Post: #1

Pop-Singer Colbie Caillat makes a song about the fact that she thinks, that women should not try to augment their beauty via cosmetics, hairdo, makeup, eyeliners, fake lashes etc.

Watch the video for the final result of all these women getting rid of all their "embellishments". What a difference makeup makes in some cases....


Women do not realize that social acceptance of those beauty props gives them an edge.

Otherwise if you watch in the video only one of the very young pretty girls comes out almost the same. The very young girls aged 16-20 who are in the top 1-5% of looks would just rule the sexual market place. Those girls with natural big eyes, huge eye-lashes, perfect complexion and long healthy hair would just dominate over the other women like Hulk over the Smurfs.

It is a privilege for women to wear make-up. If it were acceptable for men, we would look better too. During Renaissance men used to have makeup and dress equally garish and colorful as women.
Even now many guys would look way better with some goth-like cosmetics that could actually make you look more masculine. In the old times Vikings, Scots, American Indians and many other cultures used to paint their faces.

The video also clearly shows blatant disregard for femininity telling women to stop caring about their appearance, a chemotherapy victim taking of her fake hair, a fat girl getting rid of her makeup and obviously hinting to the fact that it is fine to be fat.

Feminism - making women uglier since 1963....

Post: #2

Also women compete with each other over guys. It's women who create these ridiculous beauty standards.
I love how they try to blame men for all this shit but the majority of these problems they create themselves...I used to know people like this.

Even if there was a continent-wide ban on all cosmetics, cosmetic surgery, and any beauty enhancement...women would find a way to differentiate themselves to attract a male of high value.

This song might make sense if both men and women purchased cosmetics in equal supply but they don't. So females like this go on to blame men for every time she doesn't feel pretty enough when a group of 16-18 girls walk by her and get a ton of male attention.

Post: #3

This coming from a 9, yeah SURE!

Post: #4

She doesnt get it (or does and for PC reasons chooses not to admit it): A major reason why women wear makeup, dress up, wear high heels, workout etc is to compete with OTHER women. It has nothing to do with men.

Besides, this hypocritical whore, who obviously spends a considerable amount of time taking care of herself, assumes guys here have real standards. Please. Western women know all too well that they can look like shit AND STILL find a boyfriend/husband. A mediocre chubster on OkCupid still gets 15-30 messages per day.

Post: #5

Very few people buy CDs anymore, so artists need a marketing ploy to sell anything. The marketing idea needs to garner either sympathy or outrage to key the audience up emotionally so they'll care enough to buy.

This is the reason for this video. My guess is all the other good ideas were taken. Being "fierce" has been done, in-your-face sexuality didn't fit her image, and things like human trafficking were too heavy for her. So someone decided on "Photoshop and the Modern Woman."

I miss the days when artists could just drop a CD on the market and it would rise or fall on its own merits. Now everyone has a cause, or a gimmick, or a back story of "abuse" that magically pops up when the release date is impending (not an option for her, since the industry knows her dad).

Speaking of her dad, her worked with Fleetwood Mac -- a good example of a band that didn't need gimmicks to sell records. I personally don't like them, but at least they didn't pander.

Post: #6

The wench with the red hair and the wench with the wig were a bit scary without makeup.

Post: #7

(07-16-2014 12:27 PM)Cunnilinguist Wrote:  She doesnt get it (or does and for PC reasons chooses not to admit it): A major reason why women wear makeup, dress up, wear high heels, workout etc is to compete with OTHER women. It has nothing to do with men.

Besides, this hypocritical whore, who obviously spends a considerable amount of time taking care of herself, assumes guys here have real standards. Please. Western women know all too well that they can look like shit AND STILL find a boyfriend/husband. A mediocre chubster on OkCupid still gets 15-30 messages per day.

The reason for them dressing up is to compete with other women FOR MEN! Anyone that walks around the city and gets IOIs even (or especially) by women with boyfriends/husbands knows that basic biology tells women to always be pretty for a man. Just as a man's biology is telling him to always be on the lookout for hot young ass.

And as far as message results go for example on OK-Cupid:

Fake profiles of men and women ranging from fat/ugly to good-looking for men - after 7 days:

   

After 4 months:

   
The 2 prettiest girls would have gotten 2000 messages, but the mailbox was full after one month. The fugliest broad got about the same amount of messages than the 2nd most good-looking guy. That is the SMP in the US for you and how important it is to look your best for a woman!

Post: #8

What the heck? Why is the bitch with the buzzcut so much more popular than the brunette?

Post: #9

women don't determine female attractiveness men do, and vise versa. I think this is something tomassi rollo discusses.

Post: #10

Not sure about antiquity, but during the Victorian and Edwardian era makeup was frowned upon as something reserved for prostitutes, etc.

