Anonymous wrote:Do you think she’s wearing a hairpiece in the white blazer/sitting photo? I ask because I could use one but it seems too time consuming to put in on a regular basis. Look at the hair behind the part. Or did she just make a zig zag part?

No. She's not wearing a hairpiece.

No one wears hairpieces. You ask all the time.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I live in NYC, and I’m honestly dumbfounded at the idea that she is “stunning.” She is nicely groomed but would be considered homely here. I had no idea standards were so low in DC.

Only in DC people will think she is stunning.

It’s the DC people who habituate this forum specifically.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The first time I saw this woman, I knew that DCUM would think she looks really polished. She's an average looking white girl who was advised to wear the stuff that DCUM thinks are put together fashion choices - a blazer, a simple necklace, minimal makeup, straight shiny hair.

Only Fans research show that men prefer average girl next store attainable.

Beautiful, fashionable, too smart is not “attractive “ to most, it’s threatening. It’s why your early morning show marketed to white non-Hispanic people have average looking anchors and reporters.

This is why there is no hope for us. Men are so easily threatened. We will never get rid of the sexism that results in us being led by the most aggressive male in the pack.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think Cassidy looks a lot like Kaitlan Collins although oddly some commenters on previous threads about Kaitlan said she looks like a man (among other insults.) I haven't heard anybody anywhere say that about Cassidy.

I think she looks like Kaitlan too!

This bottom photo looks absolutely nothing like the Cassidy at the hearing. She is much prettier in the photo in white blazer and on tv.

Ok, how about these two:

That’s because the bottom photo is NOT Cassidy Hutchinson. It’s Kaitlan Collins.

These two women look absolutely nothing alike.

Anonymous wrote:I live in NYC, and I’m honestly dumbfounded at the idea that she is “stunning.” She is nicely groomed but would be considered homely here. I had no idea standards were so low in DC.

The standards really aren't that low (DC has much better looking women than men) except amongst a certain group of DC women who INSIST it must be so. I'm from NYC and have lived all over the world in "attractive cities." My friends here in DC have always been attractive and this lady always would have been and is considered homely to average. "Stunning" lol I assure you only the Birk wearing, 30 years old totally gray, haven't ever worn makeup, really misses Filene's crowd thinks that, but unfortunately that's a big group of commenters here on the DCUM fashion and beauty section.

Anonymous wrote:I live in NYC, and I’m honestly dumbfounded at the idea that she is “stunning.” She is nicely groomed but would be considered homely here. I had no idea standards were so low in DC.

Only in DC people will think she is stunning.

Anonymous wrote:I live in NYC, and I’m honestly dumbfounded at the idea that she is “stunning.” She is nicely groomed but would be considered homely here. I had no idea standards were so low in DC.

The hottest chicks in NY post on DCUM at 11pm on a Thursday night.

I live in NYC, and I’m honestly dumbfounded at the idea that she is “stunning.” She is nicely groomed but would be considered homely here. I had no idea standards were so low in DC.

Shout out to the hall monitors reporting comments on looks/beauty in a forum called BEAUTY AND FASHION.

If you don’t think beauty or lack thereof is worth thinking about or commenting on, that’s cool. God bless. But that the whole mobilizing purpose of this forum/thread.

As long as we’re deleting thing how about all the superfluous irrelevant crap about her politics in a beauty and fashion forum?

She looks very "girl next door" and yes, her makeup was done very well to make her look mature and polished, and I liked the simplicity of her outfits (her outfit in the taped testimony was very similar, I think a light blue blazer). She is very well put together and a pretty girl, but stunning? No, I don't think so.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She's only in her 20s. She looks so polished and professional.

I was shocked she was 25. She looks 10 years older.

She looked older in person than in her taped tesitmony and any of the photographs - seems intentional to me to make her more credible (which worked, IMO).

I am also inclined to crap on her for working for questionable people in her short professional career, but I was also pretty dumb (and, at the time, Republican) in my first few years out of college.

Anonymous wrote:She's only in her 20s. She looks so polished and professional.

I was shocked she was 25. She looks 10 years older.

Anonymous wrote:She was stunning in every sense of the word.

I don’t care about her politics—I admire her courage, patriotism and integrity. And, yes, her style too — which was made especially evident by her poise, self-confidence and intelligence.

How can you not care about her politics? She literally worked for the devil.

Do you think she’s wearing a hairpiece in the white blazer/sitting photo? I ask because I could use one but it seems too time consuming to put in on a regular basis. Look at the hair behind the part. Or did she just make a zig zag part?

Anonymous wrote:The first time I saw this woman, I knew that DCUM would think she looks really polished. She's an average looking white girl who was advised to wear the stuff that DCUM thinks are put together fashion choices - a blazer, a simple necklace, minimal makeup, straight shiny hair.

I totally agree! She is average at best, and she looks about 35. She could be any girl I grew up with in the Midwest.