Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eh. Is it funny? That's all I care about. I'm not looking to go deep with her movies so I don't really care about this debate as it relates to the film. Even at a glance the film is about self image/confidence more than appearance.

It has Amy Schumer in it, by definition not funny.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the article is pretty bad. A central premise is unproven, and (to me) flat-out wrong. The author wrote: "The reality is that expectations for female appearances have never been higher."

What is the foundation for that opinion? That view diametrically opposes my understanding of contemporary standards, which celebrate an increasingly wide variety of looks.

When I was growing up in the '80s, all the models looked like white and brown Barbie dolls. But today there are heavier women, women of various races, transgender women, older women, etc., walking on runways.

One place, mild size inclusivity. But women are no longer "allowed" to have pores, lines, expressions to harsh or bitchy, no peach fuzz, skin must be perfectly even without appearing made up, one isn’t just supposed to be thin but also taut and string but not bulky, thigh gap is still an aspiration for some, as is that lower pelvic depression in a bikini, your hair needs to be perfect.... yes, women used to be overall skinnier (for which you can largely thank dietary changes, epigentics and nicotine), but the standards are definitely more rigorous otherwise.

Now it is considered standard in upper middle class circles to get eyebrows waxes and pedicures (even in the winter!) not to mention Barre/solidcore/yoga etc. When I was a kid my mom was friends with a bunch of doctors wives in a fancy suburb but pedicures were still considered an indulgence and only people with super thick eyebrows regularly got their brows done. And they just played tennis a few times a week to stay in shape. Now the women I know in my hometown all double at soulcycle and do solidcore-type classes plus go through various primping -- standards are much higher now I think!!!

Standard? I know tons of high SES women who do none of this and have a natural, beautiful grace. Healthy looking, which includes a natural weight and not being painted up or chiseled, is what is truly "in," but you won't see that in advertising because there is very little to sell to get this look.

Anonymous wrote:Eh. Is it funny? That's all I care about. I'm not looking to go deep with her movies so I don't really care about this debate as it relates to the film. Even at a glance the film is about self image/confidence more than appearance.

Anonymous wrote:Pretty sure our grandmothers would have never dreamed of leaving the house in yoga pants rather than an ironed dress and stockings, without their hair done. Mine (born in the 1920s) also got her brows and lashed tinted and always wore red lipstick. Trends come and go, it's not like our generation invented beauty standards.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the article is pretty bad. A central premise is unproven, and (to me) flat-out wrong. The author wrote: "The reality is that expectations for female appearances have never been higher."

What is the foundation for that opinion? That view diametrically opposes my understanding of contemporary standards, which celebrate an increasingly wide variety of looks.

When I was growing up in the '80s, all the models looked like white and brown Barbie dolls. But today there are heavier women, women of various races, transgender women, older women, etc., walking on runways.

One place, mild size inclusivity. But women are no longer "allowed" to have pores, lines, expressions to harsh or bitchy, no peach fuzz, skin must be perfectly even without appearing made up, one isn’t just supposed to be thin but also taut and string but not bulky, thigh gap is still an aspiration for some, as is that lower pelvic depression in a bikini, your hair needs to be perfect.... yes, women used to be overall skinnier (for which you can largely thank dietary changes, epigentics and nicotine), but the standards are definitely more rigorous otherwise.

Now it is considered standard in upper middle class circles to get eyebrows waxes and pedicures (even in the winter!) not to mention Barre/solidcore/yoga etc. When I was a kid my mom was friends with a bunch of doctors wives in a fancy suburb but pedicures were still considered an indulgence and only people with super thick eyebrows regularly got their brows done. And they just played tennis a few times a week to stay in shape. Now the women I know in my hometown all double at soulcycle and do solidcore-type classes plus go through various primping -- standards are much higher now I think!!!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the article is pretty bad. A central premise is unproven, and (to me) flat-out wrong. The author wrote: "The reality is that expectations for female appearances have never been higher."

What is the foundation for that opinion? That view diametrically opposes my understanding of contemporary standards, which celebrate an increasingly wide variety of looks.

When I was growing up in the '80s, all the models looked like white and brown Barbie dolls. But today there are heavier women, women of various races, transgender women, older women, etc., walking on runways.

One place, mild size inclusivity. But women are no longer "allowed" to have pores, lines, expressions to harsh or bitchy, no peach fuzz, skin must be perfectly even without appearing made up, one isn’t just supposed to be thin but also taut and string but not bulky, thigh gap is still an aspiration for some, as is that lower pelvic depression in a bikini, your hair needs to be perfect.... yes, women used to be overall skinnier (for which you can largely thank dietary changes, epigentics and nicotine), but the standards are definitely more rigorous otherwise.

