For those of you still wondering why women have self-image “issues”.
Guys, do you read Maxim? Allow me to suggest that if your answer is ‘yes’, you’re a great big asshole. I say that in the nicest possible way. Because I have been in the unfortunate circumstance before to read that magazine (waiting room hell), and I can say with some authority that it was some of the most ridiculous shit I’ve ever laid eyes on. I LAUGH when guys make fun of Cosmo but have a couple of Maxims on the back of their crapper. Oh, I know. Trust me. You have it for the “hot chicks” throughout, for when you can’t pinch off a loaf fast enough and might want to play with yourself for inspiration.
Anyway. Maybe you’re not a great big asshole because you like to look at “hot chicks” (although I wholeheartedly question some guys’ idea of “hot” - I mean really? you are turned on by silicone overlying bony ribcages? really??). But here’s what does make a guy an asshole: publishing a list in a major magazine of the “Five Unsexiest Women Alive”. Why would you do that? Just to be an asshole.
So here’s the list:
5. Britney Spears
4. Madonna
3. Sandra Oh
2. Amy Winehouse
1. Sarah Jessica Parker.
Okay. If they wanted to be really serious about this, you know and I know that #1 would be Rosie O’Donnell. But that’s neither here nor there. No, what they wanted to make was a list of women who are actually more attractive than MOST women but not as attractive as most CELEBRITY women. Subjectively, of course. They wanted a list of women who were at one time considered very attractive but have, through age or drugs or too many Cheetos, become less attractive.
I ask again, why? Why would they do that?
Are women not feeling shitty enough about ourselves? Are we not as hyper-critical of our looks as we should be? Do you desire that we have it kicked into our heads as much as possible that we can never ever FUCKING EVER live up to your expectations of what women should look like? Do you wish to ensure that once we reach a certain age or pass that threshold of 115 pounds, we accept that we are “unsexy”? Thank you sir, can I have another?
And guys wonder why we don’t like having sex in bright light, why we’re afraid to prance around in lingerie, why we take an hour to put on makeup and do our hair.
We’re just trying not to repulse you.
People sometimes ask me why I don’t have pictures of myself on my blog, especially people who know me personally. I’m not a bad-looking woman, after all. Some people even think I’m pretty damn cute. Well you know, this is why. I can handle criticisms of my writing and my opinions, but I can’t handle strangers criticizing my FACE. Which is what happened in the old incarnation of my blog, when I had a couple of pics up. One blogger posted something like, “She’s not ugly but she looks like a major dork with a gummy smile.” I got email saying, “You’d be cute if you had a stronger chin.” I shit you not! People (always men) took time out of their day to tell me what was wrong with my LOOKS. They were probably Maxim readers.
Anyway. Here’s what someone actually got paid money to write about Sarah Jessica Parker for this popular men’s magazine:
How the hell did this Barbaro-faced broad manage to be the least sexy woman in a group of very unsexy women and still star on a show with “sex” in the title? Pull your skirt down, Secretariat, we´d rather ride Chris Noth.
Keepin’ it classy, Maxim. Keepin’ it classy.
She’s a real hideous pig, all right:
*applause*
October 26th, 2007 at 11:45 amOk, I’ll give you this one, but next time I’m going on a rant about the women who are always crying on the shoulder of the nice guy, then going back to the abusive jerk they were crying about, telling the nice guy what a perfect husband he’s going to make somebody (else).
October 26th, 2007 at 11:57 amP.S. All those women on the list are very hot, except for Britney, and that’s got nothing to do with a few extra pounds after having babies. The ill-fitting wig, skanky outfits, and general insanity really take her out of the hotness realm.
October 26th, 2007 at 12:00 pmIt’s insecurity. The Maxim dudes know most of these media starlets would laugh in their faces if they tried to have sex with them- and they see them as essentially hanging out a giant “AVAILABLE” sign but denying them entrance anyway.
Those grapes were sour anyway, she’s a hog anyway, no difference.
October 26th, 2007 at 12:08 pmDon’t worry Fred, you’re still hot:):):)
October 26th, 2007 at 12:10 pmPS - Madonna is still on my babes I’d like to bag list:):):)
October 26th, 2007 at 12:14 pmI’ve never been attracted to women you could cut yourself on.
That said, the wife was 95 lbs for 30 years or so until the changes, then she put on 30 lbs. A week after each of the 3 kids she was back to 95lbs.
“Do these jeans make me look fat?”
“Yes, thank God, finally!”
October 26th, 2007 at 12:19 pmThat list really bothered me, too, Rachel. It really is as if the so-called editors of Maxim said to themselves exactly what you wrote. And that’s offensive.
Personally, I like SJP’s quirks: she’s not a perfect looking woman, but she has confidence and panache. Same goes for Sandra Oh. It’s like the French conept of jolie-laide which translates as an “lovely ugliness”, an unusual beauty or handsomeness that transcends pure prettiness.
These “editors” remind me of those guys on Fark.com who write in posts about pretty women “I wouldn’t hit it” or “sharp knees” or somesuch nonsense. I love the Farker who created the photoshop with the two 600 lb+ guys on minibikes with those very same comments captioned over their heads. I suspect the Maxim guys are about as hot as those two!
October 26th, 2007 at 12:19 pmA buddy of mine met Sara JP way back when they were filming “Honeymoon in Vegas,” and he reported that she was an absolute sweetheart as well as looking really good (I remember her in that movie, and she was full on smokin’ back then, before she lost so much weight). Maxim sucks metrosexual ass. The “men” who read that rag are pretentious little gits who sorely need an ass whooping.
I’ve never been attracted to the supermodel type, not even when I was a teenager. My favorite actresses are Zooey Deschanel and Rachel Weisz. I also like Kari on Mythbusters. I used to like Janeane Garafolo before she went psycho-dyke or whatever her gig is.
October 26th, 2007 at 12:39 pmI could live with the list labeled “Overrated.” That is not sensational enough for Maxim.
silicone overlying bony ribcages? Meh. Not so much. Some Barbie doll in a magazine isn’t real, accessible, attainable or IMHO desirable. I like women real and in person - so things like personality, wit and wisdom can be discovered and appreciated. An airbrushed glossy pic doesn’t tell me much I want to know.
October 26th, 2007 at 12:40 pmI’ve never heard of Maxim, but as I’ve been telling women for thirty years, I’ll decide who I find attractive, thank you very much.
October 26th, 2007 at 12:44 pmI think the staff at Maxim is afraid to put Rosie O’Donnell on their unsexy list because they’re afraid she will either eat them, sit on them, or start complaining loudly in their direction if she’s labelled as “unsexy”. So they were picking people as safe to label as unsexy, not the truly “unsexy”.
And Barbara Streissand, can’t post her on an un-sexy list because her singing and the outrage of her showtune-loving fans would cause your eardrums to bleed.
Can’t post HRC on an unsexy list because you may end up in a gulag come 2009.
October 26th, 2007 at 12:53 pmBritney’s implosion and Amy Winehouse making a roadmap of her skin (Rachel, I agree with you 100% on the damn tramp stamps) are the only problems I have with any of them.
I’ve loved SJP’s humor since Square Pegs; she’d be a blast on a date. She’s the kind of gal I envision sitting across from me in a cafe where the tables are so small that our noses are almost rubbing together, a night that we decide to skip the 9:30 movie because we’re having so much fun simply talking.
Same with Sandra Oh. I loved the scene in Grey’s Anatomy when she and the dude decided to live together; she brings him to her place and tells him matter-of-factly that’s she’s messy, lazy and procrastinates about cleaning. “Still want to live here?” she asked him.
When Madonna’s “seduce the physical trainer to make her first child” story broke, I was jealous: Lucky Bastard, I cursed under my breath.
