1. And... we're back. You'll notice that all of your images are back as well, as are our beloved emoticons, including the infamous :foo: We have also worked with our server folks and developers to fix the issues that were slowing down the site.

    There is still work to be done - the images in existing sigs are not yet linked, for example, and we are working on a way to get the images to load faster - which will improve the performance of the site, especially on the pages with a ton of images, and we will continue to work diligently on that and keep you updated.

    Cheers,

    Fok on behalf of the entire Styleforum team
    Dismiss Notice

The Attractive Woman.

Discussion in 'Social Life, Food & Drink, Travel' started by LabelKing, Jan 19, 2007.

  1. whodini

    whodini Senior member

    Messages:
    18,144
    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2006
    Location:
    Loretto, KY
    While technically untrue, the above statement does have some semblance of truth to it.
    Please, anything after #1 is only #2...
     
  2. Tokyo Slim

    Tokyo Slim Senior member

    Messages:
    19,179
    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    Location:
    Where Eagles Dare!
    Please, anything after #1 is only #2...
    But being the second best looking woman on the planet doesn't make you ugly. Cheer up Whodini! Even at 4,987,274th best looking woman in your state, you might still be attractive enough at 3am in a truck stop to swing a little action! [​IMG]
     
  3. Quirk

    Quirk Senior member

    Messages:
    2,581
    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2006
    I've noticed this too. It seems every aspiring starlet at that time had a similar face whereas today every aspiring starlet has some sort of Lohan-esque type visage. Sometimes, though, it seems that the older faces were more refined.
    I often find myself staring at actors in old movies and being amazed at incredibly different actors looked then than they do today. I suppose it's all hair, makeup and lighting, though, rather than any fundamental difference in physicality. After all, look how different Jennifer Connelly looks in her retro look above vs. her contemporary look in Tokyo Slim's avatar. Granted, those pics are about fifteen years apart...
     
  4. LabelKing

    LabelKing Senior member

    Messages:
    25,745
    Joined:
    May 24, 2002
    Location:
    Constantinople
    I often find myself staring at actors in old movies and being amazed at incredibly different actors looked then than they do today. I suppose it's all hair, makeup and lighting, though, rather than any fundamental difference in physicality. After all, look how different Jennifer Connelly looks in her retro look above vs. her contemporary look in Tokyo Slim's avatar. Granted, those pics are about fifteen years apart...
    I don't know if it's the knowledge that that is a modern person being retro, but somehow that Jennifer Connelly photograph strikes me as a modern person trying to be vintage. That's why I find most costume period films done today unconvincing since the people in there all look very modern despite their attire.
     
  5. whodini

    whodini Senior member

    Messages:
    18,144
    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2006
    Location:
    Loretto, KY
    But being the second best looking woman on the planet doesn't make you ugly. Cheer up Whodini! Even at 4,987,274th best looking woman in your state, you might still be attractive enough at 3am in a truck stop to swing a little action! [​IMG]
    You're a little bitch. Not only do you not even recognize my #1/#2 pun, but you futher insinuate that I'm a truckstop whore. And an unattractive one at that. Dick. [​IMG] Label, you make an excellent point about modern women trying to look vintage. I think that's exactly when it emphasizes my point that people today do not look like people from the 30s, at least not from the popular media pool.
     
  6. GQgeek

    GQgeek Senior member

    Messages:
    17,933
    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2002
    Location:
    Canuckistan
    I watched Casablanca the other night... Ingrid Bergman [​IMG]
     
  7. Toiletduck

    Toiletduck Senior member

    Messages:
    2,547
    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2006
    oo...but jennifer connelly is damned hot.
     
  8. Tokyo Slim

    Tokyo Slim Senior member

    Messages:
    19,179
    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    Location:
    Where Eagles Dare!
    You're a little bitch. Not only do you not even recognize my #1/#2 pun, but you futher insinuate that I'm a truckstop whore. And an unattractive one at that. Dick. [​IMG]

    Oh, I got it. It was supposed to be a pun? I just thought it was so simplistic and juvenile that it must have been unintentional. My mistake.

