I lowkey aspire to look this high status (White Lotus Reference)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Serious question, why do some of you see posts like this and feel the need to respond like “How gauche! Why, my old money grandmama would never allow this! I’d much rather be in the country with the dogs!”

No one cares. You don’t get an award because your version of aspirational is different from someone else’s.

Agree - the point is to have a little fun, and these people are so threatened! And like, if you have to say it….

I think the country horse/dog/old money people are being facetious? I hope? Like just playing with the DCUM trope of everyone wanting to look like they've been rich forever and feeling terrified of being caught not having generational wealth.

I had assumed they were trying to be playful and make jokes too. Why else would they read and post on the beauty forum?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Meh. I'd rather look like whatever, wear old boots, drive a Land Rover with a pile of dogs to my generationally owned castle.

Haha me too!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Meh. I'd rather look like whatever, wear old boots, drive a Land Rover with a pile of dogs to my generationally owned castle.

Haha me too!

Then go start a thread for people who aspire to look like Queen Camilla

[Anonymous]

There are a million YouTube video and instagram accounts focusing on this aesthetic.

Have fun.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The two on the right look great. The one on the left is the only one that looks basic.

Out with the Birkenstock Crew.

I don’t think you know what basic means. You can look good and basic at the same time. All of them look basic. 2 of them look better than the third. That’s all.

Adding, though, that Carrie Coon is my fave of the three. She’s the best actress for sure.

The Carrie Coon character not looking as attractive as the other two looks to be a plot point. It does keep coming up (remember how the other two were going on about how "You look amazing" and "no you do" and awkwardly leaving her out and she was right there?).

I personally find Carrie Coon to be the most beautiful of the 3. And, at the same time, I’m so trained to unconsciously read appearance signaling that I also found her the least “you look amazing”. My brain kept switching back and forth.

She's the least altered of the three. Leslie Bibb is the oldest and she's in great shape but she's also had a lot done to her face. Monaghan's work is more subtle but she's still had quite a bit of work done. Coon is the youngest but clearly the least "touched." I would be somewhat surprised if she doesn't at least do Botox for big events, but when she acts her face looks really natural and I really don't see evidence of anything. She takes roles that are not necessarily flattering and seems to lean into her natural looks (beautiful but aging naturally, looks more like a middle class woman than a movie star) while the others lean more heavily in their beauty and probably have more invested in maintaining it.

I wonder if they laughed about this while filming -- the fact that their characters acknowledge having work done that is probably reflective of what the actresses themselves have done. Or if it was just not acknowledged.

Anyway, even if she's the least "preserved" of the group, Coon is the one I'd most want to look like because she's pretty and fit but looks her age and looks at home in her skin. I would take that over looking more dramatically gorgeous but having to maintain a lot of procedures and feeling the pressure if that all the time. It would be nice for a minute but long term it's too much work for me.

Leslie Bibb has had too much work done. It doesn't look natural or good. She would be prettier if she had not done whatever she has had done bc like so many women who do that, she looks strange. And Moynahan is gorgeous but teetering very close to the edge. She is someone who would age so beautifully and does not need to do "work." I really don't understand why women don't think they can age and still be beautiful.

PP here and I do think Bibb's facial work is starting to border on Joker territory, which happens a lot when someone is super thin with like zero body fat and also getting the fillers and botox and eye lifts and all that.

However, the looks is working so well in this specific role that it doesn't bother me at all. It's totally believable to me that this particular person would look exactly like this. Also despite clearly having had a lot of work, her face is is still super expressive (perhaps they all laid off the Botox before filming) and her super tight face and filled lips are so perfectly conducive to her fake smiles and faux concern that she's working in all these scenes that I don't care that it's the result of too much work -- she's so perfectly cast.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Meh. I'd rather look like whatever, wear old boots, drive a Land Rover with a pile of dogs to my generationally owned castle.

Haha me too!

100%

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Serious question, why do some of you see posts like this and feel the need to respond like “How gauche! Why, my old money grandmama would never allow this! I’d much rather be in the country with the dogs!”

No one cares. You don’t get an award because your version of aspirational is different from someone else’s.

Agree - the point is to have a little fun, and these people are so threatened! And like, if you have to say it….

Yes, that’s exactly what it is! Threatened by what, I don’t know, but it does give threatened vibes.

Look, a blond woman wearing lululemon to school pickup on her way to yoga class isn’t the same level of tacky as say, Kim kardashian. It just isn’t. You can gripe about it being “new money” all you want, but the average person doesn’t care.

Agree. It's basic vs. tacky.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think outfits like that should not be worn in a restaurant.