Now it is considered standard in upper middle class circles to get eyebrows waxes and pedicures (even in the winter!) not to mention Barre/solidcore/yoga etc. When I was a kid my mom was friends with a bunch of doctors wives in a fancy suburb but pedicures were still considered an indulgence and only people with super thick eyebrows regularly got their brows done. And they just played tennis a few times a week to stay in shape. Now the women I know in my hometown all double at soulcycle and do solidcore-type classes plus go through various primping -- standards are much higher now I think!!!

I agree with both PPs, somehow. There is more diversity in some things (size, skin color, clothing style) -- and I think that's really great. I love how women now don't all have to wear the same thing to work -- some people love dresses, some will wear jeans and a blazer practically every day, some will wear business pants and a button down or a peasant blouse or whatever. Viva la difference! BUT there is more pressure for it all to be "done." Pretty much every woman between the ages of 40 and 65 dyes her hair. People are totally shocked that i don't do my nails (never mind my toenails!), and I'm considered practically a barbarian for not waxing. I don't work out either. No one did any of that in the '70s, and really not much of it in the '80's either. (I can think of one mother I knew that had her nails done weekly, and everyone talked about how precious it was!). I think it's a pain. I wish all these young woman, who were brought up on girl power, would stand up and say "Forget it. I don't really want to spend all this money having someone rip all the hair off my body with hot wax, or threads or whatever." Also, I feel bad for the young girls who are expected to be beautiful and athletic and studious. In my day, most girls were just one of those things. If you were two of those things, that was like TOTALLY AMAZING. I can't think of a single person who was all three. Now, it seems like pretty much every teen girl is. (I'm joking... but sometimes I feel like telling the pretty girls to coast on their looks a little, to make it easier for those of us who were smart but not great looking to at least have a chance!) It just seems like a lot of pressure.
I haven't seen the movie yet so don't know how that fits in.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even young people look horrible these days. Much healthier and vibrant looking in the 80s. The depression pills, no outdoor play, planned activities and smartphone hunchback is destroying vitality.

Your opinion. I think everyone young looks so much better now. Advanced acne treatment, an emphasis on working out, teens aren't smoking, affordable fashion, to name a few reasons.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the article is pretty bad. A central premise is unproven, and (to me) flat-out wrong. The author wrote: "The reality is that expectations for female appearances have never been higher."

What is the foundation for that opinion? That view diametrically opposes my understanding of contemporary standards, which celebrate an increasingly wide variety of looks.

When I was growing up in the '80s, all the models looked like white and brown Barbie dolls. But today there are heavier women, women of various races, transgender women, older women, etc., walking on runways.

One place, mild size inclusivity. But women are no longer "allowed" to have pores, lines, expressions to harsh or bitchy, no peach fuzz, skin must be perfectly even without appearing made up, one isn’t just supposed to be thin but also taut and string but not bulky, thigh gap is still an aspiration for some, as is that lower pelvic depression in a bikini, your hair needs to be perfect.... yes, women used to be overall skinnier (for which you can largely thank dietary changes, epigentics and nicotine), but the standards are definitely more rigorous otherwise.

Now it is considered standard in upper middle class circles to get eyebrows waxes and pedicures (even in the winter!) not to mention Barre/solidcore/yoga etc. When I was a kid my mom was friends with a bunch of doctors wives in a fancy suburb but pedicures were still considered an indulgence and only people with super thick eyebrows regularly got their brows done. And they just played tennis a few times a week to stay in shape. Now the women I know in my hometown all double at soulcycle and do solidcore-type classes plus go through various primping -- standards are much higher now I think!!!

I agree with both PPs, somehow. There is more diversity in some things (size, skin color, clothing style) -- and I think that's really great. I love how women now don't all have to wear the same thing to work -- some people love dresses, some will wear jeans and a blazer practically every day, some will wear business pants and a button down or a peasant blouse or whatever. Viva la difference! BUT there is more pressure for it all to be "done." Pretty much every woman between the ages of 40 and 65 dyes her hair. People are totally shocked that i don't do my nails (never mind my toenails!), and I'm considered practically a barbarian for not waxing. I don't work out either. No one did any of that in the '70s, and really not much of it in the '80's either. (I can think of one mother I knew that had her nails done weekly, and everyone talked about how precious it was!). I think it's a pain. I wish all these young woman, who were brought up on girl power, would stand up and say "Forget it. I don't really want to spend all this money having someone rip all the hair off my body with hot wax, or threads or whatever." Also, I feel bad for the young girls who are expected to be beautiful and athletic and studious. In my day, most girls were just one of those things. If you were two of those things, that was like TOTALLY AMAZING. I can't think of a single person who was all three. Now, it seems like pretty much every teen girl is. (I'm joking... but sometimes I feel like telling the pretty girls to coast on their looks a little, to make it easier for those of us who were smart but not great looking to at least have a chance!) It just seems like a lot of pressure.
I haven't seen the movie yet so don't know how that fits in.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the article is pretty bad. A central premise is unproven, and (to me) flat-out wrong. The author wrote: "The reality is that expectations for female appearances have never been higher."