It became popular in the early 20th century as the women's liberation movement took off.

Maybe this somehow relates to that neo-Victorianism thread. Or maybe not.

In any case, a lot of the chicks in the video look kind of busted without it. I've noticed this in real life, too.

Post: #11

Omg. Wow. So brave. Wow, just wow.

Post: #12

8/10 WB

2/10 would not listen to after.

Post: #13

Quote:"You don't have to try (to look pretty)"

And men don't have to find you attractive.

Post: #14

(07-16-2014 05:34 PM)RexImperator Wrote:  Not sure about antiquity, but during the Victorian and Edwardian era makeup was frowned upon as something reserved for prostitutes, etc.

It became popular in the early 20th century as the women's liberation movement took off.

Maybe this somehow relates to that neo-Victorianism thread. Or maybe not.

Good call, Rex. From 'Beauty In The Victorian Era':

Quote:The rise to the throne of Queen Victoria in 1837 marked the decline of the use of cosmetics. The Victorian Era was a time dominated by a strict moral code, religious values, modesty and sexual restraint. Therefore, during this period cosmetics were considered to be immoral, their use frowned upon and thought to be something that only women of dubious morals would wear. But that doesn’t mean that ladies stopped using them altogether.

While actresses and prostitutes, which at the time were considered to be pretty much the same thing, kept on wearing strong makeup, well-off ladies used very little and in very natural tones.

It's not returning to the concept of The Idealised Victorian Woman:

Quote:She serves and obeys her husband, is moral adviser and guide to the children, and ensures peace and stability in her home. Beautiful, sweet, passive, and self-sacrificing, her identity is derived solely from her role as wife and mother.

But the reaction of privileged women of that time, which was concerned with destroying that stereotype. For example:

Quote:When Charlotte Brontë set out to write the novel Jane Eyre, she was determined to create a main character who challenged the notion of the ideal Victorian woman, or as Brontë was once quoted: "a heroine as plain and as small as myself" (Gaskell, Chapter XV). Brontë's determination to portray a plain yet passionate young woman who defied the stereotype of the docile and domestic Victorian feminine ideal most likely developed from her own dissatisfaction with domestic duties and a Victorian culture that discouraged women from having literary aspirations.

Thus began an epidemic of Plain Heroines, who think of themselves - or are told by others - that they're ugly, but still win the heart of desirable men, whom look past their lack of beauty and end up attracted to their inner, desirable, nobler qualities. Sound familiar to this video and the articles written by Sensibles? True beauty is within.

As usual, you can confirm this with what do people masturbate or fantasise over that can be financially-exploited. Let me introduce you to the non-Mary Sue strand of female writing: the plain romantic heroine.

Some selections:

Quote:"Nora's heart and her goodness makes her the woman for jaded, untrusting Christian."

McQueen gets around!

Quote:"She's called Horseface Hattie by the men in her town and, and is being railroaded into marrying a not-so-nice widower. But Reed sees the attractive woman she is."

She gets the bad boy.

Quote: "Even though Christopher was blind, he knew that Gillian had an inner beauty that being loved brought out."

Quote: "Cassie is the plain, poor relation dogsbody who Dane marries out of pity. But her true beauty ensnares him."

Quote: "Cassie is dowdy and men don't appreciate her, other than for her incredible abilities with electronics. She uses her ownership of a revolutionary videogame company to buy herself a husband. Joel is not about to let this technology or Cassie become another man's possesion, so he kidnaps her and forces her down the altar. He is not as indifferent as he pretends to be."

Quote: "Isobel is tall, large, with strong features, and has carrot-red hair. Nathan is blind but her voice and her strong nature spurs him into asking for her hand in marriage."

Quote: "Friday is a bluestocking who is deeply in love with her Adonis-like neighbor. He thinks of her as a friend, until his eyes open up to her charm."

Because god-forbid she ever realises an ugly man has other positive qualities.

Quote: "Evelyn is favored more for her efficiency than her looks. However keen spy Justin sees the depths in her that were long overlooked ."

Quote: "Shy, prim, and proper spinster Abigail is seduced by her patient, gunslinger Jesse."

Blah blah blah, the page I'm reading alone lists 45 novels in this vein.

You might think. "Well, modesty and propriety... it was a different time." No, those are all modern romance novels currently being sold on Amazon. Note also, the tall, ugly knight in Game Of Thrones the girls want to win Jamie Lannister. Same old, same old.

A subset of this would be what I think of the Victorian and Edwardian Adventures of Ugly, Ugly Children. If you're American, you'll recognise the stereotype from any stories about children growing up on the plains, which is why The Cult Of Sensibility had a fit last year over this cover for 'Anne Of Green Gables', thinking it too 'sexualised' and the cover model too 'beautiful' because Anne was 'modest and plain!'