Sexiness is not limited to physical beauty; it’s an attitude, the confidence in how a woman carries herself. And Rachel, judging from what you write, I’ll bet you’re DAMN sexy.
October 26th, 2007 at 1:01 pmPS - Madonna is still on my babes I’d like to bag list:):):)
The prom-queen-in-heat cover photo of “Like A Virgin” is still smokin’ hot.
October 26th, 2007 at 1:07 pmI heard about the list on the radio one day and I the way I thought about was that these women were unsexy not because of their looks, but their personalities/mannerisms/behaviour. I agree with the list (although I would have had a completely different one, topped by Rosie) because I can’t handle alot of the actions and mannerisms that these 5 women have.
Just another perspective…..
October 26th, 2007 at 1:15 pmWell, that explains the person who was recently on my site via the google search for
rachel lucas photo
Now I’m going to pimp myself because I’ve ranted about this type of nonsense before.
Did you decide on a costume?
October 26th, 2007 at 1:25 pmYOU GO, RACHEL!
*APPLAUSE!!!!!*
October 26th, 2007 at 1:32 pmUhh….., Madonna is a woman?
I thought that she? had successfully completed the conversion and was now a transvestite.
Not that there’s anything wrong with that.
October 26th, 2007 at 1:34 pmPersonally, one of my criteria is intelligence—IOW, the ability to carry on a coherent conversation about something other than the latest gossip of who-boinked-who. Celebutards in general don’t do it for me, although if I could keep her off her latest religious enthusiasm, Madonna might be an exception; from what I hear, she’s a very savvy businesswoman indeed.
And my various loves have, all of them, been easy on the eyes, but none of them would get a second look from a Playboy talent scout. I didn’t care—I liked them anyway. From things they said to me, I got the strong impression that women primp and fuss with themselves at least partly to keep other women’s claws out of them; women are a lot better at spotting tiny details than men are. Most guys like and prefer the “very little-to-no makeup” look, and aren’t wildly attracted by hairstyles that look like they need a consulting architect to construct.
I’ve never seen a picture of you other than that childhood one you used to use, but I would probably find you attractive. Of course, you’d look at me like something you scraped off your shoe—but that’s life.
October 26th, 2007 at 1:43 pmHave to admit I don’t give it much thought, which celebutards are sexy or not. Actually, I think that the most beautiful women in the world are the ones that are aging gracefully, much like my wife. She just turned 40 and I think she’s sexier than she was when I met her. Of course she doesn’t believe me but it is true. I think it has as much to do with WHO she is as much as how she looks. Am I kissing ass? Maybe, but I highly doubt she reads this or any other blog I do. I also don’t read Maxim, FHM, Stuff, Playboy or any of that other crap.
October 26th, 2007 at 2:05 pmRachel,
I remember the photos of you from the old days and I will say flat out you are one smoking hot babe - not just physically, but mentally, too!
People who make snide comments like the ones you described do so because they can’t attack what you write intelligently, so they fall back on personal attacks. Yes, conservatives who attack Rosie O’Donnel for being fat (instead for being a screaming communist) are just as guilty.
Well, let me be the first to pledge:
Put up photos of yourself, and I will appreciate you for your beauty as well as your wit; I will defend your honor when idiots say stupid shit; and I will never complain about your chin.
YOU RULE!!!
October 26th, 2007 at 2:11 pm*sigh*
I never used to be concerned with how I looked - I was 5 ‘ 7 and 115 pounds. Probably could have modeled. I was in a pageant and got first runner up (it was for the scholarship money - I swear). I was never without a boyfriend…ever.
People used to ask if I was anorexic. Nope…just really active in sports. I ate like a pig. And that never changed. The activitiy level did change. Poor hubby married me at 135 and is stuck with me at … more than that.
I don’t FEEL fat…not really. I can still move and do things I’ve always done. My thighs might bump more corners now. I’ve got some junk in my trunk. And hubby doesn’t help.
He was raised on the idea that an attractive woman is a thin woman. So I’m fat in his eyes. It really sucks. I don’t think I’m ugly. And my mind is as sharp as ever.
I can’t stand looking at magazines like Cosmo because it’s nearly impossible to not judge myself against them. And then I remember that I could sit on them and break them in half and I feel much better!
October 26th, 2007 at 2:15 pmWhat bothers me is that these are considered “men’s” magazines. In other words, voyeurism is considered an admirable quality.
October 26th, 2007 at 2:20 pmRachel,
Like Chris H, I don’t read Maxim, FHM, Stuff, Playboy, etc.
I don’t have time for that crap in my schedule. What reading I have time for has to have some level of intellectual content.
Besides the cop gig, I work a part-time job doing security for a local homeless shelter. Among the few magazines some of the male residents scrape up the cash to subscribe to, Maxim is probably the hands-down winner. Oh yeah, THERE’S a bunch of hot guys who can criticize women for being “un-hot”.
On top of all that, I have to agree with Chris H also about how sexy REAL women who age gracefully are. My 45 year old Italian/Korean girlfriend is far sexier and more beautiful than most celebrity chicks in their 20’s anyway.
October 26th, 2007 at 2:22 pmTHE FIVE UNSEXIEST WOMEN
1. Chris Matthews. The voice of a neutered choir boy with a face shaped like a pie.
Combs his hair like some snooty rich kid in middle school named Scotty, whom you wanted to beat senseless.
2. Joy Behar. Her voice sounds like a ragged fart. Her face looks like it was assembled out of liver, gizzards, and tomato paste. Her hideous hair comes from Lucas’s Wig World and Live Bait.
3. Rosie O’ Doughebag. Her head looks like a warning about heavy steroid use.
“THIS could be YOU!”
Her body resembles a sack of spuds with legs.
Her voice sounds like she’s squeezing yodels through bad gut cramps.
4. Hillary. The high school English teacher everyone despised.
“Hoity toity stuck up basketball head.”
5. Christine Amanpour (or whatever). Her face was fashioned with a ball peen hammer.
If you woke up and found her in your bed, you would kill yourself—after you threw her out the window.
“Begone, loathsome skankster.”
I can testify that Rachel Lucas is cute as all heck.
Cute as a kitty with a ribbon.
Cute as a puppy with a lollipop in its mouth.
Of course, when I saw her she was face down on the floor in a west Texas saloon.
Clutching a sack o’ pork rinds, moaning “Mine. Mine.”
Crawling towards the juke box.
“One more time. Play it, Sam.”
“Play what?”
“I dunno. moaaaan. I don’ feel so good.”
“We don’t have that tune.”
But still cute.
October 26th, 2007 at 2:27 pmI’m thinking your post is kind of put into perspective by something my father used to say. “You’ll know that women will have finally “arrived” when they can walk down the street with a bald head and a beergut and think they’re beautiful.”
A good rant though.
October 26th, 2007 at 2:30 pmI think Maxim is one of the stupidest publications around, and the article was mean spirited, BUT…..I do think Sarah Jessica Parker is very unattractive and way too skinny. And speaking of Sex and the City, I also think that Kim Cattral needs to hang it up. That whole over the top maneater thing is so tiresome and lame. Just my opinion.
October 26th, 2007 at 2:48 pmSome of the most vicious and withering criticisms I’ve heard about women have come from other women.
That said, you’re right to feel the way you do about Maxim.
October 26th, 2007 at 2:51 pmMaxim’s is for men with too little class to eschew Porn entirely (in which category I place myself, BTW), but who are too insecure to buy real skin mags.
October 26th, 2007 at 2:57 pmThank you!
October 26th, 2007 at 3:03 pmDon’t really wanna crash this pity party, but someone really needs to explain to me how magazine articles and pictures can make otherwise intelligent, confident women question or even hate themselves.
