2007 Victoria’s Secret Fashion Show: Selita Ebanks

at least we wont have to buy a Christmas tree we can just borrow her to stand in the corner of our living rooms and just place a star on her head since she is dressed like one in pic 1 she already knows how to stand tall.. the clothes are so ugly draws attention away from her face..but i wouldnt say she was "ugly" because she clearly isn't..

The lack of hips is a joke ugh

@1st pic

so she became a christmas tree this year=D

i watched her interviews and it seems that she is the best angel among the others as personality.

as a model, not my fav but those are great legs!

she's beautiful in person. some shots are just plain unflattering. and yes, her boobs have a gap.

Nexttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt

She cant walk for shit. She tries to hard.

she's OK

Gorgeous. Agree about short torso but she's gorgeous.

sexy and stunning

she looks like she aged alot in the face over the past year

fugly alien. How the hell do these select these models.

Alex I agree with your comments...lets not forget about the five head either. Don't get me wrong, she looks pretty but to be "perfect" all the aforementioned things would need to be modified.

She seems to have peak early. She's 24, and that's not all that unusual - I have known girls who have peaked around 16, and gone straight to ugly by the age of 18. Certainly, her most recent boob job doesn't help (I think they're spaced too far apart).

But this still doesn't take away from the fact that, at her peak, she was absolutely gorgeous, and easily comparable to any of the other angels.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4BOk1RuC3E

I take back what I said in an earlier post...

Adri>Ale>Heidi>Izabel>Miranda>>>Selita>Karolina>Marisa

she sucks at life

13,

why the hell do you still get on this site since according to you, all they post is ugly hoes with no butts and tits? To hit on Philip, huh?

She has a very weird torso...And burn in hell the person who designed the hideous outfit from the second picture. The VS shows are getting tackier and tackier...

There is no butt to see on that pic.

on page 3, the combo of her butt and long legs : wow

does absolutely nothing for me.

Her face is ugly, I will never get over her ugly face..sorry Ebanks but you're no supermodel.

They have to be able to find something better than her. I can't believe that she rose to the top of the competition when they found her. Maybe it was just a bad day in the creative department up in Columbus. You just never know.

there is a tranny quality to this girl, but she is gorgeous. and very fit. perhaps that's why her waist is kind of squarish? but her legs are amazing. they're like 3/4 of her body! insanity..

She is fine... and that's exactly the problem... Just ok... Looks really average next to the other VS Angels!! :/

eat a fuckin sammich

This lady is 100% pure ugliness!

she is not the girl next door but they went out in the 70's with Cheryl Tiegs...yawn.

I'm with Alex, a woman can look "stalky" through her torso when she is out of proportion the other way...does not look good. I much prefer an evenly proportioned woman with a nice long sexy stomach and long legs to MATCH ie) even. Obviously, only a tall woman fits my criteria but that's OK, I'm 6'1".

You know, I used to think she was very pretty but then that forehead of hers really got to me.

Oh and Alex, two things:

There is no such thing as "boobs too big" for a woman unless they hit like triple Gs or something. Just "bad looking boobs".

And her legs aren't a problem (long legs never are). It's the fact that she doesn't have much hips which is like a Victoria's Secret trademark with their models.

Selita is beautiful, but she has 3 main problems with her body:

1. She has absolutely NO waist - she's built like a dude.

2. Her (fake) boobs are WAY too big for her finy frame.

3. Her legs are actually TOO long - they make her look horribly short-waisted.