Was your wife wearing sweatpants during the ceremony?
[Forgetting that I’m not actually married] No. But would you divorce yours when she takes the dress off after the ceremony and dons sweats? 
No – I’d try to get her between the time she took off the dress and the time she put on the sweatpants.
My point is that these women looked like the type that lived in sweatpants, twenty-four hours a day. I don’t know of many guys who find that attractive.
Part of me enjoyed just seeing these women so happy in the end. I’m a sap, I admit it.
I also am fascinated with makeovers and while the plastic surgery was unnecessary, (and creepy), it was interesting to see how they ended up looking. I just have a fascination with this sort of thing.
But I agree with y’all that these women were never really ugly to begin with. Losing weight, getting fit, getting a hair and makeup makeover would have probably been quite a dramatic enough transformation for them.
Plus, isn’t it true that when you get liposuction, the minute you gain weight, the fat collects in those same spots? So perhaps (if, God Forbid) these women gain the weight back, they’ll have undermined all the liposuction work? Or am I unclear on how liposuction works? (I suppose that it could deplete excess deposits of fat in those areas so that when weight gain occurs, if it occurs, the fat collected in those areas will be proportional . . . ) Does anyone have the Straight Dope on this?
One thing I will say, though—getting the dental work—at least some of it—seemed like a really good deal. I am ambivalent about the veneers (that seems too phoney and needless in this case), but bleaching the teeth, and fixing up cavities, putting on crowns, fixing cracks in the teeth, and someone else pays for it all? Excellent deal.
Plus, by lengthening Rachel’s incisors, it probably won’t be as pleasant for her to perform fellatio.
(Okay, I’ll stop now.)
My point is people should marry the woman, not the clothes.
And you’re not married, so it’s all theoretical for you, I guess. :rolleyes:
I hope the woman you do marry doesn’t live in sweatpants and ratty clothes and mope around the house all day. That would get old very, very fast.
Mrs. Moto and I have twins, and she still finds time to fix her hair, put on makeup, dress up a little, and look very, very nice. There really is no excuse.
I don’t see why.
Excuse? Look, if your wife wants to dress up every day, it is of no concern to me. If my wife wanted to just look how she looks, it would be of no concern to me. I wouldn’t have married Maybelline. The relationships I’ve had were not conditioned on eyeshadow.
Not really as he’d still have a type of woman he would marry. Just maybe he happens to cares more about what the person is like on the inside rather than be overly concerned with the shallow and superfical. It’s not an attitude that should cause rolled eyes.
But, with shows like The Swan promoting some idealized outer beauty as the only thing that matters, it’s not surprising that you would roll your eyes at someone who thinks the inside is more important than what someone wears or if they put on mascara or has a hairstyle that takes 2 hours to “fix” in the morning.
That may be the way you judge attractiveness, but thankfully not all men feel the same way.
Well, then, have at it, pal.
There seems to be no shortage lately of unkempt, overweight lasses with low self esteem, so your social calendar should be quite full. 
And, BTW, my problem isn’t with the unattractiveness. I have said all along these women weren’t particularly unattractive.
It’s the low self-esteem, and the total inattention to their appearance, that’s a turn-off. And I don’t think I’m out of line for feeling that way.
Thing is, I think that people who go without such adornments as make-up are, generally, fairly confident in their appearance, or at least have no qualms with it. I’m sure there are some, like our “ugly ducklings”, who don’t do it because they feel there is nothing to salvage, but in my experience that’s the exception rather than the rule. This is contrasted to those who cake on foundation, blush, mascara, etc… these women clearly have appearance issues. They do it to please themselves because they’re not comfortable with the way they look. In no world could that be construed as not having self-esteem issues.
True, there are extremes on both ends.
Effective use of cosmetics means not using too much.
I’d also like to add that, in my opinon, the reason they aren’t comfortable is because they’ve grown up being told that they “need” all that crap to look good. “You’d look so much better with just a little blush/mascara/lipstick/whatever.” It’s really little wonder that there are so many women with self-esteem issues. And this includes the ones that even Mr Moto deem to find attractive.
Perhaps. Effective self-esteem means not needing cosmetics to feel good about one’s appearance.
Do you wear blush, eyshadow, foundation, or lipstick?
Why have I been made the bad guy here?
Women who put a little bit of care into their appearance look better. I don’t think this is a controversial statement - indeed, it could be a truism.
This is the stupid thing I think I’ve ever read.
Women wear these things, in part, to look more feminine. I don’t want to look more feminine, so I don’t wear them. Pretty simple.
stupidest, sorry.
An even skin tone is “feminine”? It seems to me there’s no excuse for not trying to accentuate your appearance, Mr Moto. Proper cosmetic use is not excessive. You can barely even tell it is there…