…I mean, unless they’re really not that intelligent or confident. Which couldn’t be, right?
Right?
October 26th, 2007 at 3:11 pmAlexander’s right. Maxim is hardly alone in airbrushing women into “perfection.” Cosmo, Marie Claire, all the women’s magazines remove wrinkles and even massive amounts of normal skin to make their models seem anorexic-thin.
Kudos, by the way, to Dove® for their Campaign for Real Beauty, which features real women with real bodies, unretouched. Watch this video to see the truly massive amounts of manipulation which go into converting an attractive but perfectly ordinary-looking woman into a billboard poster.
October 26th, 2007 at 3:23 pmIf you were talking about Sarah Jessica Parker, you don’t really need a small table for that. =)
But yeah, agree on most everyone’s main points.
October 26th, 2007 at 3:32 pmOn Sarah Jessica Parker:
My problem with her isn’t her looks, but what she chooses to do with them. She often chooses hairstyles, makeup, and clothing that hide her positive and accentuate her negative. She is very pretty when she is just being herself. But when she “glams up” it looks pretty bad. No, not Rosie bad, but certainly unattractive.
Ironically, I think she is cutest when she plays parts that are supposed to be “not pretty.”
Remember how adorable she was a dork on Square Pegs? Did you see her made up as the ugly witch in that one Disney film (forgot the name)? And she was mighty fine as an unglamorous tough cop in that Bruce Willis movie (also forgot the name). But on Sex and the City, and in many commercials for “fashion” crap, I think she looks weird.
Lesson for all women: let your natural beauty shine through! Wash off the makeup, rinse the crap out of your hair, and wear comfortable clothes. Oh yeah, and eat something.
October 26th, 2007 at 3:43 pmAnyone who would down-grade a woman based solely on age has clearly never dated an older lady.
October 26th, 2007 at 3:45 pmThanks Pat, and regarding your first post. It made me grind my teeth…I know that deal all too well.
Not to say because other mags do it it’s okay for Maxim to, but I think heaping so much blame on them (and men) about why women are so insecure about themselves rings false. I’ll flip through again, but I don’t recall seeing an angry, chauvinistic
man modelling women’s clothing in W magazine…I think I remember seeing 6′6″ bone-thin women with a ton of makeup on and little else reclining on a couch with a cat or some shit.
But, what do I know? I’m a guy.
October 26th, 2007 at 3:48 pmYou guys are right about the womens’ mags - don’t even get me STARTED. It was the nasty wording and the superficial malice of this particular Maxim piece that pissed me off.
Rupert, my love - you realize with that comment you make it sound like I am old. Thank you sweetie.
(He’s 9 months older than me, y’all. Just for the record. Don’t want any weird rumors started that Rachl Lukis dates young’uns.)
October 26th, 2007 at 3:56 pmYea, that was a nice rant rachel, but women’s problems with body image and standards of beauty are not generated in men’s magazines. Propagated, reinforced? OK…but generated by, I don’t think so. Men will believe in whatever standard of beauty they are told to believe, which is why Maxim and playboy are catering to their audience. And believe me, I’m not trying to let men off the hook here, they do bear some responsibility for contributing to the problem.
So who sets the standards of beauty? Hollywood, fashion industry, beauty pageants, like that. Seriously, ever look at a playboy from the 50s…the women in them are equally airbrushed but are all soft full curves. They also had body hair, the elimination of which is another modern “beauty” trend.
So while maxim makes a handy target of convenience, it’s a rather insubstantial target.
October 26th, 2007 at 4:06 pmI enjoyed that very much:) the first part made me laugh out loud:
Guys, do you read Maxim? Allow me to suggest that if your answer is ‘yes’, you’re a great big asshole. I say that in the nicest possible way.
I dont fit into most catergories since I dont care for that kind of stuff (an hour putting on makeup and doing my hair..unless its a special occassion) and I’ve never read Cosmo and my attitude is very simply..”if you dont like what you see..dont look” and if people want to be vocal about it well I have no problem showing off my right hook and a knee to the..well anyway plus I have a nice big strong gentlemen to stand up for my honor:) and he’s not the magazine kind of guy.
Oddly enough its usually women who have something to say about me (my guy is..he catches the eye;) so obvisously when they hit on him with me right there..well I’ve been in my share of fights (verbal and otherwise)
Hmm I know there was a point when I started out with this…well anyway..I didnt figure on seeing any guys on here reading Maxim and I’m glad I was right:)
October 26th, 2007 at 4:10 pmI’m also betting the guys who wrote that piece dont get much of anything..they’re sad little men..who need their asses kicked.
You can’t really compare Maxim and Cosmopolitan. When I flip through a Maxim (yes, on the mug), it’s just to look at pictures of pretty girls. End of story. When women read Cosmo, they’re reading the damn articles and actually absorbing really bad and/or stupid ideas. Big difference, and the Cosmo effect is far more damaging to gender relations in the long run.
The text stuff in Maxim is invariably either (a) leftist swill or (b) shallow moronic misogyny. The solution that most non-Moonbat men arrive at is to ignore the articles entirely.
And for the record, I don’t buy Maxim or any of the others of its ilk. My roommate subscribes, and, yes, he’s kind of a moron. Still, a picture of a pretty girl is a picture of a pretty girl, and not every trip to the mug requires Tolstoy.
October 26th, 2007 at 4:17 pmWell done Rachel! I also believe lists such as the one Maxim put together (the staff there must have an ungodly amount of free time), are for lack of a better word, crap.
Who do they think they are to pass judgement on anybody? I would love to see what the guys who compiled this list look like. I’ll bet that would give a brand new definition to the word “unsexy”
October 26th, 2007 at 4:19 pmOh! I didn’t know we could edit comments! That’s great!
October 26th, 2007 at 4:20 pmI used to read Maxim magazine until I realized it was written by gay men.
October 26th, 2007 at 4:32 pmSarah Jessica Parker is a Tauntaun.
Of course, me and the other men who “grade” these women usually have more hair than a Wookiee and are about as attractive as something hanging out in the cantina so the Star Wars analogy comes full circle.
I agree with your Rosie take. Her ugliness is ageless and is unbound by the fetters of her epidermis. Whatever that means.
October 26th, 2007 at 4:37 pmI’ve never had a ‘type’ I find appealing. I an equal opportunity gawker. I review all holders of feminine charms on a case-by-case basis. That said, I second Gullyborg on the no make-up look. The less prep, the more natural, and sexy, the woman looks.
And, PaleoMedic, I’m thankful that I’m not the first to admit on this forum that I found pre-crazy Janeane Garafolo attractive.
October 26th, 2007 at 5:14 pmI’m going to echo Amanda’s comment and give you a standing ovation.
October 26th, 2007 at 5:18 pmNot going to read every comment, but to say that my girlfriend looks like a 28 year old version of Sarah Jessica Parker….and that Maxim can go fuck themselves.
…and I must add that they must be joking if they don’t put Courtney Love on their list. Although I have to say that Courtney is on my “to do” list, in the form of taking her to my 20 year high school reunion, feeding her lots of dope and watching approvingly as she goes down on every guy under the table while we talk about our old games of Dungeons and Dragons.
….what?
October 26th, 2007 at 5:30 pm1. Sarah Jessica Parker would be no where near the vicinity of this list.
October 26th, 2007 at 6:03 pm2. Amy Winehouse isn’t “Unsexy.” She’s a fucking crackhead. That is what makes her unattractive.
3. Sandra Oh. I actually have to agree w/ this one. And it has nothing to do w/ being a celebrity or not. I just think she’s fucking ugly.
4. Madonna no long qualifies for this list. I would replace her with…say…Rosie McBackfat and catapult her to 1st place. Pronto.
