Anna Sorokin and her terrible style

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It looked like she straight-ironed very processed/damaged hair without using heat protectant.

I will not judge her hair during the trial because it's already been stated she didn't have access to hair dryers or flat irons or hair products.

Rich people have very clean, shiny, healthy hair. It’s an immediate tell.

Nah. Good hair is just genetic, and I know people of every class that have both good and bad hair. There's only so much you can do topically.

I come from an upper class family and have horrible hair---thin, frizzy, dull.
I had nothing to do with the family I was born to or the hair I was born with.

But you have the actual means and time to correct it. She did not.

She certainly did. She was paying thousands of dollars a night for her hotel. She had money, she just only spent it on things that were important to her.

When I read the story she wasn't paying anything - she was getting others to pay for her. How is your comment relevant?

Whether the money was legitimately hers, or funds she bilked from other people, she spent it on things that were important to her. and added lustre to her image She had the "time and means to correct [her hair]" but she didn't choose to, as having great hair is not actually a wealthy "tell". That's what I'm addressing. How is your comment relevant?

She managed to check into a hotel with out a credit card on file, and then tried to get the staff to cover for her by comping them things billed to her room. Unless she could bill hair treatments to her room, I'm not sure she did have the means. She had other schemes, but not much cash on hand.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It looked like she straight-ironed very processed/damaged hair without using heat protectant.

I will not judge her hair during the trial because it's already been stated she didn't have access to hair dryers or flat irons or hair products.

Rich people have very clean, shiny, healthy hair. It’s an immediate tell.

Nah. Good hair is just genetic, and I know people of every class that have both good and bad hair. There's only so much you can do topically.

I come from an upper class family and have horrible hair---thin, frizzy, dull.
I had nothing to do with the family I was born to or the hair I was born with.

But you have the actual means and time to correct it. She did not.

She certainly did. She was paying thousands of dollars a night for her hotel. She had money, she just only spent it on things that were important to her.

When I read the story she wasn't paying anything - she was getting others to pay for her. How is your comment relevant?

Whether the money was legitimately hers, or funds she bilked from other people, she spent it on things that were important to her. and added lustre to her image She had the "time and means to correct [her hair]" but she didn't choose to, as having great hair is not actually a wealthy "tell". That's what I'm addressing. How is your comment relevant?

She managed to check into a hotel with out a credit card on file, and then tried to get the staff to cover for her by comping them things billed to her room. Unless she could bill hair treatments to her room, I'm not sure she did have the means. She had other schemes, but not much cash on hand.

Sometimes she DID have cash with a few fraudulent wire transfers and bad checks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It looked like she straight-ironed very processed/damaged hair without using heat protectant.

I will not judge her hair during the trial because it's already been stated she didn't have access to hair dryers or flat irons or hair products.

Rich people have very clean, shiny, healthy hair. It’s an immediate tell.

Nah. Good hair is just genetic, and I know people of every class that have both good and bad hair. There's only so much you can do topically.

I come from an upper class family and have horrible hair---thin, frizzy, dull.
I had nothing to do with the family I was born to or the hair I was born with.

But you have the actual means and time to correct it. She did not.

She certainly did. She was paying thousands of dollars a night for her hotel. She had money, she just only spent it on things that were important to her.

When I read the story she wasn't paying anything - she was getting others to pay for her. How is your comment relevant?

Whether the money was legitimately hers, or funds she bilked from other people, she spent it on things that were important to her. and added lustre to her image She had the "time and means to correct [her hair]" but she didn't choose to, as having great hair is not actually a wealthy "tell". That's what I'm addressing. How is your comment relevant?

She managed to check into a hotel with out a credit card on file, and then tried to get the staff to cover for her by comping them things billed to her room. Unless she could bill hair treatments to her room, I'm not sure she did have the means. She had other schemes, but not much cash on hand.

Sometimes she DID have cash with a few fraudulent wire transfers and bad checks.

You're probably right, when she wrote a bad check she *should* have real quick gotten a hair treatment.

