I tend to believe that over-sized body parts, often surgically enhanced, were a thing of our modern, hedonistic age. Television, artificial celebrity, social media fads, etc. have produced grotesque facsimiles of humans, who seem to think that they are beautiful people. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder or the person willing to pay for something they don’t have and believe to be attractive. When I was younger, the only aspect of the human body I recall hearing about being modified was the nose of young women with wealthy fathers.
I was wrong (happens often!), as evidenced by figures I discovered in a garden in/on Mauritius. They were imported from Asia/India/Indonesia. Someone must have liked what they saw or imagined something that they did not see but wanted to have to have crafted such figures. Fat lips are not a thing of the collagen era, but a someone’s beauty ideal of the past.
After leaving Mauritius, I traveled to Dubai. In the mall, I spotted several women (most assumed to be of Russian origin), whose lips looked as though they had been modelled after the statues. I am sure that they were inspired by something seen in western magazines or television programs.
I’m not sure if it’s a good sign or a sign of something else, when some of the most impressive politicians are women. I am talking about the likes of Elizabeth Warren and Kirsten Gillibrand, both US Senators. If the country were run by the likes of these people, it would surely be a better place. ( I do not include Hillary on this list, for reasons that I have mentioned earlier.)
And, then there’s Angie…
This is a so-called “stream of consciousness” ( I don’t actually know what that is, but it sounds cool), or something like that.
I just read a Vanity Fair piece on Scarlett Johansson, which included many (supposedly) alluring photos. I am sure that she is a nice person, but she is not my dream female. She is not a five, but she is also not a ten, for those that believe in a scale. She must be a good actress, because others have said so and she keeps being cast.
Sadly, she had a major role in one of the dumbest movies ever made: Lost In Translation (one of many dumb movies by the same director…who is haled as being great…which I do not see). I must be dim, because I do not understand how anyone could have liked this film, much less raved about it. However, she did play in a movie I liked very much: A Good Woman, a modern adaptation of an Oscar Wilde play (Mrs. Windemere’s Fan). She played a rather dim American woman, married to a rich man. I assumed that she was acting the role and not playing herself.
I have been—foolishly—enthralled by movie actresses, but this one does not make the cut. I’ll leave her for others to drool over…
I hired many women during business career: all performed well and caused few problems. I like strong, confidant, intelligent women; most men do not. I cannot trace the source of my feelings, but perhaps it comes from early relationships with girls and women and being in environments where women counted (except the US Army, of course).
I do not like pushy women that do not have the intelligence, talent, or skill to back up their brashness. The same is true for men who talk a good game, but cannot deliver, or feel that having an opinion makes them smart.
I found the below article interesting, but my conclusion is that women lose out to men, if the man is deciding, because most men are uncomfortable working with women or have ego problems dealing with a smart female.
Women change--allegedly--only to change.
Admittedly, I used the allegedly to be polite and not be accused of being sexist...which I have been known to be. My wife has proved the former point on many occasions. I am constantly arguing against some change in our lives. On occasion, I am successful.
Yesterday, I wrote about painting my “office”. I have been suffering from an extreme case of why-do-today-what-you-can-put-off-until-tomorrow. Change was not necessary, merely a means to avoid a less-appealing activity. I could live with the color scheme and fading of paint until the day I die, but that would mean sitting down and using my brain. Both activities require my hands, but in a different way. Typing a few hundred thousands words, making necessary content and editorial changes along the way seems like a chore too far.
Manual work seemed more appealing...
Men are either stupid or suckers.
Want proof? Just look at men’s fashion.
Every few years, the same basic items--pants, jackets, ties, shirts--are minimally altered by the “fashion industry” to lure men into buying new clothes...which they do not need. Doubt, ego, and desire to attract women--who read fashion magazines--drive purchases, not need. The few hold-outs are classed as old-fashioned, stupid, or insensitive (to the need of companies to make profit).
Neckties change their size like an accordion, from fat to thin. The same is true of jacket lapels. Now, pant legs are getting the same treatment. Shirt collars are another target.
Weird changes do not seem to take hold, such as the leisure suit tried in the 70s or business suits with Bermuda shorts. But, the fashion industry, helped by media that live from their ads, keeps trying to entice men to be “bold” and “with it”, ie. spend money on stupid stuff.
I learned early in life that women dress to look good, while men dress to avoid looking stupid. That explains why subtle changes work best: guys are afraid of looking different from the pack, but also want to appear to be hip.
I try not to be a slave to the fashion industry, but when buying new clothes one must take what’s on offer. My closet is full of clothes with different widths. Sometimes I look in fashion and sometimes out-of-date. I don’t care...even if my wife and children criticize me.
Anyone that has watched Olympic ice hockey might have noticed what looks like cheerleaders in the stands. Americans are used to this feature at football games, where each team has its own troupe.
Gyrating girls in the stands seem to be normal at Russian rinks, which I first noticed watching KHL games. These girls are a cross between cheerleaders and go-go girls, whose role seems to be to animate fans of both teams and entertain during breaks in play. In stead of performing in front, they do it beside fans on the steps. Women’s liberation has not progressed quite as far in Russia. (Cheerleaders at NHL games seem to be a holdover from darker days). Women are more-often seen as objects and available to male entertainment. Being useful to older men was/is one way for young girls to escape the drudgery of having little money. Of course, this goes on everywhere in the world, but seems a bit more blatant in Russia, as it was during Soviet times.
The girls in Sochi are a service provided by the organizing committee and do what they usually do. I’m sure that they were a bit more animated during Russian games, but who can blame them. Now, that the Russian team is in hiding, the girls can concentrate equally of fans of both teams. I’m sure that they are happy to be part of the spectacle, which is better venue than a rink in, say, Novosibirsk or Murmansk or other garden spots having a KHL team.
I want to re-visit two statements that I have made in the past. First, most are aware that only a stupid person never changes his or her mind. Of course, stupid people do not understand or are not aware of this wisdom. Second, I have pointed out that women should not play ice hockey.
I am not admitting to either stupidity or changing my mind, but I do want to say something positive about women’s hockey. I still believe that this is not a sport for “girls”, but I have been impressed by the skating and stick-handling skills of the players I’ve seen at the Sochi Games. I enjoy watching the games, because they remind me of good college hockey of my youth. I do not like the overly physical state of the game at the professional level, so the more technical style of the women’s game, where body checking is not allowed, is far more pleasing. This is not unlike my opinion about women’s soccer.
The Canada-USA game was excellent hockey. Either team could have won. This was a preview of the (expected) final match-up.
I have never visited Saudi Arabia and do not expect to in this life. Perhaps, female citizens of that kingdom have lurked beneath black shrouds I have seen in other countries, but none wore a flag pin. Many were visiting Dubai at the same time I was there, so I noticed something. Not a small number had come to drive cars, which they did for hours on end and in circles. Traffic in some parts was clogged for most of the day.
Muslim women living on the Arabian peninsula might prefer to cover themselves in black (men seem to prefer white), but hands are left on display. One can only imagine what they wear underneath, but rings are on display for all the world to see and admire. In the case of other women: to desire.
These women sported the kind of bling--if that’s the correct word for real jewels--one usually sees only in windows of shops on Bond Street, around Place Vendȏme, and similar tony locations. American women seem to prefer large chunks of glass, whereas wealthy women of the Middle East flaunt more opulent stones. Some must work out in a gym to be able to lift their hands.