5. Again. Not unsexy, but a crackhead. And the fact that the entire world has seen her stained asscrack does not help matters.
SJP went way up in my estimation when a particularly dumb entertainment reporter (surely there’s at least one redundancy in that phrase) noted that she and hubby Matthew Broderick were seemingly always working. “We have bills to pay,” she said, “and we have no other skills.”
October 26th, 2007 at 7:58 pm- Robyn
lol you can say that again. Still, I guess it’s nice work if you can get it.
The trouble, like already mentioned, is friggin hollywood. They push this ‘gee look at me! I weigh 50lbs soaking wet, and have the body of an 10 year old’ horseshit. Although the mags don’t help. Men OR womens. I mean really, how many times do we have to hear about how great Brad Pitt is? C’mon does anyone REALLY care?
People will like what and who they like for any reason. Hell, maybe just because they don’t have to explain their jokes all the time. (I really hate that. Just kills the funny)
Like Robyn said, the lists are crap. And the people who read them also have too much free time. If they’d all just step in front of the bus, the world would be a better place.
October 26th, 2007 at 8:52 pmAnd I could find a decent parking place.
Everyone wins.
I’m seeing SJP on TV right now in some hair color commercial. Soft brown hair, very light makeup. She looks great. Was she on SITC? I used to watch that once in a while and never noticed anyone other than Kristin Davis. Mmm, Charlotte, yumm.
I’ve gotta agree with Paleo … Kari Byran is so desirable. She’s like your buddy’s tomboyish kid sister who showed up at the pool one day in a string bikini. She seems like a whole lot of fun to be around, utterly unpretentious, daring, and pretty smart.
That adds up to total sexiness. She isn’t really that pretty and she doesn’t have a perfect body, but …. wow!
I don’t understand this list you’re writing about. Maybe its from the perspective of a 22 year old who just found out SJP and Madonna are his mom’s age. But I never got it about Sandra Oh. Gak. Double Gak. And Winehouse? Holy crap. There is nothing a woman can do to make herself uglier than wall to wall jailhouse tatoos.
October 26th, 2007 at 9:07 pmNow here’s a topic joey knows something about. -smirk-
I never see that air-brushed Hollywood caricature of a woman in my real world, but I do notice many lovely ladies every day.
October 26th, 2007 at 9:21 pmI happen to think I’m married to one of the sexiest ladies, and she’s not only got woman in all the right places (if you know what I mean), but she’s also got the funny stuff, and smart stuff, and happy stuff in my every day life…
Hmmm…
Rachel I pretty much agree with your rant, and most of the comments that follow. Personally, it didn’t take too long in life for me to figure out that beauty had more to do with internals and intangibles than it did with packaging and wrappers. I like a woman as much as anyone, but won’t consider her anything but art (good or bad) until I know what’s in her head and in her heart. Of course a smart, fit, well-dressed woman with a good heart…well, that’s undeniable!
As far as Maxim goes…it worked! That list had no purpose other than getting attention. Maxim is a for-profit enterprise, and the selections on that list were chosen based on name-recognition and popularity. Note that one is a movie actress, one is a musician, one is pop TV, etc. When you want to sell magazines, you put names on the cover to attract attention. “Flippers” come to see your had-to-believe list and also see the other scantily clad women in the mag. He can’t sit and read the whole mag (or rub one off, in most places), so he buys the mag. Ideally, even non-readers are talking your controversial list, which piques the interest of even non-”flippers” who may go out and buy the mag to see what the deal is. So, Maxim sells magazines, gets talked about, and giggles their purile, juvenile, smug delight…all the way to the bank.
BTW, I remember the older pics. Rachel gots nothing to be ’shamed of, and no basis for self-deprecation.
C
October 26th, 2007 at 10:26 pmGod help me, I did too. Really attractive, but that’s all over now, baby blue. Nothing like stark raving Moonbattery to spoil someone’s appeal.
October 26th, 2007 at 10:35 pmAs a man, I actually have to agree with that list.
Let me explain. These are all physically attractive women. If all I did was see them, I would think they were definitely super hot.
But then they open their mouths and spout off leftoid drivel and I am so turned off it’s not funny. I couldn’t get it up for them if I tried.
When Rosie O or Jeneane G open their mouths, it doesn’t effect their attractiveness in the least, becasue they aren’t attractive in any way to me.
So, yes, I agree that they are incredibly NOT sexy. Don’t confuse physical attractiveness with being “sexy”. They aren’t the same.
Patricia Richardson is probably the sexiest woman in Hollywood in my opinion. She is extremely cute, but also has really good morals and political views. As a man, it’s the whole package that is sexy. None of the 5 loosers on that list has anything but physical attractiveness. That is NOT sexy!!!!!
It didn’t say “unnatractive”. It said “unsexy”. They are incredibly unsexy because they DON’T live up to the incredible potential that their looks give them!!! So I do think you overreacxted on this one Rachel…
October 26th, 2007 at 10:58 pmmethinks you missed the point of similarity between all these women.
October 27th, 2007 at 1:06 amThey are all held up as sex symbols, sex objects and models of sexuality. But they are all viewed by men, or at least me, as NON sexy.
They are plain and simple trash.
Their status isn’t defined on their looks, it is their actions.
Trashiness is the only common factor besides gender.
Maxim is a stupid magazine but women are far more critical of each other than a man could ever be. You have only yourselves to blame.
October 27th, 2007 at 9:22 amThis is what happens when you let the metrosexuals near computer keyboards. There was a list of sexiest men upon which the like of Leo, the Wii creator and Justin Timberlake were all judged hotter than real men like Denzel Washington. For pity’s sake, on th elist I recall Steve Carell was ahead of Clive Owens…
So Rosie didn;t make the list cause all the light in the loafers crowd [swishvoice] LOVE HER! [/swishvoice]
October 27th, 2007 at 9:34 amOk, I’m going to get it for this….
I don’t read Maxim or any of its ilk…but is it just me or isn’t this kind of funny?
I mean, it is riffing on all these ridiculous sexiest man, woman, horse of the year stuff.
I’ll admit a lot of it was pretty cruel, but these ladies could buy and sell all of us 10x over, and none of them are lacking the attention of the opposite sex I am sure. It would almost have been crueler to put rosie down there, cause she is a little pathetic.
I cracked up and cringed at the same time reading this thing….so I guess I am a bad man..
But as a women I know once said on the topic of getting older, gaining weight etc “Play me or trade me…..”
October 27th, 2007 at 10:19 amWell, there’s your answer right there. Consider the source.
October 27th, 2007 at 10:26 amDenzel Washington is a “real man?” Since when, last I checked he was a famous hollywood actor.
October 27th, 2007 at 12:50 pmSarah Jessica *was* hot back when she did L.A. Story. Then she consumed too many cigarettes and not enough food. She’s all too skinny now.
October 27th, 2007 at 1:10 pmJust like another poster has stated on this BBS, most of the knives in my back were placed there by women.
That said, however, I have been “just friends” with a number of men who have felt comfortable enough around me that I was kind of an “honorary guy,” and I have overheard some of their unguarded comments about women… many of which which aren’t pretty.
Although I realize most of these may just be throwaway comments, sometimes the men I’ve known sound like they judge women very harshly on their looks and their body parts. Some of these men sound like they wish they could build their “perfect woman” from off-the-shelf body parts just like electronic components. I’ve also met men who, if they don’t like the way a woman looks, feel free to treat her almost as if she’s subhuman and not worthy of decent treatment.
Maybe some of us (maybe even most of us) women are overly sensitive about such things, but it’s not a comfortable feeling to think that men might care about us as only as long as we’re able to compete with the 18-year-old girls out there with just-ripe bodies who look great without any extra help.
