Could someone explain something for me?

May 28, 2007 01:30

When did the ideal vision of beauty change from this:


Read more... )

grr!

Leave a comment

Comments 20

nebris May 28 2007, 04:30:54 UTC
One day I plan to Collar Ms Hilton and then fatten her up to make babies. Daughters only. =)

~M~

..I think this qualifies as LJ Rant of The Day..yer gal was the first btw..

Reply

lupie_stardust May 28 2007, 07:29:07 UTC
"...then fatten her up to make babies."

I promise I will not argue with you over this.

Reply


smolder May 28 2007, 04:51:42 UTC
[here via your GF]]

I wholeheartedly agree. I recently posted a picture of Keira Knightly and asked who would find it attractive.

Give me a girl with curves and real breasts any day.

But I have read articles that state you can't compete in today's media market without looking like you are dying of starvation.

Reply


(The comment has been removed)

theycallmeboy May 28 2007, 10:37:03 UTC
What is this place you call "outdoors"? Is it in Belgium?

Reply


gefingerpoken May 28 2007, 05:58:55 UTC
She had hips; she had breasts; she was a proper woman!

Kind of a double-edged sword there, though, isn't it? The current standard being that stick-thin is what a woman "should" be, but someone else saying that a "proper" or "real" (god, how I hate the term "real") woman has some fat on her.

I mean, hey, I've got hips and boob to SPARE, so I'm not complaining about that, really. I'm just saying that there shouldn't really be ANY standard for what a woman should be.

Well, other than "she has to have a vagina of some sort." That should really be the only criterion.

Reply

lupie_stardust May 28 2007, 08:20:04 UTC
"she has to have a vagina of some sort."

I don't know if even THIS has to be the criterion. Gender doesn't necessarily have to match the genitals. I have a friend who's a woman and she has a penis!

Reply

gefingerpoken May 28 2007, 19:43:16 UTC
Oh. Sorry, I'm still of the opinion that biological criterion should be met for you to actually be male/female physically.

Whether they are born with the vagina or not doesn't matter, as long as at some point, they have it.

Reply

theycallmeboy May 28 2007, 10:41:38 UTC
I get your point. It's not my place to dictate what a woman is "supposed" to look like. If a woman is naturally skinny, then I'm hardly going to hold that against her. I'm simply tired of looking at women who are clearly underweight and being told "this is beauty." Because in my eyes it's not. There's a difference between being naturally thin and grossly malnourished.

Reply


alainn_mactire May 28 2007, 09:11:17 UTC
Here via nebris

Thank you, thank you, thank you....

As a happily curvy size UK 18, the whole stick woman culture drives me mad. I don't care what people think anymore, both myself and my partner are happy with my curves :) but, I have had stares, comments and teenagers laughing behind me as I walk down the street.

Now I'm a stubborn cow, so I usually just glare back, but, seriously, a less comfortable and confident woman would be in bits. What the hell are we teaching our children if all they have to look up to is that *eyes Ms Hilton angrily*?

It's nice to know there are people out there who appreciate proper women, not the freaky things we're now lead to believe are "how we should look".

Reply


Leave a comment

Up