It amazes me that they're seeing sex in a chubby blonde 6 in a button up shirt, but that's their Sensible nature. I've started to note the writers for the Onion's AV Club are constantly pointing out how uncomfortable they are with any depiction of sex, by addressing scenes as 'troubling'.

"I was troubled by the blowjob scene."; "I was troubled by the rape scene."

Give them a couple of more years, and we'll end up with:

"Why, the very thought of such sexual impropriety seizes at my very heart and consumes my soul with dread. How can such a thing possibly exist, to make such mockery of all the goodness upon this earth?"

Given that I've long suspected women gain weight, avoid makeup, cover themselves with tattoos and hack off their hair to avoid attracting male attention, I think we're just seeing what the new vision of propriety is. Modesty is achieved not through buttoning up and meekness, but through sloth, aggressiveness and gluttony so no-one will consider touching you sexually. They're trying to push men away, but men are so fucking thirsty, they keep on pushing back.

I'm expecting Sensibles to push things even further, until all forms of sex are too awkward and troubling to even consider, and this is one front where feminism will start changing or splintering within 10 years. Millenial Woman have been trained to know they're supposed to be sexually-empowered by casual sex, but I expect them to start reacting against this, and start claiming empowerment through not choosing to have sex.

I noticed this article a couple of days ago, and thought "Aha. Here it comes."

Why I Quit Tinder by A Fat, Snarky Hambeast.

Trigger warning for one of the ugliest pictures of a pair of women I've ever seen.

Post: #15

Rotfl if she sings that you don't need make up then don't use anything that enhance your looks aka, great non natural lightning and don't fix your eyebrows. Also in the last scene you see her rocking lipgloss, and i'm guessing very very thin makeup so her skin is not reflective.

Hypocrisy everywhere in that video

Post: #16

(07-16-2014 08:12 PM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  Good call, Rex. From 'Beauty In The Victorian Era':

Quote:The rise to the throne of Queen Victoria in 1837 marked the decline of the use of cosmetics. The Victorian Era was a time dominated by a strict moral code, religious values, modesty and sexual restraint. Therefore, during this period cosmetics were considered to be immoral, their use frowned upon and thought to be something that only women of dubious morals would wear. But that doesn’t mean that ladies stopped using them altogether.

While actresses and prostitutes, which at the time were considered to be pretty much the same thing, kept on wearing strong makeup, well-off ladies used very little and in very natural tones.

It's not returning to the concept of The Idealised Victorian Woman:

Quote:She serves and obeys her husband, is moral adviser and guide to the children, and ensures peace and stability in her home. Beautiful, sweet, passive, and self-sacrificing, her identity is derived solely from her role as wife and mother.

Given that I've long suspected women gain weight, avoid makeup, cover themselves with tattoos and hack off their hair to avoid attracting male attention, I think we're just seeing what the new vision of propriety is. Modesty is achieved not through buttoning up and meekness, but through sloth, aggressiveness and gluttony so no-one will consider touching you sexually. They're trying to push men away, but men are so fucking thirsty, they keep on pushing back.

Nice point about the Victorian era. Women then had to marry early and were mostly reduced to their inherent beauty. They could not even balance out a few things with display of her breasts and heavy makeup like during the Renaissance times.

Also fun to see the female hamster spinning the tale of plain Jane marrying the wealthy, daring, unbelievable good-looking hero. The guy still has to look like this and has to have loads of natural Game (being funny, mysterious, dashing, daring, deliciously direct, dark & brooding etc.)

   

I don't think that most women want to decrease male attention by getting tattoos, cutting hair etc. I have talked with some women and they were honestly surprised to find out that men find short hair less attractive - the magazines and media have been praising the pixie-cut for decades! Also they did not realize that tattoos make you more masculine and thus less attractive for men - they may make quite a few men more attractive for women, but that does not make it so for the other sex. And again they had no idea!

The thirst of Betas is just so powerful, that no one tells them the truth and likely the Blue Pill men have been brainwashed by the same magazines. But of course when you look at the girls of the level A celebrities, billionaires & sports-stars you will be hard-pressed to see many tattooed snarky bitches with piercings and tank-girl haircuts.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/worldcu...acana.html

   

And even though half of those girls are models or ex-models, they all come with a heavy makeup and one older wife with plenty of Botox.

Part of the problem is of course the simple factor of demographics. One of the reasons why Ukraine is filled with hot, slim girls is just that there are less men than women available for girls above the age of 20. It becomes even worse when you deduct the guys who disqualify themselves by being alcoholics or in prison etc.
But we won't be able to change that - when average Jane can still get thousands of dick-offerings per year, she won't feel the sting of the SMP until her end 30s.