Men sometimes put down women because of our competitiveness and because of the fact that we compete for men… but in fact it does look like competition, and nasty competition at that, from a female point of view. If a guy doesn’t like your looks, he may not care about getting to know you as a human being. If a woman wants to get a date, or get married (especially if she wants kids), it is far easier to do that when she’s young and looking her best.
The stakes are high, and a lot can be riding on your looks. We are being judged on our looks every time we walk outside the door, to a greater degree (I believe) than men are. A man might lose his looks when he’s an older fart, but in many cases his other assets (whatever they might be–and yes, a fat bank account helps a lot–being a wife and mother IS a job).
When a woman is young and nubile, she might not have to work hard to attract a whole crowd of men. She might have a whole crowd of men lined up and falling all over themselves to hand her the world on a platter (silver or not). But when her looks start to go, or if she isn’t the preferred physical type of the men she knows, it might be the case that nothing she does will be good enough for the men around her.
If a woman makes it into her thirties or forties, and she still wants to get married and have children, well, she obviously doesn’t have much time left to do all that. Because women DO have a biological clock, and it ticks faster than men’s do–at least regarding childbearing. And also because if she’s still single by the time she’s in her forties, most of the men out there in her age group or beyond will be looking for women who are younger than she is.
At least, that’s the way it looks to me.
And yes, many women (even most) might be very interested in how prosperous a man is, quite apart from whether they love him or not… because being a wife and a mother is a JOB–and just as a man is very interested in his compensation for his JOB outside the house, a woman will be interested in her compensation for her JOB inside the house as well.
And let’s face it, mortgage companies, landlords, utility companies, grocery stores, etc. will not take “love” as payment.
October 27th, 2007 at 1:33 pmI fell in love with Sandra Oh when she used her motorcycle helmet to flatten the face of the bastard in “Sideways”.
October 27th, 2007 at 2:01 pmJust last night I had to caution my wife not to demonstrate Aikido techniques on the unsuspecting, no matter how “gently”. lest she damage them unintentionally.
There *must* be something wrong with me.
And, don’t forget, when you are a celebuwhore (like all 5 of these chicks and pretty much everyone else in Hollyweird), the old saying is very true: Any news is good news!!!
I doubt they are bothered by this at all. They have people talking about them because of this article. And, if people are talking about you they aren’t forgetting about you — the greatest fear of any celebuwhore…
October 27th, 2007 at 2:31 pmI recall when I saw your picture on the site that you are very pretty. Assholes who criticize your appearance are just that. Assholes.
October 27th, 2007 at 6:49 pmAnswer: “What a funny coincidence, because I can tell from your email that if you had a bigger penis you still wouldn’t be cute at all.”
October 27th, 2007 at 7:01 pmIf Maxim had just remembered to use the phrase, “bless her heart” after each criticism…
October 27th, 2007 at 7:02 pmI think BigBadJohnny and Jason are the ones who understood this list.
Maxim is garbage, pure and simple. So are all the women on this list. I know that any one of them would make my husband’s privates crawl up into his pelvis.
Sure, Rosie is an obvious choice as are many other women in Hollywood who have no hopes of getting laid for free. I think the point of this article is what these 2 other posters have indicated: that these women blew whatever potential they had to attract men for one reason or another.
SJM once had an admirable body, but Hubby always called her Horse Face and never considered her good-looking (nice soft focus and flattering camera angle in that posted photo, BTW). What is really her main turn-off now, though, is this “1000 shoes are just FABULOUS” image that she’s built. Most men of substance are looking for, well, substance, so I am not really surprised that she’s on this list.
Sandra O and Amy Winehouse who? Oh, they’re on shows you couldn’t pay me to watch. I think. Regardless, after checking out their photos I can’t imagine anyone finding them sexy. The bodies are okay, but yeesh, the faces! Those would be known as 3 baggers. And please, tattoos aren’t sexy. I can’t comment on their behavior because I really don’t know who the heck these fugs are, but I would imagine they have issues that men don’t really want to deal with.
Speaking of which: Madonna has had and will always have the air of venereal disease about her. Trashy = unsexy.
That last comment applies doubly for Ms. Spears.
And, one more thing: a woman who permits her self image to be harmed by anything in a magazine should stop wasting her money on subscriptions and invest in a spine.
October 27th, 2007 at 7:31 pmI’m kind of surprised that there were any negative comments about Sandra Oh… out here in California, Asian women have long been a hot fashion accessory for men.
A lot more Asian women than Asian men marry non-Asians (primarily Caucasians). I hear that not only does it piss off Caucasian women, but it also pisses off a fair number of Asian men. It’s still fairly rare for an Asian man to marry a non-Asian woman.
October 27th, 2007 at 7:44 pmOh, yeah, Rachel… the picture of Sarah Jessica Parker you used is one of the few pics of her I’ve seen which I actually like.
October 27th, 2007 at 8:10 pmUh…yeah!
October 27th, 2007 at 9:17 pmSo, Pam, if I understand you right… you are saying that while women must compete for men with physical looks and that men must compete for women with a paycheck. I tend to agree. It’s arbitrary and unfair from both sides.
October 27th, 2007 at 9:39 pmHere’s the thing, Sandra Oh in Grey’s Anatomy, looks normal, even pretty. Sandra Oh attempting to take glamour shots for the camera, looks like a fucking Grey. I shit you not, that’s the first thing that pops into my head with the pics at the link. Don’t know why, but it is. As for the list itself, of course it’s bullshit. But then it’s in Maxim. What did you expect. That’s like going to the 4chan boards and expecting normalcy.
October 27th, 2007 at 9:43 pmJohn: I think that _on average_, women’s looks are far more important to men than men’s looks are to women. At least, how else do you explain the number of butt-ugly men out there with model types on their arms?
In general, a man’s earning power is more important to a woman, than a woman’s earning power is to a man. But I’m sure neither of these generalizations is true in 100% of cases.
Both sexes must have something to offer the other. It’s a trade. In that sense, I don’t think people get something for nothing.
One way I’ve heard it put is that historically, traditionally, women get protected and taken care of by men in exchange for “obedience” and youth, beauty, and sex.
Personally, I have never insisted that a man have a certain income level… but if there were to be a next relationship after the one I’ve been in for five or six years, I’d pay more attention to that aspect–because I’ve been in several relationships where I have paid much more than 50% of the bills, and I don’t much care for it.
In this relationship I have been the main support of both of us (and three cats), and the last couple of years (after a work slowdown, a learning curve on new work, and then a pay cut!) have been really brutal financially.
One of the young men I knew in my long-ago teens went on to become a well-respected and wealthy surgeon; and back then, he, at least, was very attracted to me. The relationship went nowhere, but sometimes I think that had we stayed together, my life would have been different–certainly more prosperous. When I was young, I never wanted to be a wife and mother, but it _might_ have been nice to be taken care of financially, looking back. Hindsight is so clear, decades later.
I’ve heard that there is a French saying to the effect that a woman’s time (for successfully snagging a man and having kids) is very short; however, men sometimes marry several wives (bigger age difference as time goes on) and siring more kids.
October 28th, 2007 at 2:14 amSandro Oh is hot. She’s the only reason I even flip over to the channel… that has the show… that’s called, um… well, she’s in it. That’s all I know. If she’s not on screen I don’t care what’s going on. Afterwards, I go back to the Discovery channel. /shrug
Back to the point at hand. That list was made by men writing for the audience they assume reads their magazine: clueless young men. Maxim is (or was the last time I read it) freakin’ funny. I laugh out loud when I happen to read it, but I don’t read their magazine for witty insights into anything. If the article was meant to be humorous, then it’s subjective and not everyone will find it funny. That’s the way I take it, but only because that’s the memory I have of the magazine, where nothing is sacred.
