Female Beauty Ideals (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message


SugarMyChurro -> Female Beauty Ideals (7/24/2007 11:08:30 PM)

Over the weekend I posted something about photoshopped images on magazine covers. Among the anticipated replies was the usual: "Of course we know that magazine covers aren't how people really look" etc. But I have to think that something really is truly wrong with how we think of female beauty when I see changes like this:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/showbiz/showbiznews.html?in_article_id=470586&in_page_id=1773

And then you can compare that to a previous image here:
http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2006/07/winehouse270706_544x600.jpg

I mean, maybe I am totally off base here - but I think the woman in question looks best when she was slighter younger and slightly less well-known. In the second image, she was younger and less famous on the right - and sure, maybe what she's wearing isn't the most flattering outfit ever but I think she looks quite hot. Fame and fortune has done nothing for her except to make her look like Death's Bride. Strangely enough, I hope she actually has a drug addiction problem instead of just making herself into a walking corpse because of body image problems - obviously both problems would totally suck, but the latter seems even more vicious to me.





Lothlauren -> RE: Female Beauty Ideals (7/25/2007 1:39:37 AM)

ouch, she should take a break from the music and maybe take up cooking. (Ever see a skinny cook that enjoyed his job?)




ClubMix -> RE: Female Beauty Ideals (7/25/2007 1:49:33 AM)

Have you ever seen the Dove Campaign for Real Beauty video on YouTube? I highly suggest you look it up. It shows exactly how ridiculously unrealistic our society`s idea of "beauty" is.  




eyesopened -> RE: Female Beauty Ideals (7/25/2007 2:19:56 AM)

One of the best things i ever did for my daughter was send her to modelling and personal development classes.  There she was taught that a every model must carry in her model's bad a roll of duct tape.  The duct tape is used to tape back any arm flab, thigh flab or to lift the buttocks or the breasts.  The model is altered for the camera and photoshop does the rest.  Once she learned what models go through to present an image she had a better acceptance of her own body.

It is sad that society (and sorry but especially men), reward thin women and punish the fat. 




Arpig -> RE: Female Beauty Ideals (7/25/2007 9:07:15 AM)

quote:

It is sad that society (and sorry but especially men), reward thin women and punish the fat. 

It has been my experience that nobody punishes women like the women themselves




hotwater07 -> RE: Female Beauty Ideals (7/25/2007 9:29:33 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arpig
It has been my experience that nobody punishes women like the women themselves

This is true.  But until the propaganda for physically appearing beautiful is outweighed by substantial values for actually "being" beautiful, most of us will continue in the struggle against ourselves.  Personally, I'm just seeking a balance between "she's hot!" and "she's got a great personality". [;)]




NefertariReborn -> RE: Female Beauty Ideals (7/25/2007 9:37:10 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SugarMyChurro

Over the weekend I posted something about photoshopped images on magazine covers. Among the anticipated replies was the usual: "Of course we know that magazine covers aren't how people really look" etc. But I have to think that something really is truly wrong with how we think of female beauty when I see changes like this:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/showbiz/showbiznews.html?in_article_id=470586&in_page_id=1773

And then you can compare that to a previous image here:
http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2006/07/winehouse270706_544x600.jpg

I mean, maybe I am totally off base here - but I think the woman in question looks best when she was slighter younger and slightly less well-known. In the second image, she was younger and less famous on the right - and sure, maybe what she's wearing isn't the most flattering outfit ever but I think she looks quite hot. Fame and fortune has done nothing for her except to make her look like Death's Bride. Strangely enough, I hope she actually has a drug addiction problem instead of just making herself into a walking corpse because of body image problems - obviously both problems would totally suck, but the latter seems even more vicious to me.




I'd have to agree with you.  She looks very sexy on the right.  And, I can't comment on the left, I nearly threw up (no pun intended).  Her family needs to do an intervention. 




Estring -> RE: Female Beauty Ideals (7/25/2007 10:02:33 AM)

But no rehab. No, no, no.