What is the foundation for that opinion? That view diametrically opposes my understanding of contemporary standards, which celebrate an increasingly wide variety of looks.

When I was growing up in the '80s, all the models looked like white and brown Barbie dolls. But today there are heavier women, women of various races, transgender women, older women, etc., walking on runways.

One place, mild size inclusivity. But women are no longer "allowed" to have pores, lines, expressions to harsh or bitchy, no peach fuzz, skin must be perfectly even without appearing made up, one isn’t just supposed to be thin but also taut and string but not bulky, thigh gap is still an aspiration for some, as is that lower pelvic depression in a bikini, your hair needs to be perfect.... yes, women used to be overall skinnier (for which you can largely thank dietary changes, epigentics and nicotine), but the standards are definitely more rigorous otherwise.

Now it is considered standard in upper middle class circles to get eyebrows waxes and pedicures (even in the winter!) not to mention Barre/solidcore/yoga etc. When I was a kid my mom was friends with a bunch of doctors wives in a fancy suburb but pedicures were still considered an indulgence and only people with super thick eyebrows regularly got their brows done. And they just played tennis a few times a week to stay in shape. Now the women I know in my hometown all double at soulcycle and do solidcore-type classes plus go through various primping -- standards are much higher now I think!!!

I agree with both PPs, somehow. There is more diversity in some things (size, skin color, clothing style) -- and I think that's really great. I love how women now don't all have to wear the same thing to work -- some people love dresses, some will wear jeans and a blazer practically every day, some will wear business pants and a button down or a peasant blouse or whatever. Viva la difference! BUT there is more pressure for it all to be "done." Pretty much every woman between the ages of 40 and 65 dyes her hair. People are totally shocked that i don't do my nails (never mind my toenails!), and I'm considered practically a barbarian for not waxing. I don't work out either. No one did any of that in the '70s, and really not much of it in the '80's either. (I can think of one mother I knew that had her nails done weekly, and everyone talked about how precious it was!). I think it's a pain. I wish all these young woman, who were brought up on girl power, would stand up and say "Forget it. I don't really want to spend all this money having someone rip all the hair off my body with hot wax, or threads or whatever." Also, I feel bad for the young girls who are expected to be beautiful and athletic and studious. In my day, most girls were just one of those things. If you were two of those things, that was like TOTALLY AMAZING. I can't think of a single person who was all three. Now, it seems like pretty much every teen girl is. (I'm joking... but sometimes I feel like telling the pretty girls to coast on their looks a little, to make it easier for those of us who were smart but not great looking to at least have a chance!) It just seems like a lot of pressure.
I haven't seen the movie yet so don't know how that fits in.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the article is pretty bad. A central premise is unproven, and (to me) flat-out wrong. The author wrote: "The reality is that expectations for female appearances have never been higher."

What is the foundation for that opinion? That view diametrically opposes my understanding of contemporary standards, which celebrate an increasingly wide variety of looks.

When I was growing up in the '80s, all the models looked like white and brown Barbie dolls. But today there are heavier women, women of various races, transgender women, older women, etc., walking on runways.

One place, mild size inclusivity. But women are no longer "allowed" to have pores, lines, expressions to harsh or bitchy, no peach fuzz, skin must be perfectly even without appearing made up, one isn’t just supposed to be thin but also taut and string but not bulky, thigh gap is still an aspiration for some, as is that lower pelvic depression in a bikini, your hair needs to be perfect.... yes, women used to be overall skinnier (for which you can largely thank dietary changes, epigentics and nicotine), but the standards are definitely more rigorous otherwise.

Now it is considered standard in upper middle class circles to get eyebrows waxes and pedicures (even in the winter!) not to mention Barre/solidcore/yoga etc. When I was a kid my mom was friends with a bunch of doctors wives in a fancy suburb but pedicures were still considered an indulgence and only people with super thick eyebrows regularly got their brows done. And they just played tennis a few times a week to stay in shape. Now the women I know in my hometown all double at soulcycle and do solidcore-type classes plus go through various primping -- standards are much higher now I think!!!

Anonymous wrote:Even young people look horrible these days. Much healthier and vibrant looking in the 80s. The depression pills, no outdoor play, planned activities and smartphone hunchback is destroying vitality.