Saying that, it’s like a musical band having political opinions. Who really cares? You have a certain thing you go to them for, and anything outside of that is totally pointless. Rage Against the Machine has slamming music, but they’re political retards. Maxim is a humor magazine, but they’re clueless retards when it comes to women. They know hawt young things, but they haven’t a clue when it comes to substantial issues like grace, wit, insight, mystique, some of the real qualities that make a woman sexy, as opposed to merely hot.
Personally, I blame Kim du Toit and his library of classy and hawt women. To paraphrase Bill Cosby “Whoa-man!” I don’t think the same after reading his ‘blog. Dammit! /shakes fist
October 28th, 2007 at 11:29 amOnly for the articles (honest).
October 28th, 2007 at 3:37 pmAnd, one more thing: a woman who permits her self image to be harmed by anything in a magazine should stop wasting her money on subscriptions and invest in a spine.Posted by ellenlowe
Ditto..Amen..Bravo and all that:)
October 28th, 2007 at 3:48 pmEh, she’s okay. Her body is smokin’ but her face seems a little…I don’t know…off, I guess. She’s not “ugly” but something about the shape of her face just doesn’t seem right.
In short, I’ve seen better, but not many.
Speaking as a white man who has dated 2 Asian women (one after the other) I am well aquainted with that particular viewpoint. As it happens, both of those relationships were ultimately ended because someone disapproved of them. The first girl was given an ultimatum by her very traditional father to stop seeing me, and the second had “whore” scratched into her car by my white ex-girlfriend.
The root of it is this:
Asian men don’t like it because they think “their women” are being stolen by the gweilo. White women don’t like it because they think “their men” are being seduced by yellow whores.
It’s racist, sexist, and disgustingly possessive.
October 28th, 2007 at 4:21 pmUh, MightySamurai: It might be politically incorrect for either Asian men or Caucasian women to dislike the fashionableness of Caucasian men dating Asian women… but thank gawd, being politically correct isn’t against the law yet.
Freedom of association… I guess you’ve heard of it?
Asian (or black) families who stop their daughters (or sons) from dating Caucasian (or other) men (or women) are just as racist and bigoted as anyone else.
Actually, I’m not all that surprised. I’ve known other Jewish women who were forbidden (as teenagers) from dating non-Jewish men. I believe it probably happens within all ethnic or racial “groups” to some extent.
Mating within one’s own group, and distrusting strangers, is a pretty old game for the human race. I may not like being excluded, but I understand it (one or two boys or men refused to date me in past years because I am of Jewish descent). In high school, one Cuban boy said that his mother told him he could marry anybody “except a Jew.”
I wouldn’t try to force someone to not marry someone–it’s not my business–but I don’t have to like their choices; I just have to refrain from harming them or saying rude things to them.
From some of the marriages I’ve seen, sometimes marrying someone from another culture just invites more trouble in a situation that comes with trouble enough to begin with. Although I have seen many exotic-looking men out there who look nice, I’d probably have hesitated to get involved romantically or marry one of them.
One really nice Caucasian man of my acquaintance waited until he was in his late 40s to marry. He has a job which takes him all over the world. He had dated some pretty exotic women–some American of various races, and some Asian or other foreigners.
He ended up marrying a South American woman, who may have been “hot” at the time, but her behavior since has been a major turn-off. She’d have been dumped long ago, except for the fact that this man is more or less hostage to the fact that they had a kid together, whom he adores. Because I get the impression that otherwise she kind of drives him nuts.
Oh, yeah… one more comment… among those male friends whose wives are foreign or of various ethnic groups… those women are at least as possessive as Caucasian women.
One man has a Filipino wife, and she apparently felt threatened by me before I ever even met her. I had been planning to move out of state, and I wanted to see this man one last time before I left. I had met him in a college class in 1986, and we had been pretty good friends for a long time.
I wasn’t able to see him, to say good-bye, until the afternoon of the day I left… it turned out that that was because of his then-girlfriend. He admitted that she had been trying to keep him from seeing me. And I believe she’s a major reason why I haven’t seen him in several years.
October 28th, 2007 at 4:52 pmI didn’t say it is, or should be, against the law.
All I said was that I think it is wrong. Has it become politically incorrect to differentiate between right and wrong now?
How so?
If I allow my child to date anyone he or she pleases, regardless of race or ethnicity, while my neighbor only allows his child to date people of a certain race (or forbids them from dating a certain race), does it not stand to reason that he is more of a bigot than I am?
So that makes it okay?
You claim that boys refused to date you because of your Jewish ancestry and one boy was told by his mother not to marry a Jew. Doesn’t that seem at least a little bit wrong to you?
Except culture is an entirely different factor than race. If I were dating a girl from South America I expect I would have a tough time relating to her, even if she were as white as the driven snow (for those of you scratching your heads, yes, there are white Latinos).
I have experienced culture clash before, even when dating natural-born American girls. I’ve also dated non-white girls and experienced no culture clash at all.
Look, I’ll admit that my opinion may be somewhat colored by the experiences I’ve had when dating outside my race. But surely we can both agree that there is something fundamentally wrong with this attitude.
You yourself previously objected to men who judge women solely by their appearance. Is this not the same thing? If someone says they will not date anyone of a certain race or forbids their child from dating anyone of a certain race, are they not judging people solely based on their physical appearance?
October 28th, 2007 at 5:25 pmI didn’t say possessiveness was characteristic of a certain race, I said it was characteristic of a certain opinion.
I would posit that the reason why non-white women tend to be more possessive of their men is because the opposition to interracial relationships is much stronger where they come from. It used to be just as strong here, as well. There is a famous story of a black kid who was murdered and thrown in a river back in the Jim Crow era because he said “Bye, bye, baby” to a white woman in a grocery store.
Here in America, we have mostly gotten over this. Other countries have not.
October 28th, 2007 at 5:34 pmSo, Pam, if I understand you right… you are saying that while women must compete for men with physical looks and that men must compete for women with a paycheck. I tend to agree. It’s arbitrary and unfair from both sides.
Yeah, it is unfair and arbitrary from both sides. However, someone’s gotta earn the money to keep the relationship and household going. I’ve never YET known a landlord, utility company, or grocery store which would take “love” as payment for the bills.
No, it doesn’t HAVE to be the man paying all the bills… Certainly many women are capable of earning good wages or salaries.
But if you and the woman both want kids, and if she’s going to be a stay-at-home wife and mother (with all that entails), in effect she’s your employee as well as your wife and lover and mother of your kids. And she’s going to be very interested in compensation for her job, just like you’re going to be very interested in compensation for your job.
So… just like you don’t get a house, or electricity, or phone service, or groceries, for free… you don’t get a wife for free either. Hopefully some of the man’s “payment” is emotional attachment. And hopefully the woman isn’t so materialistic that all she cares about are the money and goodies which the man can provide.
But money and materialistic things are part of dating and mating, no matter how unfortunate or crass some people may think that is.
If there ever is another relationship after this one, I am going to refuse to support anyone else EVER AGAIN (well, except for pets).
October 28th, 2007 at 10:30 pmAll I said was that I think it is wrong. Has it become politically incorrect to differentiate between right and wrong now?
What’s right or wrong about parents telling their kids who not to date? Most parents have something to say about it.
Asian (or black) families who stop their daughters (or sons) from dating Caucasian (or other) men (or women) are just as racist and bigoted as anyone else.
How so?
I said that Asian or black families who stop their offspring from dating Caucasians are just as racist and bigoted as anyone else… meaning, they’re just as “racist and bigoted” as Caucasians who stop their offspring from dating Asians or blacks. What’s not to understand? What’s good for one race or ethnicity goes for another race or ethnicity, right?
