s/o women over 40 who look amazing

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What’s her name... the ginger with really long hair? In her 50s, I think?

Nicole Kidman? She’s so plastic, if you put her next to a radiator, she’d melt.

Julianne Moore? She is gorgeous.

No. She has aged terribly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People who look amazing over 40 also looked amazing when they were younger. It’s not surprising that beautiful people remain beautiful.

Some people grow into looks, some people get a faces of meth situation, but for the most part? Yeah. Attractive people are attractive. There was a recent reddit post wondering how Heather Graham looks so great at 51. Step one? Look like Heather Graham at 21. A person who looks awful at 21 for the most part isn't going to transform into a hottie at 51.

(also I like to think that from everything I've heard and personal experience Heather Graham is one of the nicest people in Hollywood so that helps)

[Anonymous]

This is OP and I feel I might have misdirected this thread. It's not meant to insult anyone for not looking great at 40, or to ask how you can look younger than 40 when you are 40.

I really just meant to have a balm to that "what are mistakes people make at 40" thread wherein women who have dared get older and look older and still look awesome can be shared and celebrated.

As someone who is nearing 50, I am just really glad when I see women my age and older who look great - and don't seem to be messing up their faces with terrible plastic surgery to do it.

Perhaps this should have been titled "who's aging gracefully but actually aging and they make getting older look less scary looks-wise"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who look amazing over 40 also looked amazing when they were younger. It’s not surprising that beautiful people remain beautiful.

Some people grow into looks, some people get a faces of meth situation, but for the most part? Yeah. Attractive people are attractive. There was a recent reddit post wondering how Heather Graham looks so great at 51. Step one? Look like Heather Graham at 21. A person who looks awful at 21 for the most part isn't going to transform into a hottie at 51.

(also I like to think that from everything I've heard and personal experience Heather Graham is one of the nicest people in Hollywood so that helps)

I think people know this. Yes, you have to be gorgeous to start out. However, the point is that being gorgeous at 21 does NOT mean you will be even moderately good looking at 51.

Just look at Britney Spears, who I don’t think is even 40. Brooke Shields is someone who was stunning at 20, but at 50, no one would even take a second look at her if they passed her in a grocery store.

My friend is a good friend of Heather Graham and he says that she legit looks like she’s in her early 30s in person. I mean, at 20, Brooke Shields was far more striking than Heather Graham was at the same age, but Heather Graham has aged much more slowly. I think these threads are trying to tease out the differences.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Congrats on winning the genetic lottery, I guess?

I don't get the bitterness. Celebrating older women makes me, an older woman, feel good. I know I'll never look like a celebrity, that's not the point. The point is that it's nice to take inspiration from mature women who look their age while also looking amazing. It's just nice to be reminded that being over 40 (or 50, or 60) doesn't mean it's over for you, looks wise. I don't want or need to look 25. But that doesn't mean I can no longer be sexy or beautiful.

Also, while the women we're talking about on here are genetically gifted, a lot of their beauty comes from their personalities and their talent. Beauty isn't just tight, dewey skin.

It’s not bitterness, it’s an acknowledgement of unearned privilege. I choose not to promote those who have done nothing to but seek their value in the patriarchal, mysogonistic culture, and trade on that “value” to the detriment of those who have worked hard to achieve something of substance.

But you do you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People who look amazing over 40 also looked amazing when they were younger. It’s not surprising that beautiful people remain beautiful.

yep.
56 years old


54 years old


57 years old

[Anonymous]

Who are these people?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Speaking of gingers, you know who is kind of a bummer? Amy Adams. The first pic below is the 2016 Golden Globes, when she was 41. And the second photo is last year (age 45). Maybe it's a temporary issue but she looked amazing in 2016 and just looks so puffy and more middle-aged in the second one. Not bad (she's obviously a beautiful woman) but the difference is really striking. I notice it because I have her coloring and similar bone structure and I'm 41 and like how I look, but when I saw her recently I was like "whaaaaat is happening?" If a rich celebrity can take that middle-aged turn so quick, I don't stand a chance!

I think she looks great in both photos.

+1

She looks more vibrant in photo 1, because her makeup brings out her eyes and her dress works well with her makeup coloring. The following time of the blue dress is a less sunny look yet she still looks good.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is OP and I feel I might have misdirected this thread. It's not meant to insult anyone for not looking great at 40, or to ask how you can look younger than 40 when you are 40.

I really just meant to have a balm to that "what are mistakes people make at 40" thread wherein women who have dared get older and look older and still look awesome can be shared and celebrated.

I hear you, OP! How about Shohreh Aghdashloo? She plays Avasarala on The Expanse (great sci-fi show). Not sure how to post an image but let me try...



