixie cut - it’s a perfect look for her face, and draws more attention to her personality.

Totally agree that hair color and style make a major impact on how you feel about your presence in the world.

Huh, this kibbe system is all new to me. I took the quiz and got 52, Soft Natural. I have no idea what that means so I guess I need to go look it up. I am long in all my extremities, short in the waist, not curvy at all but not sinewy and gain weight in the midsection. I'm small bones but average height. I get the most compliments when I wear streamlined clothes that show my lack of curve rather than trying to create a waist. I guess I will go try to figure this out!

I like to read these style threads.

I bought the original Kibbe book when it came out in the late 1980s. I bought other books too, and had color analysis at 3 different times. On the Kibbe classification I come out soft dramatic, but just barely--my answers are spread over several categories.

I've always been interested in style analysis. Here's a story from my Jr. High class:

The girls had to take a Homemaking class in the 8th grade. I don't remember much, but I remember when the teacher read off descriptions of different styles, then we went around the room, one by one, had to stand and have everybody figure out what we were.

The styles were Dramatic, Sophisticated, Gamine, Sporty natural, and Womanly Woman. There was probably one more. So each girl stands, embarrassed, to get classified.

Only one girl was classified as Dramatic. The teacher disagreed strongly--no way a junior high girl could be dramatic. Most were plopped into Womanly Woman or Gamine. I was Sophisticate--tall skinny me was always trying to look more like a model.

Four years later we are graduating seniors. Our class went on to one of 2 high schools, and I didn't stay as close to a good friend who was now a friend of Dramatic. My friend married right after her graduation. Her friend Dramatic was a bridesmaid, and she looked gorgeous. A few weeks later Dramatic was crowned Miss Universe of 1960!

I've always struggled a bit with fitting myself into a style category, so these conversations are endlessly interesting to me.

What an interesting story, Ms. Maven! I went to Homemaking classes in Grade 7 and Grade 8. The boys went to Industrial Arts (how to take care of cars, plumbing, etc.). We did talk about body types. Yikes!!!!

I came out as flamboyant gamine. I am the least gamine person I know. I’m going to form a Kibbe fail club with Jenn

Just popping back to thank notsaf for cautiously typing me a natural, which I'd never considered myself (average height, non athletic) but which has set me off on an intriguing path of exploration of 'natural style'.
And to say that MissMaven, thanks for offering yet another wonderful story!

Could it be that those who feel the Kibbe results for them are wrong view themselves differently from how others view them? In other words, would the results likely have been different if another person had answered the question for them? It CAN be difficult to answer questions about how you yourself look.

In addition, there are various ways to be a Gamine, a Romantic, a Dramatic, a Natural, a Classic, or whatever. (And many people are a combination of two or three body shapes or style types.) You have to discover and/or develop your personal version.

Yeah, I don’t see “natural” for me even a little bit (I’m only on the taller side of average, and my body does not have the least athletic appearance, one of those cases where appearances are not deceptive, LOL. I guess we see things in photographs of other forum members one way when the reality in three dimensions is different. I would love to be more gamine or natural, but nature did not deal me those cards.

That said, I’m going to continue to dress the way I like, regardless of these categories. I check it all out from time to time in case there is some new insight to glean, but I rarely come up with anything useful. I think I already have a good sense of what flatters me, and what I prefer to wear from a personality standpoint.

The Cat and Janet, I see your analyses are a both/and situation rather than either/or ... I think we BOTH can find it hard to see ourselves, separate our preferences from the objective reality, AND we need to follow our own lights, knowing that ultimately we are the final aribter of what works for us. Tools not rules, right?

I concur, the Cat! I'd say flamboyant gamine sounds very much like it aligns with (my perception of) you stylewise, Brooklyn. Interesting that you do not!
Also, I don't think Natural equals athletic or outdoorsy or whatnot, it's more about yang quality, rounder edges, wider and fuller feautures, jawbone, lips. While dramatics are more angular, sharp and pointy. (I consider my self Flamboyant Natural. I could of course be terribly mistaken...)

While Kibbe categories and other tools can surely be helpful to a certain agree, I become more and more convinced that PERSONALITY TRUMPS IT ALL. Several stylists have come to this conclusion. One of them is Imogen Lamport, and I recommend those of you who are interested in this subject to read her blog post "Why Personality Is the Key to Style." Here is the link: https://insideoutstyleblog.com.....style.html
At her website insideoutstyleblog.com you will also find other articles on how your personality influences your style. (Search for "personality" there and you will see a long list of related blog posts.)

Thanks for the link The Cat; I'll be reading that this a.m.!!

Thank you for introducing this topic. I've been curious about what Kibbe is all about and after following yours and the other members links have a bit better understanding. I really like that it encourages all types of beauty and demonstrates it with photos. I took the test twice, the first time I was a Natural/Soft Dramatic and the second time I came out as a Dramatic Classic. Since I'm pretty average with some yang features, this makes sense. Truth is Beauty with it's emphasis on dressing your face was also pretty interesting and it appealed to me because I think I'm a bit of a gamine which is what I'd like to be because I like the outfits they use to illustrate it. The main thing I learned from my reading so far, is that I'm not pure Dramatic or pure Romantic and I don't wear these styles because my instincts have cautioned me that I would look silly dressed either way. I love those looks on others but they don't work for me but dressing Natural or Classic does. Now I understand why.

Well, I tested FG, one more point and it would be DC. Took it a second time and placed in DC. I don’t think my face ‘matches’ my body type.

The Cat, I think part of it, for me and Brooklyn, at least is that this test didn’t take into account actual height? There’s no way either of us are gamine, just by sheer size.

Ok. Extremely late to this thread. I took the quiz... the best one yet! So easy! Automated! No combing through old Excel spreadsheets! I came out with 102, Classic/Soft Gamine... meaning I assume Soft Gamine. That sounds consistent with past results...

I’m back to say that the descriptions never made any sense to me... but the information on sewing, cut, tailoring, fabrics, those totally worked like a charm for me and coincided with Angie’s observations for myself. I think now, once you get your ‘score’, the thing to do is go straight to the info on garment construction...

I wish I had seen this much earlier! I have been busy since DS just returned from college. I struggled with Kibbe and all of these quizzes for a few years. I have watched Marrium Style on YouTube, and have tried out many of these quizzes. Nothing made sense for me. I am very Yang but neither Kibbes Dramatic nor FN seemed right. I’m not Classic or Romantic, and definitely not Gamine. I pretty much gave up and felt his system was useless for my physique. He has a Facebook page and website of his own now because he became upset with everyone trying to interpret his work and getting it wrong, but even that was not helpful. Then, somewhere, somehow, I stumbled upon what in my opinion is a brilliant system called “Align”. It’s fairly new, so it’s not well known, but the woman behind it is lovely, Florentine Mossou. I paid for a consultation and it was worth every penny. With the information she provided, I now readily understand what works and does not work for my body and why. She also helped with makeup, glasses shapes and with hair. Sadly, for my type sleek hair works best and I have thick wavy hair that is anything but sleek! (Maybe keeping it short was instinctive, but I’m enjoying the length at the moment.). Here is the link to her site. https://www.callastudio.nl/

Staysfit, I have heard of the Align system. Good to hear that you had a positive experience.