If I allow my child to date anyone he or she pleases, regardless of race or ethnicity, while my neighbor only allows his child to date people of a certain race (or forbids them from dating a certain race), does it not stand to reason that he is more of a bigot than I am?
I basically think you misunderstood me.
Mating within one’s own group, and distrusting strangers, is a pretty old game for the human race.
So that makes it okay?
Not okay or un-okay. It just IS. It’s how most people who identify with a particular group seem to think.
You claim that boys refused to date you because of your Jewish ancestry and one boy was told by his mother not to marry a Jew. Doesn’t that seem at least a little bit wrong to you?
It stung somewhat at the time. But, in my estimation, there have been far fewer boys/men who refused to date me because of my Jewishness than boys/men who refused to date me because of my height.
October 28th, 2007 at 10:43 pmI wish I knew what made her attractive. She just is, to me, at any rate. Different strokes and all that. /shrug
October 28th, 2007 at 11:46 pmDisclaimer: Yes, I read Maxim. Got a subscription right after a divorce a few years back that still hasn’t expired. Oops.
I took the list to be more of a “list of women that other women wish were ‘Hollywood Hot’ but really aren’t”, which would be similar to what has been posted previously. For example, women that other women might like to think are hot but really aren’t could include (from my highly subjective point of view, by the way)…
- Debra Messing (too thin, takes a hit for being on the gay version of “Amos & Andy”)
- Sarah Jessica Parker (looks all right when she’s not trying, but SITC killed it)
- Sandra Oh (looks like an Asian version of SJP - that’s not a good thing; being on a chick show doesn’t help)
- Any of the girls on the OC (way too skinny and/or prissy)
- Alexis Biedel (special note on her below)
Note, though, that looks is only part of the problem - it’s personality or what they’re involved in that kills it more than anything. To see the flipside to this, I am absolutely wild about Uma Thurmann. Is she older than I am? Sure. Is she as good looking as Sarah Jessica Parker in identical styles or outfits? Probably not. But, you know what? While Sarah Jessica Parker was tapping every penis that throbbed on HBO while whining about shoes, Uma Thurmann was doing “Kill Bill”. No contest who wins that one. I even liked her in “The Avengers”. It’s similar to dealing with a cute girl where every experience with her is unpleasant versus dealing with a less physically attractive woman who loves football and dead baby jokes. That girl laughing at your jokes is going to look real cute real fast.
SPECIAL NOTE ABOUT ALEXIS: Sorry, but this one is a very serious sore point for me. I knew this girl who would repeatedly insisted that Alexis Biedel was the most beautiful thing ever, and it was incredibly annoying. She has a face that is only beautiful if you’re into 12-year-olds and I’ve yet to see her do a remotely respectable job as an actress. She was terrible in “Sin City” and I’m firmly convinced she was playing herself in “Gilmore Girls”, which is not a compliment. Ugh.
October 29th, 2007 at 1:29 amIf Sara Jessica Parker would only gain a few pounds, she would look better. As they say, after she hits her 40ties, a woman has to chose between her face and her behind. She is Mr. Ed reincarnaited. I can’t stand the whole cast of the “Sex And The City”.
October 29th, 2007 at 9:23 amAnd don’t even start me on Madonna! What on earth has she done to her body?
The same thing is happening to Angelina Jolie. Veins everywhere. Is there some wacky excersise routine that changes those women into freaks?
Maxim is porn with training wheels. Guys who read that should just grow the nuts to go up to the counter and ask for a Penthouse.
October 29th, 2007 at 9:56 amI’ve always said that a woman can be beautiful (and even gorgeous) without ever being pretty. I put Sarah Jessica Parker and Sandra Oh (and Felicity Huffman) in that category.
And Chris Noth? (Speaking of him…) Same category, really. He’s totally unattractive to me, objectively, but still pretty hot. And not just because he’s a republican.
October 29th, 2007 at 10:00 amI would posit that the reason why non-white women tend to be more possessive of their men is because the opposition to interracial relationships is much stronger where they come from. It used to be just as strong here, as well. There is a famous story of a black kid who was murdered and thrown in a river back in the Jim Crow era because he said “Bye, bye, baby” to a white woman in a grocery store.
Then, MightySamurai, how do you explain why many Filipino women are so possessive of their men and jealous of any non-Filipino female within a five-mile radius?
Because young Filipino women are practically the #1 export of the Philippines. They will go to great lengths to marry an American man, especially a Caucasian American man. Hell, you can practically buy a Filipino woman out of a catalogue, or you can go over there, meet one, and buy her from her family–or so I’ve been told. Certainly it seems that a lot of Filipino families are not against interracial dating and marriage.
After my “just-friends” guy friend married his Filipino girlfriend (met her over here after she had divorced her first husband), she surrounded him with her friends (especially her girlfriends), but I got the feeling she didn’t want me around. I did try to be friends with her, but I haven’t seen my guy friend in over four years.
Oh, yeah, and he’s such a nice guy, one of her girlfriends made the remark that she wanted to find a white guy just like him, and make him work real hard for her. When my guy friend told me this, it sent a shudder down my spine, and it was clear that it had sent one down his as well.
All I can say is, I really miss my guy friend, and I wish she weren’t so damned possessive. He and I were always friends-only, but she was jealous of me before she even met me.
October 29th, 2007 at 12:18 pmRachel, Rupert is one lucky guy.
I always thought that you were as cute as a button in that picture of you as a kid, and your video clip of you teasing Sunny (or was it Digger) simply confirmed it. However, your really important asset is your mind, warped though it may be at times.
October 29th, 2007 at 3:55 pmAnd the people who read them also have too much free time. If they’d all just step in front of the bus, the world would be a better place.
And I could find a decent parking place.
Everyone wins.
Ed that is hysterical! I can’t really sympathize with your need for parking (I’m from Oklahoma, we have lots of wide open spaces and parking), but thank you for your comments. The world could use more men like you. I am lucky enough to be married to someone who loves me for who I am not what I look like. I could weight 300lbs or 115lbs and he wouldn’t care either way.
I totally agree with the thought of those ignorant people stepping in front of a bus though. Everyone would win!
October 29th, 2007 at 4:20 pmI think it is two entirely different things between rating a woman that’s just a person living her life (there’s nothing right about that) and rating a woman that touts herself as a “sex-symbol”. You put yourself in that position, you get what you deserve.
Anyone that bags on McDonna gets points in my book though. I’d like to start a magazine dedicated to that. ;^)
October 29th, 2007 at 5:48 pmSarah Jessica Parker should not be on the list, to be sure. She is getting a bit older, but she’s still attractive. I’ve never heard of Sandra Oh.
The reason the fat pig O’Donnel isn’t listed is that she has no pretensions to beauty.
The list is reasonably good and only needs one correction. Replace Sarah with Rene Zellweger.
Usually, to be considered beautiful only requires good health, but Rene Zellweger is the exception to that rule. Almost any woman would be considered pretty if she simply weren’t overweight or flabby. No need for makeup or fancy hairdos, just get in shape and it won’t matter what you’re wearing or what your hair looks like. It’s really that simple, ladies.
But Zellweger is the exception that proves the rule. There’s no amount of singing and dancing or toned body that can overcome that face. I get this strange urge to punch her face because her face looks like a fist. I overcome this urge because I realize that her face already looks like it’s been punched in. Talented, yes. Pretty? Not in her wildest dreams does she meet any standard of beauty, especially the standard for movie stars.
October 30th, 2007 at 4:17 amI’m sure they do. But I think we both know there are both good and bad reasons for not allowing your child to date a certain person.
For instance, if you tell your daughter not to date Billy Everyteen because he smokes, drinks, and gets in bar fights, you are doing the right thing.