People that concentrate too much on fitness and dieting are often pretty boring conversation partners. They talk about stuff related to that soo much.

It's not just "a restaurant." It's a wellness resort in Thailand, where people are expected to wear clothes like that -- they'd just had their biomarkers done by a personal trainer.

OK, that only makes it mildly more acceptable. I would be sooo bored in a Thai wellness resort. For one thing, I appear to be one of the rare people who doesn't enjoy getting massages from strangers. I'd rather be drinking a limeade, fully dressed, at the Jim Thompson House Museum in Bangkok.

Main character syndrome ^^.

No one here cares that you like limeade. Seriously.

OK, have fun being thin and getting inconspicuous "work" done. In your athleisure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The costuming is so perfect on this show. These three trigger me so much as you see women like this a lot in the wealthier parts of NOVA and DC. Perfectly toned bodies even in their 50s and 60s, tastefully applied barely there makeup. Smooth skin that belies their age. Expensive perfectly coordinated outfits even to workout!

I want to be them!

they look ridiculous and the one in the middle has something weird going on with her thigh/hip area.

You might mean the lines created by the strange undies the actress is wearing to keep the seam of her pants from cutting her unmentionables?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Serious question, why do some of you see posts like this and feel the need to respond like “How gauche! Why, my old money grandmama would never allow this! I’d much rather be in the country with the dogs!”

No one cares. You don’t get an award because your version of aspirational is different from someone else’s.

Agree - the point is to have a little fun, and these people are so threatened! And like, if you have to say it….

I think the country horse/dog/old money people are being facetious? I hope? Like just playing with the DCUM trope of everyone wanting to look like they've been rich forever and feeling terrified of being caught not having generational wealth.

Maybe.

More likely defensive. Because they don't look remotely like MM, and aren't traveling to resorts in Thailand -- because they beyond basic.

That’s actually a really good way of putting it, I’ve never thought of it like that. Like “basic” is actually pretty democratic, in that it’s accessible to anyone w enough money, and visually accessible to everyone, unthreatening, and maybe that’s the whole point. But the people going on about their “old money grandmother,” (which is such an admission in and of itself that they are “no money”) are trying so hard to align themselves w the social group who historically have been the meanest and the most exclusive. It’s a cope for downward mobility bc they know they don’t even have the funds to be basic, so they’re pretending they’re rejecting it in favor of the other thing, which in reality is even less attainable.

As for castle/dogs lady, she’s interested enough in this bubblegum-pop discussion to condescend to submitting a response here so I’m not sure how genuinely “countryside” her life is, but sure. Sounds nice.

I’ve always been low-key obsessed with how gorgeous both LB and MM are. Didn’t think I’d tune in for S3 but maybe I will now! Always thought LB has been really typecast, but I’ve loved her look in all of those roles (Popular, GCB, American Wife…anyone remember those!?)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These outfits look outdated to me. Are people really wearing this outside of a resort gym?

I mean they are at a resort gym, right?

They appear to be in a restaurant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Serious question, why do some of you see posts like this and feel the need to respond like “How gauche! Why, my old money grandmama would never allow this! I’d much rather be in the country with the dogs!”

No one cares. You don’t get an award because your version of aspirational is different from someone else’s.

Agree - the point is to have a little fun, and these people are so threatened! And like, if you have to say it….

Yes, that’s exactly what it is! Threatened by what, I don’t know, but it does give threatened vibes.

Look, a blond woman wearing lululemon to school pickup on her way to yoga class isn’t the same level of tacky as say, Kim kardashian. It just isn’t. You can gripe about it being “new money” all you want, but the average person doesn’t care.

It's not tacky, it's just basic. Lululemon is overpriced plastic clothing. Wealthy wellness types are into natural fibers and would be seen in breathable clothes made of linen and cotton or 95%cotton/spandex versions of similar outfits and without logos. Dewey skin with no makeup other than lip tint/gloss.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The two on the right look great. The one on the left is the only one that looks basic.

Out with the Birkenstock Crew.

I don’t think you know what basic means. You can look good and basic at the same time. All of them look basic. 2 of them look better than the third. That’s all.

Adding, though, that Carrie Coon is my fave of the three. She’s the best actress for sure.

The Carrie Coon character not looking as attractive as the other two looks to be a plot point. It does keep coming up (remember how the other two were going on about how "You look amazing" and "no you do" and awkwardly leaving her out and she was right there?).

I personally find Carrie Coon to be the most beautiful of the 3. And, at the same time, I’m so trained to unconsciously read appearance signaling that I also found her the least “you look amazing”. My brain kept switching back and forth.