If you look at photos of women like Marilyn Monroe, Jayne Mansfield, etc., they would be considered plus size today. I think things turned when Twiggy became a super model in the mid sixties. Suddenly that skinny, emaciated look became the in thing.
I also think that women perpetuate this problem more than men do. I would imagine most men would take Marilyn Monroe over an anorexic looking woman in most instances.  




lighthearted -> RE: Female Beauty Ideals (7/25/2007 12:19:20 PM)

wow.  she's clearly got something wrong there, be it medical or psychological.  I would even hazard a guess that she's a bit older than 24.

but, like Arpig said, nobody punishes us like ourselves.

lighthearted, who's currently sporting a little more junk in the trunk than she'd like [:D]

edited:  spelling (duh)




popeye1250 -> RE: Female Beauty Ideals (7/25/2007 12:47:28 PM)

Not me, I like "punishing" thin women!

One thing the woman in the picture needs to do is get rid of the tattoos! They're ugly!




Pulpsmack -> RE: Female Beauty Ideals (7/25/2007 2:59:19 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: eyesopened

It is sad that society (and sorry but especially men), reward thin women and punish the fat. 



First of all the over-generalized statement is reckless in the extreme. First of all define "thin". Is Ally McBeal "thin" or is she fucking skeletal? Now what about fat? Is Rosie O'Donnel Fat, or is that the bipedal version of livestock?
There is "skinny/skeletal" and there is "slim". There is "healthy" and there is obese. So depending on how fast and loose your definitions are I could say anything from I feel you are incorrect about all of it or some of it, to I feel you are dead on and that is exactly how it should be.

Now society's reward/punishment. How responsible is this? I wholeheartedly agree that society worships and promotes an image. But this reward/punishment seems absurd to me. Nicole Ritchie was a somewhat chubby girl, and America embraced her for what she was. Paris calls her fat and she goes skeletal. What was her reward? A societal intervention scrutinizing her body with a fine tooth comb for her dramatic weight loss. Some reward. Renee Zellwegger  puts on some pudge and they launch an ad campaign with her new style of sexy. "Some punishment". It seems that while there is a promoted image,  those who lose too much are criticized more and more harshly than those who gain too much, and the latter only has permission when they have great results they feed to the public and relapse (Kirstie Allie, Oprah).

And men? Well if most men find a woman sexy when she severs her right thumb and hobbles her feet, then you either suck it up and deal, or you roll the dice on your own merits. Outside this community (and occasionally within it) men who aren't overly sensitive, tolerant PC types who have nothing to offer the woman as an equal partner are considered something between less-attractive and monstrous. So we can either begrudgingly try our best Alan Alda/Phil Donahue impressions to score a little ass, or we can flip that convention the middle finger and either find others who aren't hung up on that, or we strive to offer something else that negates that "black mark." My sympathy meter on the "fat" woman (by my standards) who is angry at men because they don't find her as attractive as a thinner woman is some how stuck on "don't give a damn".

There is a perfect "Barbie" proportion for women of the various heights (which may vary with cultural subjectivity). It is an "absolute zero" reading. If the girl is a few pounds overweight, then she strays from that standard by a factor of 8. If she is a few underweight then she strays from the factor by a factor of -8. Anything above 20 is universally considered unattractive (by the subjective majority standard). Anything below -20 is universally considered unattractive (same reason). You can tweak that with cultural subjectivity, but you also have to figure in the laws of supply and demand (that make a girl of -12 unfairly as “desirable” as a girl of +8). A dark-haired Olive-skinned Italian might do fairly well for himself in Sweden for the simple fact that he is different and anybody who has an attraction to that set of features has a small pool to fish from. We have an obesity epidemic.

Fat/obese people are a dime a dozen here, thus they are devalued for the same facially neutral reason why a fair-haired, fair-skinned Swede's features are devalued in a racially homogenized region... it's plain and common. Thus, maintaining an unhealthy and unattractive skinny profile may seem more forgiving than a fat one, but that is merely because of the poor American diet. It was the reverse centuries ago in Europe when lean and starving was too common. Boo hoo... the worm has turned.