But if you tell your daughter not to marry Billy Everyteen because he’s black, Jewish, Latino, etc., that is wrong. There may not be a law against it, but morally and ethically it is still wrong.
Ah. Okay, sorry. I thought when you said “anyone else” you meant “anyone else, including people who don’t forbid their children from dating outside their race”.
Let me be clear. I’m not saying it’s wrong for an individual to have personal preferences when dating. I myself prefer to date women of a certain height, hair color, eye color, personality type, etc. Consequently, MOST of the women I have dated have been white, Anglo-Saxon Protestant. It’s not that I won’t date non-WASPs or that I consciously seek out WASPs to date, that’s just the way my personal preferences average out.
What I am talking about is the attitude held by certain people that whites should ONLY date whites, blacks should ONLY date blacks, and so on. Especially when they take it a step further and demand that other people follow those arbitrary rules
It’s one thing to say “I, personally, would not date/marry a certain type of person”. It’s quite another to say that EVERYBODY should do the same.
I think we may be talking about different things. Being possessive of their men (I assume you mean their husbands/boyfriends) is different from being possessive of Filipino men in general.
But for the record, I consider both attitudes to be wrong.
Poverty will make you do all sorts of things.
It’s like you said. Generally speaking, men go for looks and women go for bank accounts. The reason why so many Filipino women marry white American men is because they believe (often correctly) that by doing so they will become financially secure. Or at least more financially secure than they were in the Philipines.
I should also mention that the fascination with white American men is in no way limited to the Philipines, or even to Asia in general. Many American women don’t realize this, but when American men go overseas we sometimes have to beat the local women off with sticks and pitchforks. As soon as they catch the accent they are all over us. I once went on a school trip to Italy and I met these two Italian girls who just wouldn’t leave me or my friend alone. They rode the bus with us all the way out to our hotel, which was no small distance, and actually asked us for our hotel room number so they could come back later and “hang out” (their words).
They finally left us alone when we lied and told them we were gay (first and hopefully last time I will ever have to do that : )).
That depends on how you look at the situation. Certainly there are many Filipino families that are not especially opposed to interracial dating/marriage. But are most of them okay with it? That’s harder to prove without actually going to the Philipines.
Also, the Philipines are a bit of an exception given that the poverty level is so much higher there (I believe that about 40% of the population is below the poverty line). As a result, there are a high number of Filipino women who try to marry wealthy American men to take them away from that. But, if you look at another country like Japan (where the percentage of people below the poverty line is apparently so small that the CIA World Fact Book lists it as “NA%”, go figure) you will find comparatively fewer women who actively seek out white American husbands. That’s not to say it doesn’t happen, but it does happen less often by comparison.
No offense, but this attitude seems eerily similar to your own:
“Personally, I have never insisted that a man have a certain income level… but if there were to be a next relationship after the one I’ve been in for five or six years, I’d pay more attention to that aspect–because I’ve been in several relationships where I have paid much more than 50% of the bills, and I don’t much care for it.”
Precisely my point. It hurts when people act like this. That’s why I think it is wrong.
October 30th, 2007 at 11:42 amMightySamurai, the world is what it is. Railing against someone who refuses to date someone from another race or ethnic group, or refuses to allow their kids to do so–for whatever reason–I don’t regard it as “right” or “wrong,” and I don’t care if it’s right or wrong–regardless of their reasons for it, and regardless of whether I myself have been stung by the attitude before.
For your information, my being TIRED of relationships where the fricking man lets me pay most of the bills, PLUS do all of the fricking cooking and most of the housework, is, I believe, QUITE different from some female saying that she wants to “make [some guy] work really hard for [her].”
I’ve never had the attitude of finding some poor schmuck and MAKING him do ANYTHING such as pay all my bills.
It’s just that if, in the future, I have a chance with someone different who will actually pull his OWN financial weight, I might take it–that is, if I’m not so totally sick of freeloading men that I just refuse to deal with men on a “romantic” level anymore.
I don’t expect, in my 50s, to be able to find a man who would be willing to support me–even if I wanted to be a stay-at-home wife, which I never really wanted to do (aside from cooking, I’m not very domestic, I don’t like housework much, and I don’t have much time for it because I have to work a lot to pay bills). Frankly, I know that I have a better chance of winning the California Lottery.
Oh, yeah–I have also heard that some of the Asian women prefer Caucasians because they’re taller than Asian men, whether or not they have a lot of money.
My guy friend had a first wife who was Caucasian… and she and I became friends. I even house-sat for them for a couple of weeks. I knew that once he had a serious girlfriend/wife, I would have less time with him, because his wife would have to come first, and I made very sure to stay on her good side (we met in a college class, and we used to hang out a lot when we were both single). However, I was shocked to see the attitude by his second, Filipino wife… she apparently felt threatened by me before she even met me.
Hurtful behavior toward me? Yes. But so what? The fricking world is full of humans who hurt other people. I may bitterly complain and rant about it… but frankly it’s like spitting in the wind. They’re certainly not going to change because of me.
And although I may be recalling events which stung at the time they happened, my life isn’t long enough to go around trying to “right” a “wrong” that is basically standard operating procedure for most humans. But this IS a major reason why I like my critters better than most people.
I don’t know if the poverty level of the Philippines (note: correct spelling) has all that much to do with why so many of their women are willing to be picked out of a catalogue, or to marry American men without really knowing anything about them.
Japanese society is certainly a closed one in terms of immigration and certain attitudes… it is very difficult for a foreigner to become a citizen. From what I have read, as a nation, they believe themselves to be at the top of the Asian hierarchy, and they definitely look down on other Asian ethnic groups (Korean, Chinese, etc.).
I’ve read of comments by their gov’t. leaders to the effect that one of the reasons the U.S. has certain problems is because we have all these different ethnic groups/races here. Japanese society is much more homogenous than the U.S. Is this “racist” and “bigoted”? I don’t much care, really, but it would be one reason I’d not attempt to immigrate there, even if I wanted to.
One final comment: People now throw around the words “racist” and “bigot” with abandon, to the point where they’re basically about as meaningless as the word “Nazi.”
October 30th, 2007 at 12:06 pmMightySamurai,
The last statistic I saw was that hundreds (around 900 if I recall correctly) of Japanese (mostly women) marry Americans every year. I think there are now more Korean-Japanese marriages, but it’s still close. My wife’s parents were truly exceptional people, but still not exactly thrilled that their daughter married a gaijin. I guess you can’t really blame survivors of the Hiroshima bombing for that attitude. Her sister and brother were even more opposed at the time.
Thirty years and three children later we are way past that. I’m OK, but the rest of you Americans are not. Why? I’m an insider by marriage. It really is a group oriented culture. My wife was a student at an English class I was teaching while I was stationed in Japan. I doubt things would have progressed beyond friendship had not the male members of that group vouched for my character.
Language and cultural issues have come up from time to time, and we’ve had the same problems every other married couple faces, but it worked for us. I never considered my wife to be eye candy, just a pretty, smart, fun, adventurous girl I wanted to be around.
Sandra Oh’s looks don’t appeal to me. I lack the artistic ability to say why, I can only say she doesn’t particularly appeal. I wouldn’t call her ugly. Ditto for the others.
Maxim? I see it in the barber shop. It’s Playboy on training wheels for those with one paragraph long attention spans.
October 30th, 2007 at 2:31 pmOne reason why the thing about either marrying within a certain group or not doesn’t bother me all that much now, even though it stung in the past, is this:
After trying to ignore such things as religious/cultural differences and trying to date some guys of differing religious backgrounds, I came to the conclusion that while having a partner of the same religious background didn’t matter that much to me (as long as the guy wasn’t religious), it does matter to a lot of other people.
Therefore, I also came to the conclusion that I should not attempt to be more than “just friends” with