[Anonymous]

Um, I don't get it. Her hair in the first photo looks great, and the 2nd photo just looks like she walked outside in the wind/rain, but not terrible. I live in DC and travel to fancy cities frequently and don't see many woman that have better hair than #1. I wish my hair looked as good, but it comes down to genetics (no styling can compensate for thin and fine hair) or wearing wigs.

[Anonymous]

PP again, I do agree she did not look rich in the actual photos they showed of her in the abc (or other network) documentary. The no makeup, plain jane face, and lack of fashion/sense of style is the giveaway, but at least she has long and thick hair that she occasionally managed to style well. When it was not styled and unkempt like in the trial, then I would kind of agree with OP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Um, I don't get it. Her hair in the first photo looks great, and the 2nd photo just looks like she walked outside in the wind/rain, but not terrible. I live in DC and travel to fancy cities frequently and don't see many woman that have better hair than #1. I wish my hair looked as good, but it comes down to genetics (no styling can compensate for thin and fine hair) or wearing wigs.

Disagree. My stylist does these amazing and super expensive weaves (is that what they are called?) using actual human hair from Eastern Europe. You would never know they are fake. I don't get them, but I complemented someone else's hair (not realizing it was an add-in), and the stylist gave me a whole long discourse on the different qualities of human hair that one can purchase, and the different methods for adding it to your own hair. I was really intrigued by the market for human hair -- I did not realize it was that sophisticated and there were that many different variables.
So, again, there's pretty much nothing that money can't buy nowadays.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Um, I don't get it. Her hair in the first photo looks great, and the 2nd photo just looks like she walked outside in the wind/rain, but not terrible. I live in DC and travel to fancy cities frequently and don't see many woman that have better hair than #1. I wish my hair looked as good, but it comes down to genetics (no styling can compensate for thin and fine hair) or wearing wigs.

Disagree. My stylist does these amazing and super expensive weaves (is that what they are called?) using actual human hair from Eastern Europe. You would never know they are fake. I don't get them, but I complemented someone else's hair (not realizing it was an add-in), and the stylist gave me a whole long discourse on the different qualities of human hair that one can purchase, and the different methods for adding it to your own hair. I was really intrigued by the market for human hair -- I did not realize it was that sophisticated and there were that many different variables.
So, again, there's pretty much nothing that money can't buy nowadays.

No, you are not disagreeing with me, we are on the same page. I said wigs as a general term (obviously encompassing all the types of fake hair). You can add fake hair to fine&thin to make it look good, but you can not really style fine&thin as-is. Who is the stylist you recommend?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PP again, I do agree she did not look rich in the actual photos they showed of her in the abc (or other network) documentary. The no makeup, plain jane face, and lack of fashion/sense of style is the giveaway, but at least she has long and thick hair that she occasionally managed to style well. When it was not styled and unkempt like in the trial, then I would kind of agree with OP

No.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP again, I do agree she did not look rich in the actual photos they showed of her in the abc (or other network) documentary. The no makeup, plain jane face, and lack of fashion/sense of style is the giveaway, but at least she has long and thick hair that she occasionally managed to style well. When it was not styled and unkempt like in the trial, then I would kind of agree with OP

No.

NO to you, idiot

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP again, I do agree she did not look rich in the actual photos they showed of her in the abc (or other network) documentary. The no makeup, plain jane face, and lack of fashion/sense of style is the giveaway, but at least she has long and thick hair that she occasionally managed to style well. When it was not styled and unkempt like in the trial, then I would kind of agree with OP

No.

NO to you, idiot

Ok, sweetie. You’re a moron.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP again, I do agree she did not look rich in the actual photos they showed of her in the abc (or other network) documentary. The no makeup, plain jane face, and lack of fashion/sense of style is the giveaway, but at least she has long and thick hair that she occasionally managed to style well. When it was not styled and unkempt like in the trial, then I would kind of agree with OP

No.

NO to you, idiot

Ok, sweetie. You’re a moron.

+1, this thread went exactly as expected.