She's the least altered of the three. Leslie Bibb is the oldest and she's in great shape but she's also had a lot done to her face. Monaghan's work is more subtle but she's still had quite a bit of work done. Coon is the youngest but clearly the least "touched." I would be somewhat surprised if she doesn't at least do Botox for big events, but when she acts her face looks really natural and I really don't see evidence of anything. She takes roles that are not necessarily flattering and seems to lean into her natural looks (beautiful but aging naturally, looks more like a middle class woman than a movie star) while the others lean more heavily in their beauty and probably have more invested in maintaining it.

I wonder if they laughed about this while filming -- the fact that their characters acknowledge having work done that is probably reflective of what the actresses themselves have done. Or if it was just not acknowledged.

Anyway, even if she's the least "preserved" of the group, Coon is the one I'd most want to look like because she's pretty and fit but looks her age and looks at home in her skin. I would take that over looking more dramatically gorgeous but having to maintain a lot of procedures and feeling the pressure if that all the time. It would be nice for a minute but long term it's too much work for me.

Leslie Bibb has had too much work done. It doesn't look natural or good. She would be prettier if she had not done whatever she has had done bc like so many women who do that, she looks strange. And Moynahan is gorgeous but teetering very close to the edge. She is someone who would age so beautifully and does not need to do "work." I really don't understand why women don't think they can age and still be beautiful.

Male gaze.

Most of the men will prefer Leslie Bibb. I guarantee it.

Nooo, she is way too tall and dry looking with the short bob. Men like long hair. MM is the most attractive by far.

The point stands ... the reason women "don't think they can age and be beautiful" is because most can't. MM has had plenty of work done as well.

Most can. They just don't want to. No one is forcing anyone to be oveweight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The two on the right look great. The one on the left is the only one that looks basic.

Out with the Birkenstock Crew.

I don’t think you know what basic means. You can look good and basic at the same time. All of them look basic. 2 of them look better than the third. That’s all.

Adding, though, that Carrie Coon is my fave of the three. She’s the best actress for sure.

The Carrie Coon character not looking as attractive as the other two looks to be a plot point. It does keep coming up (remember how the other two were going on about how "You look amazing" and "no you do" and awkwardly leaving her out and she was right there?).

I personally find Carrie Coon to be the most beautiful of the 3. And, at the same time, I’m so trained to unconsciously read appearance signaling that I also found her the least “you look amazing”. My brain kept switching back and forth.

She's the least altered of the three. Leslie Bibb is the oldest and she's in great shape but she's also had a lot done to her face. Monaghan's work is more subtle but she's still had quite a bit of work done. Coon is the youngest but clearly the least "touched." I would be somewhat surprised if she doesn't at least do Botox for big events, but when she acts her face looks really natural and I really don't see evidence of anything. She takes roles that are not necessarily flattering and seems to lean into her natural looks (beautiful but aging naturally, looks more like a middle class woman than a movie star) while the others lean more heavily in their beauty and probably have more invested in maintaining it.

I wonder if they laughed about this while filming -- the fact that their characters acknowledge having work done that is probably reflective of what the actresses themselves have done. Or if it was just not acknowledged.

Anyway, even if she's the least "preserved" of the group, Coon is the one I'd most want to look like because she's pretty and fit but looks her age and looks at home in her skin. I would take that over looking more dramatically gorgeous but having to maintain a lot of procedures and feeling the pressure if that all the time. It would be nice for a minute but long term it's too much work for me.

Leslie Bibb has had too much work done. It doesn't look natural or good. She would be prettier if she had not done whatever she has had done bc like so many women who do that, she looks strange. And Moynahan is gorgeous but teetering very close to the edge. She is someone who would age so beautifully and does not need to do "work." I really don't understand why women don't think they can age and still be beautiful.

Male gaze.

Most of the men will prefer Leslie Bibb. I guarantee it.

Nooo, she is way too tall and dry looking with the short bob. Men like long hair. MM is the most attractive by far.

The point stands ... the reason women "don't think they can age and be beautiful" is because most can't. MM has had plenty of work done as well.

Most can. They just don't want to. No one is forcing anyone to be oveweight.

Faces still age

[Anonymous]

I am not convinced Victoria is old money. She says to her kids “you’re gorgeous. You come from money.” I don’t think a truly wealthy person would be that blunt. She would say “we’re very comfortable.” Also she has already told the husband the kids are beautiful, told the kids they are gorgeous. All the bragging makes her seem insecure. If she is truly coming from generational wealthy wouldn’t she be more secure? Also she would have been mean to yoga pants lady. She would have done that fake southern nice thing that rich ladies in the south do.