I think she’s gorgeous. And she’s 68!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Speaking of gingers, you know who is kind of a bummer? Amy Adams. The first pic below is the 2016 Golden Globes, when she was 41. And the second photo is last year (age 45). Maybe it's a temporary issue but she looked amazing in 2016 and just looks so puffy and more middle-aged in the second one. Not bad (she's obviously a beautiful woman) but the difference is really striking. I notice it because I have her coloring and similar bone structure and I'm 41 and like how I look, but when I saw her recently I was like "whaaaaat is happening?" If a rich celebrity can take that middle-aged turn so quick, I don't stand a chance!

I think she looks great in both photos.

+1

She looks more vibrant in photo 1, because her makeup brings out her eyes and her dress works well with her makeup coloring. The following time of the blue dress is a less sunny look yet she still looks good.

I think she is also tanned and a bit more golden in #1 yes. Agree she looks great in both.

[Anonymous]

This is going to sound very DC but Kamala looks fricking amazing (and has well before her vp run).

Michelle Obama also looks great in a girl next door kind of way.

I have grown up watching Claire Danes since My So Called Life and still have a girl crush on her. She looks more natural and better on screen than in red carpet pictures though.

But these are all youngish women still. I am interested in the 70+ set and can only come up with Meryl Streep.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Speaking of gingers, you know who is kind of a bummer? Amy Adams. The first pic below is the 2016 Golden Globes, when she was 41. And the second photo is last year (age 45). Maybe it's a temporary issue but she looked amazing in 2016 and just looks so puffy and more middle-aged in the second one. Not bad (she's obviously a beautiful woman) but the difference is really striking. I notice it because I have her coloring and similar bone structure and I'm 41 and like how I look, but when I saw her recently I was like "whaaaaat is happening?" If a rich celebrity can take that middle-aged turn so quick, I don't stand a chance!

I think she looks great in both photos.

She is using fillers in the second photo to hide lines. I am a ginger too and honestly was aging great (got cocky) and then 45 hit and was like oh, crap what happened. Fillers hide the marionette lines, etc, but your face will look puffy and full - but not the right way (Jennifer Aniston is a good example of a lot of filler and botox). A mini facelift is the only real answer to make you look ten years older. But, yea, that lighter the skin the worse it will be for you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who look amazing over 40 also looked amazing when they were younger. It’s not surprising that beautiful people remain beautiful.

Some people grow into looks, some people get a faces of meth situation, but for the most part? Yeah. Attractive people are attractive. There was a recent reddit post wondering how Heather Graham looks so great at 51. Step one? Look like Heather Graham at 21. A person who looks awful at 21 for the most part isn't going to transform into a hottie at 51.

(also I like to think that from everything I've heard and personal experience Heather Graham is one of the nicest people in Hollywood so that helps)

I think people know this. Yes, you have to be gorgeous to start out. However, the point is that being gorgeous at 21 does NOT mean you will be even moderately good looking at 51.

Just look at Britney Spears, who I don’t think is even 40. Brooke Shields is someone who was stunning at 20, but at 50, no one would even take a second look at her if they passed her in a grocery store.

My friend is a good friend of Heather Graham and he says that she legit looks like she’s in her early 30s in person. I mean, at 20, Brooke Shields was far more striking than Heather Graham was at the same age, but Heather Graham has aged much more slowly. I think these threads are trying to tease out the differences.

Heather never had kids. Bingo!!!

It’s scientifically proven women get less attractive after birth. I’m not even joking about this. Real science studies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Speaking of gingers, you know who is kind of a bummer? Amy Adams. The first pic below is the 2016 Golden Globes, when she was 41. And the second photo is last year (age 45). Maybe it's a temporary issue but she looked amazing in 2016 and just looks so puffy and more middle-aged in the second one. Not bad (she's obviously a beautiful woman) but the difference is really striking. I notice it because I have her coloring and similar bone structure and I'm 41 and like how I look, but when I saw her recently I was like "whaaaaat is happening?" If a rich celebrity can take that middle-aged turn so quick, I don't stand a chance!

I think she looks great in both photos.

I think she looks great, too. Things can go downhill fast between 41 and 45, and this is not an example of that. A lot of women pass that 40 milestone and think “hey, this isn’t so bad! Still got it!” But perimenopause is waiting the shadows, ready to wreak havoc.

[Anonymous]

I disagree with Pp about Julianne Moore; she is beautiful at 60.




Brittney Spears is 39. She’s fit but the years haven’t been kind to her.



Salma Hayek is 54.



Regina King, 50
[/img]https://media1.popsugar-assets.com/files/thumbor/PdVaSINxaAH_wth91PRms2X5L4g/fit-in/1024x1024/filters:format_auto-!!-:strip_icc-!!-/2020/12/18/718/n/1922153/08f8ddb05fdcd587468494.60241944_/i/regina-king-skin-care-hair-interview.jpg[img]

Charlize Theron, 45

[/img]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5d/Charlize-theron-IMG_6045.jpg/1920px-Charlize-theron-IMG_6045.jpg[img]

Taraji P Henson, 50

[/img]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/00/Taraji_P._Henson.JPG[img]