Post: #17

(07-17-2014 02:17 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  I don't think that most women want to decrease male attention by getting tattoos, cutting hair etc. I have talked with some women and they were honestly surprised to find out that men find short hair less attractive - the magazines and media have been praising the pixie-cut for decades! Also they did not realize that tattoos make you more masculine and thus less attractive for men - they may make quite a few men more attractive for women, but that does not make it so for the other sex. And again they had no idea!

They knew.

When people are psychologically-defective, their fears often play out on an unconscious level, where their unconscious motivations try their hardest to generate the result they fear most.

So the women who are rebelling against cultural norms of beauty that have existed for centuries - and everyone, deep down, knows what is beautiful and what is ugly - may think they're doing it in the name of being a unique snowflake, but they're acting on an unconscious drive to uglify themselves to deflect male attention.

I've said before I think most Millenial Girls have Dismissive-Avoidant Attachment Styles and so are trying to drive away men to create abandonment they fear the most. This is why they all say they don't need men: to create a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Thinking about this further, I think feminists deliberately appeal on this Plain Jane Romantic Sensibility that Privileged Victorian Women tried to normalise.

- Lesbian and man-hating feminists deliberately uglify themselves to repulse men and guarantee they'll never generate sexual attraction.

- Plain women who don't generate much sexual attraction naturally can only fantasise about being loved by a desirable man for their other positive qualities.

- Feminists prey on these women as naïve, exploitable targets, teaching them that 'beauty is a social construct' so positive qualities must be cultivated.

- Feminists will encourage uglification so Plain Janes know the man loves and respect you for who you are inside and your accomplishments.

- The positive qualities and accomplishments Feminists encourage are toxic and repulsive to male sexual attention, so the fantasy doesn't come true.

- Result: a 40 year old bitter, lonely spinster with Lotsa Cats who hates men, exactly like the Lesbians who taught her.

I had to laugh, one of the book sites categorises this strain of romance novel as 'Wallflower / Spinster'.

Post: #18

^ Agree with both of you here.
But seriously. Some girls are just so innocently stupid that they don't know that a short haircut makes them less attractive. They can get stupid ideas and inspiration from anything.

Until it someday hits them right into their little face...

Post: #19

What is this whole makeup-free movement advocating, really?

Note the prudish, judgemental lyric in the song: "You don't have to give it all away". Slut-shaming?

Advocating sexual modesty and plain presentation + 'love me for my qualities other than beauty' = pioneer women without the homemaking skills.

Post: #20

(07-17-2014 04:25 AM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  They knew.

When people are psychologically-defective, their fears often play out on an unconscious level, where their unconscious motivations try their hardest to generate the result they fear most.

So the women who are rebelling against cultural norms of beauty that have existed for centuries - and everyone, deep down, knows what is beautiful and what is ugly - may think they're doing it in the name of being a unique snowflake, but they're acting on an unconscious drive to uglify themselves to deflect male attention.

I've said before I think most Millenial Girls have Dismissive-Avoidant Attachment Styles and so are trying to drive away men to create abandonment they fear the most. This is why they all say they don't need men: to create a self-fulfilling prophecy.
...
- Result: a 40 year old bitter, lonely spinster with Lotsa Cats who hates men, exactly like the Lesbians who taught her.

I had to laugh, one of the book sites categorises this strain of romance novel as 'Wallflower / Spinster'.

You may be right on the subconscious motivations. But the deepest level is sometimes way way deeper than even the subconscious which can be changed by conscious indoctrination.

If you've seen one of those Model-TV-shows where the stylists does an extreme make-over with the girls, then you know that the girls are absolutely afraid of their long hair being cut. And some do cry as they get their (usually) ugly short haircut. But then they get assuaged that they look great and you see them sporting the same shitty hairdo on the catwalk, because being different is better than being the same.

Unfortunately all this crap IS IN fact changing reality for us men as I see even slim attractive wives cut and shave their heads like a teenage punk girl, because it is so "cool". She gives crap about her husband and considers herself a trendy mom.

I see it happening in all economic areas except for the absolutely upper level of male social achievement - the famous, the extremely wealthy and the top billionaire families. Those strata of society are in fact quite openly Red Pill - the indoctrination and bullshit fantasies are for the lower masses who actually are stupid enough to believe CNN, FoxNews, Huffpo or the New York Beta Times. Some of them even preach one thing when coming on TV and then turn around and visit a fund-raiser with plenty of trophy-model-wives, -mistresses and -girlfriends who are 15 years younger than the men's daughters. No one gives a shit.
At some of those events I have seen more beautiful women than anywhere else in my life. This world is far off from the crazy stuff preached on TV that it could be just as well on a different planet. And yes - plenty of stable marriages exist there, while the guy usually has a mistress on the side.

@Anonymous - "Sarah Plain and Tall" - funny and fitting