    I've finally narrowed it down, who it is that you remind me of... but are you a blonde or a brunette?

    [​IMG]

    hmm...

    [​IMG]
     
  9. trajan

    trajan Senior member

    Messages:
    369
    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2006
    Location:
    NY, NY
    I find that in the past people looked more normal, i.e., they were more beautiful. If you look at old pictures you'll see that the faces are more symmetrical, the proportions are better and the skin quality is much closer to flawless. I believe there are a lot of factors for this: - food. Food today is horrible. All the big companies are greedy and are saving at the detriment of the customers. Who in the past ate cow's meat from many cows' bones, tendons, and hopefully some meat, and from cows that have been fed only cereals (grown only with NPK), their own bones (read: mad cow disease) and hormones? Exactly this kind of meat is in a burger, a favorite american food. On top of this, the ground meat used by McShite is kept in horrible state (read: stale, putrified, etc), and burned to death so that everything bad is killed (and so is everything good). Ofc, this would be cooked with recycled oil from plants, the kind of oil that would have lots of trans fats when cooked. But what about the french fries? These are much worse than the meat. What about the lack of minerals in people's diet? etc, etc, etc. People today take a multivitamin and think it's OK. It is not. Food does influence your body: the fat/lean mass, bone structure, diseases, etc. - cosmetic changes. Since, we're comparing actors, how many would you say have had something "done"? Today, almost everybody has had at last something small, and before ... the 60's, 70's?? nobody had. While this might increase the attractiveness temporarily, since the body changes over time, the artificial changes will just look wierd. (that's for some cosmetic changes, people need to go to the doctor once every few years) - What about the environment, fresh air and exercise? Actors who work out to compensate look best, but then bodybuilding doesn't really work all the muscles (they concentrate on the most visible ones), and it's not the perfect substitute for the natural human development. Take the latest James Bond for example. You can see that he's "well build" in the gym way. Oh, and yes, he has an inflated belly, and the way the muscles look on him is wierd. But hey, that's just me. (btw, in the bodybuilding world, the inflated belly is a well known side effect of certain steroids that make the intestine bigger. Compare the natural bodybuilder Steve Reeves with waist 29 inches at 220 lbs with the current pros, none of them under 34 -- and that's in "contest" mode -- read they are dehydrated so that they can look more "ripped") I was at the meth in the statue section 2 weeks ago, and since the greeks and romans the ideal of beauty hasn't changed. I find all those naked statues incredibly beautiful, face, body, everything. The ideal hasn't changed. It's people that have. --trajan
     
  10. LARon

    LARon Senior member

    Messages:
    1,188
    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2006
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    I've noticed this too. It seems every aspiring starlet at that time had a similar face whereas today every aspiring starlet has some sort of Lohan-esque type visage.

    Sometimes, though, it seems that the older faces were more refined.


    I don't know if this was intended to apply to Jenifer Connelly, but if it was, let's remember that she's been who she is, and doing what she does, long before Lindsay Lohan showed up. So, its not Connelly who's derivative of Lohan (if that was intended); it might be the other way 'round, but the fact is, Connelly isn't a starlet, but an established actress, and she doesn't pursue "babyface" roles. The only time I've seen her that way was in "Pollock."

    While she might have a babyface (which may be the point here), its a damn lovely one. Among my favorites (but she's not Monica Bellucci, as was already established in another thread).
     
  11. acidboy

    acidboy Senior member

    Messages:
    21,170
    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    It means she has good birthing potential. You want her to have nice child bearing hips. Doesn't have to be fat. She just has to be able to squeeze a bunch of kids out.
    Don't know why, but this topic reminds me of this old Burt Bacharach song:
     
  12. mensimageconsultant

    mensimageconsultant Senior member

    Messages:
    4,538
    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2006
    The original image is reminiscent of the golden ratio.

    It does appear that female structural facial ideas (as presented by the media) have changed. (A major men's magazine recently ran article about that and prominently cited Lindsey Lohan.) It could be because American ideals in general have gotten bigger as Americans have gotten larger.It could be because there's more emphasis on 'natural' body attractiveness, since female celebrities dress more revealing than they used to.
     

Share This Page

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by