Misogyny is the hatred of women. OBJECTIFYING women in an offensive fashion is not the same as hating them; moreover, not all objectifyng is the same.
In a little while I will leave her to go meet Kim at Denny’s; over dinner, she will do her homework while I work on my novel, or pretend to. While we eat I will admire her lovely hands, her beautiful wrists, her perfectly wonderful collarbones. This will make me quite happy, and I will be appreciating her not for her aphysical attributes – her wit, her charm, her occasional bitchiness – but on a purely physical level. That is objectification.
While we eat, it is entirely possible that Kim will nudge me, or I her, to point out someone passing by who is nice eye candy. Neither I nor she will know a damn thing about the person; that too is objectification.
Later this week, on date night, we may watch a movie. We will doubtlessly say cruel, catty things about people in the movie. If Jessica Alba is in the movie, we may hurt oursevels by debating how many cookies she would need to become attractive. That is objectivation too.
None of that is hate. By equating lookism with misogyny, you water down the meaning of the word in a way that makes me suspect your true intent is to be contrary, not incisive. Of couse, I could easily be wrong. That happens from time to time.
Um . . . by judging a woman solely on her looks and not on her accomplishments, etc., you demean and diminish her. That’s misogyny. That’s like when what’s his name, the racist cop from the OJ case, goes, “I’m not racist, I’ve slept with black women.” Yeah . . . that means every white southern slaveowner who raped one of his slaves was thereby not a racist.
Sorry dude, just because you find women attractive doesn’t mean you can’t be a misogynist.
Come on, that is extreme. We are visual animals. Anyone who says they don’t judge people first by their looks is lying or politically correct to the point of self-detriment. If you are lost in the wrong neighborhood, who are you going to approach to ask for directions - these guys or this guy. Make that decision honestly and then tell me how you made it based on something other than looks. And then tell me it’s impossible to apply that same thinking - to a reasonable extent, in a responsible and intellectually honest way - in other parts of your life.
Once you get to know someone it’d be ridiculous to judge them on their looks but when looks are all you know about someone (the girl walking past Skald the Rhymer, for instance), it’d be ridiculous to judge them based on anything else.
Come on, that is extreme. We are visual animals. Anyone who says they don’t judge people first by their looks is lying or politically correct to the point of self-detriment. If you are lost in the wrong neighborhood, who are you going to approach to ask for directions - these guys or this guy. QUOTE]
To be honest, I think I’d rather ask the guys in the first picture for directions, because those slick handsome guys in the suits tend to be the biggest slimeballs.
Really, though, I don’t see a problem with that original picture. That’s just a bad picture, and other pictures of her recently don’t look bad. She is still a gorgeous woman, and this is coming from a 28 year old who wouldn’t mind looking like that at 52. Although, I think I should probably quit smoking right about now.
I’m kind of new here. Why did that quote not turn out all pretty like everyone else’s? I must have deleted something important. I apologize.
So you’d walk up to members of La eMe and remove all doubt that you’re in the wrong fucking hood, ese, by admitting to them you’re lost? I hope you don’t have anything valuable on you, such as a wallet, nice watch, or unbruised liver.
You know what, sorry about the hijack. I see this side-discussion has started a fight and I’m not interested in that. Back to Linda Hamilton, who looks pretty rough for 52 in that picture. I don’t know if it’s just a bad picture or what, but my mom is 52 and looks a damn sight younger than Linda does in that pic.
Like Twickster and others, I am early-to-mid 50’s, menopausal, have done my share of suntanning, and immediately went to a mirror to check myself out.
I’ve definitely got the crow’s feet, some might call them eagle’s feet.
But the other wrinkles, not so much, esp the forehead, which stayed smooth no matter how much I scrunched it up.
Having said that, more power to Linda for doing and being what she wants.
I agree with Lissener that people who have “work done” really do not look younger.
They just look like people who have had work done.
I don’t see how conclusion can be reached regarding sun exposure or tobacco use. My wife is that age, similar wrinkles. She’s a non-smoking fitness buff, uses tanning lotion with an SPF = asphalt the few days she gets to the beach. Her nonagenarian grandmother was the same. My MIL had few wrinkles and smoked.
BTW if you think that’s rough be prepared for attitude adjustments or cognitive dissonance.
I am in absolute agreement, and I doubt Ms Hamilton would prefer my supple, moist, barely-wrinkled skin considering the price she’d pay. The cheeseburger diet has a lot going for it, but keeping a boyish figure (which she had in T2 and I had, um, never) is not one of them.
Did she take steroids to get that amount of definition?
My 66 year old mother isn’t that wrinkled. At almost 42, I have yet to develop a wrinkle. It’s simply genetics, combined with lifestyle choices (neither my mom nor I smoked or sunbathed). Linda lost that genetic lottery, and made bad choices for looking good longer. Let me add my voice to the chorus that says older women look great without all the surgery, though (and they look pretty damned funny with it). Linda looks just fine to me. As I age, I find that wrinkles really do add character to people’s faces; young people are starting to look suspiciously smooth to me.
Judging from the link in the OP, looks like Fred Schneider is next up for scrutiny based on his current looks.
Fred, for those not familar with him, is a man.
Carson O’Genic, I still call smoking lines on Linda Hamilton. She has the same tell-tale lines around her mouth and eyes I have seen in every frequent smoker of a certain age.
That pic of Linda brought back memories of my eighth-grade teacher who was very petite, a vegetarian and quite a wholesome woman but also a tobacco fiend who smoked around three packs if cigarettes per day (her husband, also a teacher at my school was the same). She was extremely wrinkly for her age (late thirties), with skin that seemed tanned - in the leather sense - by the 20+ years of constant cigarette smoke. Very wrinkly around the mouth like Hamilton. I’m sure my ex-teacher is every bit as wrinkly as Hamilton now, and they’re aged the same.
Flashback continues: the smell was just terrible when my teacher would stop by my desk to give instructions. Never since have I encountered such an overpowering fume of death coming from a clean, living person. I don’t know if she ate the butts after inhaling the cigs to the filter or what.
No quibble with that if she has a known history. I don't follow celebrity enough. It just seems some individuals were genetically shortchanged as to smooth skin, something that many women take personally. One of my personal failings to be irked about holding people to an arbitrary standard over which they have no control.
