March 10, 2010

Then & Now


Any questions?

First seen atThe Diamond Age

Posted by Vanderleun at March 10, 2010 12:04 AM
Bookmark and Share



"It is impossible to speak in such a way that you cannot be misunderstood." -- Karl Popper N.B.: Comments are moderated and may not appear immediately. Comments that exceed the obscenity or stupidity limits will be either edited or expunged.

It's not all disappointing out there.

Posted by: Mumblix Grumph at March 10, 2010 1:37 AM

Mumblix, you have posted incontrovertible proof that God is a man.

Posted by: Ed at March 10, 2010 4:24 AM

I've seen more curves in dimension lumber than in the trio at the bottom. And that's supposed to be attractive and sexy...why, exactly? I must have missed the memo.

Posted by: waltj at March 10, 2010 5:20 AM

I guess women are in charge of defining what is beautiful in women - and we aren't kind to ourselves.

Why doesn't men's idea of beauty in women have more sway?

Posted by: Deana at March 10, 2010 6:53 AM

Deana, it's because women don't trust men when they say 'you are beautiful.' they think it's merely a ply for sex. Figure that out if you can.

Posted by: at March 10, 2010 7:52 AM

Not a men's thing. It begins in fashion, and fashion is not exactly run by men. Strange relationship, women and the men who don't want them.

Posted by: james wilson at March 10, 2010 8:28 AM

ugh. I nearly barfed on the second set of pictures.

Mumblix, thank you for the mind bleach. That lovely red-headed creation made everything better.

Posted by: pdwalker at March 10, 2010 9:14 AM

As Diana West says, children these days aspire to adolescence over adulthood. Problem is, so do the "adults".
The reproductive fitness issue will kick in at some point, if not now. Works like a charm.

Posted by: Hannon at March 10, 2010 9:33 AM

Great work Mumblix. Great work.

Posted by: vanderleun at March 10, 2010 9:36 AM

He went a day's journey into the wilderness, and came and sat under a broom tree; and he asked that he might die, saying, It is enough; now, O LORD, take away my life; for I am not as good as my fathers were.

Posted by: Fat Man at March 10, 2010 10:33 AM

Mmmmm, curves, lovely curves. 36-22-36 curves. And classically beautiful faces. They had faces then as well you know. Women not girls. Mmmmm.

Posted by: glenn at March 10, 2010 10:43 AM

Deana nailed it.

It's also an age thing. Then, women were selected for stardom, outfitted, primped, preened to please men about age forty.

Now, the same is done to please boys and girls at about age fourteen. There's some huge money moving around in this industry, and it's not moving in the same directions it used to.

Posted by: Morgan K Freeberg at March 10, 2010 11:17 AM

Sickening isnĀ“t it!
Where have all the good girls gone? Long time passing?

Posted by: Al at March 10, 2010 12:05 PM

Hi Morgan -

I think you are right.

Way back, before a bunch of disgruntled women took the women's rights thing off in a very, very wrong direction, women were taught that it was a good thing to try and please their man. (Why couldn't these women's libbers have just stuck to making sure we had equal rights in the eyes of the courts and equal pay for equal work?????)

I have to keep quiet about this around my women friends or they go bonkers but I firmly believe that much of the discontent women feel is due to the fact that we have lost our sense of purpose as women in relation to men. I don't believe most intelligent men want their women to be stupid or someone they can walk all over. I think they actually want an intelligent woman who is smart enough to understand her role in his world. A good man would appreciate that and think a woman who figured that out hung the moon.

At any rate, Christina Hendrix is gorgeous. She even has what my mom refers to as "baby fat" under her arms. She just looks soft, comfy and non-threatening.


Posted by: Deana at March 10, 2010 12:14 PM

Non-threatening until she kicks you in the head and steals your spaceship.

Posted by: monkeyfan at March 10, 2010 12:18 PM

Mumblix, you beat me to it! Good to know I'm not the only who appreciates the curves.

Posted by: LS at March 10, 2010 12:42 PM

"I guess women are in charge of defining what is beautiful in women"

You're close and I could be wrong but I think most of the fashionistas are homosexuals. The girls have been looking like boys for quite some time now.

"Now, the same is done to please boys and girls at about age fourteen."

I don't know about the little lesbians-in-training but I'm pretty sure the 14 year old boys are going to vote with us.

Posted by: I-RIGHT-I at March 10, 2010 12:55 PM

Actually I think it's often that gay men are in charge of what is considered beautiful in women: women that look like boys.

Posted by: The Count at March 10, 2010 1:41 PM

Mumblix showed us that nature is not yet dead. There are other young hotties who are fine with a few extra pounds: Kate Winslet and Scarlet Johannson come to mind. Also Beyonce and Alicia Keys.

A pupil dilation test showed some years ago that men react more positively to curvaceous nudes than to skinny ones. Many of us guys have conducted the same test in strip joints. So, it's not only better government we would get if we paid more attention to and respected human nature, but also a saner and more pleasant society.

Posted by: Don Rodrigo at March 10, 2010 2:22 PM

Letting homosexuals run the fashion industry is a little like allowing a vegan regulate your wiener.

Posted by: Gagdad Bob at March 10, 2010 2:36 PM

wow.. a little homophobic around here?

Posted by: Wecker899 at March 10, 2010 3:40 PM

Wow, a little jerk of the knee around here?

Posted by: vanderleun at March 10, 2010 6:00 PM

Wanker has it right- everyone here has an unnatural fear of homosexuals. They're just too scary. Actually we're just sick of beauty being defined as scrawny ass persons of indeterminate gender wearing ugly ass clothes.


Posted by: jwm at March 10, 2010 6:49 PM

Actually all is not lost. I give you Evangeline Lilly on the red carpet at the Oscars, 2006 I think. She makes all those asexual stick figures go black and white with one smile.

Posted by: glenn at March 11, 2010 9:00 AM

Well, for the record, women were pushed to maintain ridiculously small figures back "then," as well. Just take a peek at any 1930s, 40s, or 50s starlet, and try and guess her waist measurements. They don't call it a Scarlett O'Hara waist for nothing! I don't think anorexic figures are a modern phenomenon, and there's actually been a resurgence of appreciation for the full figure recently. :)

Posted by: Julie at June 10, 2010 8:03 PM

The term "Scarlett O'Hara waste" was in reference to her period piece "Gone with the wind. During that time period a tiny waste and large bust and hips was the popular thing. It has nothing to do with Scarlett O'Hara herself. Woman in the 30's,40's and 50's where pushed to be "voluptuous" never thin. Julie you are very misinformed.

Posted by: Brittany at August 19, 2010 5:37 PM

I don't understand why they all can't be beautiful?
Why is there such a need to bash women for any kind of body type? Plus, this person compared two different ones. Obviously not everyone looks like that now, and there were skinny models back then too.

Posted by: Cassy at July 11, 2011 2:13 PM