Why is Jackie Kennedy always referred to as “beautiful”?

[Anonymous]

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Have you not learned this yet? What a stupid, vapid thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She had great style, but her face was ugly. John John, however, was gorgeous.

He was THE most gorgeous guy. I paralyzed when I saw him one day at the Central Park.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She’s a classic beauty. Not bombshell blonde, big boobs, lots of makeup, over done hair. Classic, Simple, refined and normal.

No, she’s classically ugly, with wide-set eyes, a flat nose, a round face, odd complexion, bad teeth, weird mouth, and asymmetrical features. She’s not beautiful at all.

Would love to see your picture, PP!

[Anonymous]

I think her distinctive features made her stand out on tv and in print media, so your eye was drawn to her. Attention-grabbing and beautiful are pretty similar.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel the same about Princess Diana.

I think both Princess Di and Jackie Kennedy have similar aura. They’re both extremely wealthy and give off that nonchalant, relaxed confidence that you can really be born into and not emulate.

It’s good breeding and class. It’s what sets you apart in a room and has nothing to do with the shape of your nose or the color of your hair.

No way! Princess Diana had total crazy face all the time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:On a similar note: I don't find Truman Capote's "swans" all that, like Babe Paley, Slim Hawks, CZ Guest, etc al. I don't get the appeal of their looks at all except that they wore beautiful clothes. But I hate the hairstyles and makeup and none have really great features.

But I am looking forward to the show that starts on January 31!

Ohh I think Babe Paley was just mesmerizing. But her face was not her natural face; she had major reconstructive surgery after a car accident.

[Anonymous]

She was attractive at best but she had style and elegance which really defined her. The new Queen of Denmark is the same way. She’s attractive but her style and elegance are amazing and her countrymen adore her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She’s a classic beauty. Not bombshell blonde, big boobs, lots of makeup, over done hair. Classic, Simple, refined and normal.

No, she’s classically ugly, with wide-set eyes, a flat nose, a round face, odd complexion, bad teeth, weird mouth, and asymmetrical features. She’s not beautiful at all.

Ok then hateful. WTF is your problem here exactly?

[Anonymous]

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/cd/34/0f/cd340ffc27f3b6bbfa64729612f2ca26.jpg" border="0" class="embeddedImage" />

Look at how poised she is

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There have been a couple threads like this - one on Grace Kelly too. I think beauty was different, less manufactured and cookie cutter back then.

This - same with Princess Diana.

Also, until post-WWII, growing up relatively wealthy put you ahead of the game - better health care/dental care/nutrition made for better skin, hair, teeth, and posture. Don’t compare her to your average instagram influencer, compare her to an average 30-something woman in the 60s.

[Anonymous]

For any of you to declare Jackie and Diana ugly, is beyond the pale.

But, I totally expect this from the jelly B’s of DCUM.

[Anonymous]

Beautiful clothes, beautiful manners, and she was a very attractive woman. What is there not to find appealing?

No one called her sexy unlike, say, Marilyn Monroe, but she cut a figure.

[Anonymous]

She was not a classic beauty and I never see her referred to that way. She was stylish, and more importantly, she knew exactly what people wanted of her and knew how to craft her style to meet those expectations. From being a sweet, young, society bride to a sophisticated hostess as First Lady, to being a sporty and active mother to young kids. Even after JFK was assassinated, she understood how people saw her and how to give them what they wanted, first as the very appropriate widow and later as the wealthy NYC socialite engaged in arts philanthropy and aging gracefully.

She's a good example of the power of style and image, and how having a consistent style that suits your appearance and social position, and then sticking with it for decades, can cement you as attractive and stylish even if you aren't born with great looks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Beautiful clothes, beautiful manners, and she was a very attractive woman. What is there not to find appealing?

No one called her sexy unlike, say, Marilyn Monroe, but she cut a figure.

And don’t forget Jackie’s sexy, wispy, come-hither voice!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She was not a classic beauty and I never see her referred to that way. She was stylish, and more importantly, she knew exactly what people wanted of her and knew how to craft her style to meet those expectations. From being a sweet, young, society bride to a sophisticated hostess as First Lady, to being a sporty and active mother to young kids. Even after JFK was assassinated, she understood how people saw her and how to give them what they wanted, first as the very appropriate widow and later as the wealthy NYC socialite engaged in arts philanthropy and aging gracefully.

She's a good example of the power of style and image, and how having a consistent style that suits your appearance and social position, and then sticking with it for decades, can cement you as attractive and stylish even if you aren't born with great looks.

She definitely worked with what she had, but she still wasn’t pretty at all, let alone beautiful. She was stylish. I would never say ugly if I saw her in the street. What bothers people and the reason we say “ugly” is the constant repetition of how beautiful she was. We can see she wasn’t pretty, no matter how poised or stylish, and we’re so sick of being told that we’re wrong.