Author musemaj11 Posted May 21, 2011 Author Posted May 21, 2011 This is about the fact that some guys complain about being made to pay for a girl who expects them to do so, but then expect the girl to spend money on beauty upkeep, which is inevitably more than they would spend for the same relational effect... and say the girl has no right to say she was made to do so! And no, OP, just because YOU prefer it a certain way does not make it any less a hypocritical double standard. Where did I say I expect women to spend money on beauty upkeep?
Els Posted May 22, 2011 Posted May 22, 2011 I said 'some men'. There were at least three men in this thread who mentioned that they did expect a woman to do so, with one claiming that spending $200 a month on beauty products alone is not much at all. I distinctly recall you mentioning it on another thread in the past as well, but I can't be arsed to ferret it out so I won't push that point.
ScreamingTrees Posted May 22, 2011 Posted May 22, 2011 That picture is supposedly Megan Fox in her early days when she was still a schoolgirl and had had no beauty work done on her. C'mon, her face isn't disfigured or horribly skewered or anything, just looks like she needs a new haircut and eyebrow maintenance and she should've brushed her teeth. It doesn't prove anything, just that Megan Fox's parents didn't really take care of her like they should've when she was a child. Bottom line, If *I* met someone who had to wear a mask of product to look good, I probably personally wouldn't be attracted to them when it all comes off. They don't have to be ugly, but they probably aren't my cup of tea.
Els Posted May 22, 2011 Posted May 22, 2011 C'mon, her face isn't disfigured or horribly skewered or anything, just looks like she needs a new haircut and eyebrow maintenance and she should've brushed her teeth. It doesn't prove anything, just that Megan Fox's parents didn't really take care of her like they should've when she was a child. No, she needed braces. Braces and a good hairstylist cost money. It proves how much difference all the things that some guys here have been claiming don't matter, do. One of them said that the only thing a woman has to spend on to look good is gym membership. Well, this pic evidently proves otherwise, since 'Megan Fox as a kid' definitely didn't look overweight, despite her other aesthetic failings.
Els Posted May 22, 2011 Posted May 22, 2011 (edited) So you think she naturally grew from that picture into her current appearance, with no money spent, eh? She definitely spent a LOT of money on her looks, and yet she is still the epitome of 'sexy' for many men (not all, of course, but more men than my very frugal mother is, definitely). Edited May 22, 2011 by Elswyth
ScreamingTrees Posted May 23, 2011 Posted May 23, 2011 So, Ellsy, what's your point? You think that only women need braces or get haircuts? These are things that EVERYONE has to spend money on if it becomes a problem. You're grasping at straws.. How do you know if a man expects you to purchase implants or whatever? Is he going to demand that you do whatever it is he wants before you go on a date? I'm confused.. What ******* bothered you to the point that you're thinking crazy stuff like this? NO ONE should expect ANYTHING from ANYONE. No one is entitled to anything in life from anyone unless proven otherwise. Megan's far from the epitome of sexy to me. Maybe I'm crazy. I find most women to be beautiful, but in terms of looks, I tend to gravitate towards brunettes.. Just google brunettes. I see plenty of average women who look just as good as the pictures that come up, but maybe that's because looks are subjective and plenty of people are out there that'd think that every one of the girls that'd come up weren't that great looking? The only thing that Fox might've done to "doll" herself up may be plastic surgery, and I ain't expecting a girl to alter the face that nature gave her just to go out and get coffee or eat out somewhere with me. And when I was talking about her hair in that picture, I just thought short hair didn't look too good on her. No special hairstyle needed.
Els Posted May 23, 2011 Posted May 23, 2011 (edited) I'm confused.. What ******* bothered you to the point that you're thinking crazy stuff like this? NO ONE should expect ANYTHING from ANYONE. No one is entitled to anything in life from anyone unless proven otherwise. What bothered me, was that some people absolutely cannot understand the bolded. Thank you for stating it for me. You will also find that all of my posts, far from being 'crazy', are based on cold, hard logic. I agree completely with the bolded, except that to me, there are various degrees of infractions: 1. I expect certain things from women and in turn will give them certain things they expect of me, 2. I expect certain things from women but they have no right to expect certain things of me. 3. I expect certain things from women and they had damn well better do it without complaining (including the contradictory traits of being both stereotypically hot AND frugal), AND they have no right to expect other things of me but I will do them and then complain that I was made to do them. #1 I can live and let live. #2 is annoying, but meh. #3 just, in the words of the famous Peter Griffin, grinds my gears. The fact that you do not find Megan Fox attractive is a moot point. We are talking about statistics here - if the number of men who found Fox attractive was not greater than the number of men who found any girl off the streets attractive, she would not be so successful and famous. It certainly isn't for her extraordinary acting talents, or lovely personality. So there is such a thing as 'stereotypically hot', ie what 'most men find attractive'. And since 'most men find Fox attractive' and 'Fox is attractive in part because she spent a lot of money on it', that renders the OP's generalization 'men find frugal women sexy' as a logical paradox. There was a LOT of work and money spent on transforming that girl that you called ugly into the Fox that was FHM's #1, possibly enough to feed a poor family for decades. It wasn't just braces and a haircut. I was just lazy to argue that point with you earlier since I was under the impression that correcting you partially in that context would be sufficient to prove the point. My mistake. Come on, was that too difficult? =/ You also missed my point where I stated that this isn't about me. I have no personal investment in this matter; I am in a LTR with a good guy who is in love with me, not how I look. I have had little trouble getting the men I wanted, precisely because I sought the minor niche that doesn't go ga-ga over stereotypical hotness. My only care in this matter is that it galls me to let a logical paradox stand unrefuted. Edited May 23, 2011 by Elswyth
Author musemaj11 Posted May 23, 2011 Author Posted May 23, 2011 Makeup only makes you look beautiful from afar. But upclose you will still look ugly if you are ugly.
sanskrit Posted May 23, 2011 Posted May 23, 2011 You couldn't possibly be justifying adult women spending outrageous amounts on luxury beauty aids by some elementary school picture of a celebrity in childhood could you? :lmao: Surely not...
Els Posted May 23, 2011 Posted May 23, 2011 (edited) Neither of you even seemed to read (or at least, if you did, you didn't comprehend) my post, so I don't see a purpose in replying you two. =/ I am not justifying anything; it is the actions of the men who placed Fox and others like her on a pedestal that gives women the impression that it is 'justified'. If a large majority of men salivate at the sight/thought of Mother Teresa, a large majority of women would be giving their earnings to the poor in India instead, believe you me. Edited May 23, 2011 by Elswyth
Recommended Posts