rockTheSky

^ wash them?

It's not that it's easy to criticise them. It's that they're in the public eye and are always being watched. It has a negative connotation and is likely to send out the wrong signals. Whatever their personal reasons, just think what sort of a message does it send to their fans, their idols, and the younger generation? When Anthony Keidis sings "Pay your surgeon very well to break the spell of ageing" and Peter Tägtgren sings "Silicon tits and silicon lips [...] Walking the white line of fantasy. Glamorous life is all you seek. Living in Hollywood make believe." they're very loaded remarks. In both cases it's talking about the dark side of stardom and being a celebrity. Hide this and distract from that is basically teaching young girls how to lie, and promotes the notion that surgically altering their body is better then getting women to respect themselves outside of the trite generalisations of society. It seems so absurd when you're in a happy place, and have learnt to accept yourself for who you are and what nature gave you, to think that someone else is so unhappy that they actually want to pay to superficially enhance, hide or change their physical appearance in order to attain beauty or make them happy again. Then of course, it's also more likely that if you're constantly in the spotlight, it doesn't seem so far fetched that you're getting enhancements done all in the name of vanity. It almost seems like you have a double standard about this. You agree 100% with Laffy, when she says people should do whatever makes them happy, regardless. But then you apply stipulations to this, saying that it is only fine so long as it's done for the right reasons; and as long as people don't go overboard; and that a little bit here and there is no big deal. So what, a little bit more than here and there is a big deal? What are the wrong reasons and what are the right ones? What would you consider going overboard, and where do you draw the line? Those are not rhetorical questions. What if someone goes overboard with breast implants, in your eyes (Jodie Marsh?), but that makes her happy? Suddenly it's a big deal? She claims to have had them done for similar reasons as you. I think most, if not all women would claim it was to make them happy, and I don't think that's really unbelievable.

I would think it's the opposite way round. More likely because I don't think that many people have $6,100~ to casually drop on breast implants. And they just accepted the hand they have been 'dealt' and made the best of it. That's not to say that there aren't many women who, if they did have the money, would spend it on getting breast implants. Unfortunately for actresses, and especially models, it is usually revealed because they are having photos taken of them all the time. So it's not hard for someone to draw a comparison between an old and new photo. With models we're more likely to recognise because they're usually in lingerie or bikinis.

Right, yes, because being taken aka being in a relationship means there is no need to impress anyone with your looks anymore. No need to bother dressing up nice when you go out, or wearing make-up anymore, because you're taken, right? The mentality of looking sexy and having a healthy image, including taking care over your appearance drops off after you enter into a relationship. And of course, you wouldn't want to impress your bf (a guy).[/sarcasm] Judge... judge what? Don't be so quick to accuse me of judging anything as a means to provide you with something to hit back at. I said the only possible reason I can think of. I didn't claim that to BE A reason though. I also didn't express what I thought of that possible reason. Please read more carefully. I just think of it as absurd when I think: has society really come to the point where it is so absolutely crucial for women to attain "beauty" even if it means having plastic surgery? With respect to altering something on your face; wear a mask if you're so ashamed... and if you're religious it's even worse. What an insult it would be to God to whimsically lop your nose off, have implants and liposuction all at once. Heck, forget God. What about your ancestors, your blood line. What a disgrace. One person's view.

DAMN. I never even noticed she has small breasts and I've seen a couple of films she's been in supporting acts or w/e. It's true though, and I don't think that much press is made about it either, unlike Keira Knightly. Although she's another one who doesn't seem to care much. I am totally with you though, despite not being a girl, I can't understand why girls would want bigger breasts either. The only possible reason I can think of is for guys, to impress the guys.

I guess you hate me then. I live for money. The truth is money is important to everyone. Look at people who are rich and who get rich. They could just stash the money into a private account and live comfortably off the money for the rest of their lives, but they carry on making it. Look at Kirk Kerkorian... he's 91 and he's still in the news for unloading his stake in Ford and buying more shares in MGM Mirrage. He should be retired and enjoying his wealth. Look at people like Warren Buffet who are so incredibly rich. Sure, they live modestly, but that doesn't mean money isn't important to him. For him, I would imagine the money he has is simply a measure of his success. It is therefore important to him. I hate the way people think that just because some rich people don't buy loads of material possessions that money is not important to them. I live for money because I have a loving family who support me and some fantastic friends. What happens if you loose all your money? First of all, that's rather unlikely. You don't just lose all your money one day. There is usually a reason someone loses any amount of money. Anyway, when I say I live for money, I sort of mean it like that's the last desire. It's the last piece of the pie (in order to make the pie complete).

I guess you hate me then. I live for money. The truth is money is important to everyone. Look at people who are rich and who get rich. They could just stash the money into a private account and live comfortably off the money for the rest of their lives, but they carry on making it. Look at Kirk Kerkorian... he's 91 and he's still in the news for unloading his stake in Ford and buying more shares in MGM Mirrage. He should be retired and enjoying his wealth. Look at people like Warren Buffet who are so incredibly rich. Sure, they live modestly, but that doesn't mean money isn't important to him. For him, I would imagine the money he has is simply a measure of his success. It is therefore important to him. I hate the way people think that just because some rich people don't buy loads of material possessions that money is not important to them. I live for money because I have a loving family who support me and some fantastic friends.