The proper answer to the riddle is: ladies, you aren’t that damn special, no matter what you wear or look like. Nivea or Skintimate or whatever fucktard ad campaign launched that said "treat yourself like the Goddess you are" should have the ad’s collaborators drug out in the street and shot. When enough of you stop propping yourselves up on pedestals (or allowing another to do it for you), and step out of the shackles of the 38 pair of high heels in the wardrobe, Barbie dream house then you will be free of the pressures. The problem with women (as any human being suffers) is they want to have their cake and eat it too. Women complain about the unrealistic pressures placed upon them by cosmetics, fashion, etc., yet they continue to sponsor them. A good argument might be out of coercion due to the body image assault, but that is nonsense. A woman wants the ability to wear a pair of sweats or scrubs to the grocery store and not be judged. BUT that same woman also wants to put on a pair of heels, a sleek dress and become the center of attention to confirm that she IS a sexy individual.

Blame society and its constraints thereof for forging the deadly weapons if you wish, but it is your own petty vanity and competitiveness that causes you to take up arms and wage war against yourself. Our society been corrupted from individualism to self-importance. When we feel we are that important we become competitive. When we become competitive, someone wins, someone loses, and bad feelings are bred between both. The good news is that you have the technology the accessories and the wardrobe to make you more beautiful than any time before in history (unless you happen to be aristocracy, then "the stenchards" have given you a bum steer). The down side is the same breaks have been given to everybody else and that competition, should you choose to remain in the race, becomes that much more fierce.




lighthearted -> RE: Female Beauty Ideals (7/25/2007 3:59:44 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pulpsmack

The proper answer to the riddle is: ladies, you aren’t that damn special, no matter what you wear or look like.


bzzzzzz...wrong!

sorry Pulpsmack, I find your discourse full of just as many generalizations as the one you quoted.  while I can agree with some of your points, I have to say, the statement above is the one where I really draw the line.  I believe in the value of everyone's individuality, male or female.  if they are attractive and fit or overweight and plain, their value is not increased or diminished.






KyttynTheMynx -> RE: Female Beauty Ideals (7/25/2007 4:13:06 PM)

I read a quote today that didnt really make me stop and think till now.
 
"Little girls arent born knowing how to hate their bodies."
 
hmmm...




Pulpsmack -> RE: Female Beauty Ideals (7/25/2007 4:18:20 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: lighthearted

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pulpsmack

The proper answer to the riddle is: ladies, you aren’t that damn special, no matter what you wear or look like.


bzzzzzz...wrong!

sorry Pulpsmack, I find your discourse full of just as many generalizations as the one you quoted.  while I can agree with some of your points, I have to say, the statement above is the one where I really draw the line.  I believe in the value of everyone's individuality, male or female.  if they are attractive and fit or overweight and plain, their value is not increased or diminished.





Although you contradict me, I don't disagree with anything you've written. I don't believe the "value" of a person rests upon their standard of beauty. However, there is an artificial standard of value placed upon beauty that society promotes and women support. "Women, you aren't that damned special" means you aren't competing in a paegent. It means there is no paparazzi outside the driveway waiting to snap a picture of you in a T shirt and boxers. It means the self-importance of vanity is the chain you chose to affix to your waist. The amount of time and effort one places in her appearance rivals what the aristocracy (with more money than sense and nothing meaningful to fulfill their days) did in ages past. Be thankful you "aren't that special." 

There is nothing wrong with wanting to play the game and look "beautiful", or "better" or "better than". There is nothing wrong with flipping the ref the bird and walking off the field. Both have their consequences, though. If you have a problem with the media propagandizing a standard of beauty, then stop supporting the apparatus. Stop buying their cosmetics, their shoes, their dresses, etc and feeding into this offensiveness. If on the other hand, you desire the advantages of looking sexy and elevating yourself superficially, then embrace the dark side. But pick a side, and realize that inevitably the good comes with the bad.





Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
9.179688E-02