Ah, the Kibbe rabbit hole is re-opened. But I wouldn't be too quick to adopt, or reject, what you can actually wear. I'll go to the grave maintaining that Kibbe's intention was never to put women into categories in order to tell them how to dress--or to have women imitate movie stars.
After reading his book, and researching some of his more recent writings, I've become convinced Kibbe's intention has always been to liberate women from a conventional, narrow ideal of feminine beauty by providing them with a tool which offered multiple versions of feminine beauty--a way of celebrating our uniqueness instead of trying to camouflage and disguise our "imperfections". His style cues revolve around line, shape, and proportion, not whatever is currently fashionable, and his guidelines are suggestions to be explored, not dictates about what we should, and shouldn't, wear.
Taken out of context, the questionnaire, images, and categories are of limited value. But, when I used Kibbe's tools as a stepping off point for some serious personal reflection, I ended up with a real insight into why some looks "get" me, while others are a constant struggle. Even better, Kibbe's ideas made me feel good about my face and body not looking like the slim, small-boned, evenly proportioned, feminine-featured ideal which was always held up to me as the way a woman ought to look. I'm Kibbe's Dramatic, and, when I dress my height, IT shoulders, narrow hips, and angular features as a Dramatic, I feel good about those very features other "experts" would have me downplay.