So? SO what? So nothing! That's a horrible thing to say. lol No one should ever hope or wish for summer to be over. Long holiday, nice weather, chilling with friends.

Ethnicity seems to play a relative part in body shape. Not so sure specifically about breasts though. If we take the more broad ethic groups, the differences probably come from a their ancestors and because of their culture. Obviously food and exercise play a role too - no doubt, but I think it's less. If you see people who look similar to each other, It would probably be down to genes rather than lifestyle (more often than not). You ever wonder why Alessandra Ambrosio can go on Craig Kilborn and upon being asked how many times a month she works out can give the response: "two days a month", and later go on to confess "I eat candy, and chocolate. A lot of chocolate. I eat it every day". It always annoys me when magazines have articles of women, celebs or whatever, and in the promo photos they're wearing a bikini looking stunning and slim, then in the article they're always asked how they keep such a great shape, what their work out routine is or how much they exercise. The interviewee typically gives an answer like: "you know, I am actually quite lazy and don't work out as much as I should", "I don't work out" or "I go to the gymn once a week". People seem to forget that a slim figure can also be the product of inherited genes - HOW TO LOOK LIKE KATE MOSS: 5 GREAT TIPS; be born with it, le duh! I mean, Asian cultures like the Chinese are typically very small. Japanese people typically have small frames (they're slim) and they don't have a major obesity problem in JPN as they do in the U.S - whilst culture, lifestyle and other factors do play a part, their body shape is related to genes and how their ancestors were. Just because Japanese people tend to be more slender than American people doesn't mean they lead any more of an active lifestyle. Hell, I have a small frame, I've always been thin, and right now I don't do any exercise what so ever and If I'm honest I haven't for a few years. Right now, my lunches at work consist of a bottle of coke and 9 twix bars. Most people who are slim will always be thin, regardless of how much they exercise because of genes related to their ethnic background.

Damn, that's such a good quote. No longer will people be able to pass off their so-called humour with the disclaimer that "it was just a joke". I think most people also don't think before they open their mouth. Because, of course, it's perfectly possible to already be healthy, yet not fat, and lose weight. But she clearly took it the wrong way, and jumped to a conclusion that was neither implied. A feather can lose weight without being a brick in the first place.

I know theese are old, but... Oh please, stop kidding yourself, you so would go out with him. I believe the term is 'arm candy'. Why would you want that in a guy? Like, I mean, don't say in responce: "well, I don't want him to get beaten down in a fight" - surely you'd want a bf who doesn't get into fights in the first place, like most civilized people manage to? You actually sound totally sincere and honest, which is really rare as people try to beat about the bush too much these days, trying too hard not to offend anyone. I totally get where you're coming from with that girl you described though; I've had a few female friends like that in the past. Luckily everyone clings onto gender stereotypes like there's no tomorrow, thus giving you the power to decide whether to instigate a relationship or not.

By pressing the Quote button underneath their post? Le duH

They're annoying... I bet you own one of those! How much? Admit it... we dislike you anyway. We? Who are you spokesman for?

How many of them are Chloe, Manolos, Christian Louboutin, or Chanel?

1. It isn't my world view; don't be naive 2. When I said "broadening the issue" I was talking about the issue of some of their clothes seeming a little inappropriate for children of their age. 4. I wasn't trying to instigate a debate, I was just adding my thoughts about the clothes. 5. Correction: What did you think I was talking about? I was talking about how some of these clothes look on the models in the Sisley ad campaign. Le duH

Well I didn't really "get" the whole worrying about boyfriends/growing up too fast issue from anywhere. It's called broadening the issue. Why would you think I'm related to solo?

What brands do Benetton sell? Sisley's 'Young' ad campaign is rather... I duno. The girls look about 8-9... I'm gonna get slammed for this choice of words, but I can't be bothered to think of more appropiate ones: they shouldn't be dressing like that (in some of their clothes) at their age. Everyone grows up way too fast these days. You got girls who are still in their childhood dressing in wildly inappropriate manner, and worrying about getting a boyfriend. That stuff shouldn't even matter at their age.

Well I quoted you, because you said what a lot of people say, indeed others in this thread have said it before you. Anyway, no harm done I hope.

Yes, but I did say 'everyone', which, last time I checked, doesn't single out individuals : )

Well it can be on the flip side too. I don't know why everyone always uses the conventional brand of thinking that automatically pairs attractiveness to lack of personality, and more average looking to better personalities.

Argue? Can of worms? Dude, I am not saying or suggesting you're right or wrong for watermarking it; I disagree that it ruins the picture. Beyond this, I was just telling it how it is: whether you like it or not, you are putting your name on something that you contributed nothing toward the creation of.

Well it doesn't really ruin it... at all, but why do you even need to put a watermark on it at all? You didn't take the photograph, you didn't write the article, or publish the magazine, you only scanned it. So you're watermarking a piece of work that is entirely someone else's, which you've made a copy of.