Well, look at Jo O'Meara!! :sleep: The years haven't exactly been kind to her either....
She was never a stunner in the first place. No, i think it's the ones who were pretty/ beautiful who suffer most from ageing process. Must be hard to be sexy young beaty with pick of men, then fast forward 10 years and suddenly the same men who would have killed their granny to bed you are now saying 'Rachel Stevens? A bit too old now. Droopy tits maybe. Give me Keely Hazel and Lucy Pinder!'
I never understood the fuss about Rachel's looks. Sure, she's pretty, but not jaw droppingly beautiful like some people(mainly the media, I guess) made her out to be.
Tina (the dark haired one) and Hannah (the little blonde one who's now in Primeval) are both better looking than Rachel. Jo was the voice that carried the band.
How any girl with as dumpy and out of proportion a body and flat, frying pan smacked face as Rachel can be considered "fit" or "hot" is incomprehensible.
[/B]
Am i getting mixed up or was she at one point hired by Pretty Polly to model their tights?
No disrespect to all you petite girls out there but i always thought tights were advertised by tall leggy models.
Rachel can't be more than 5"4 most.
I don't know if she was or wasn't hired by Pretty Polly.
Anyway, nice legs are nice legs. As long as their width is in proportion to their length and the calf and thigh shape is right, the length is immaterial.
Christina and Kylie are both barely 5'1" and have great legs. Tina Turner is 5'4" and her legs are legendary (no pun intended )
Rachel however has chunky legs. I doubt they would consider her leg model material.
I think she's extremely pretty, OK, not the most flattering photo. But I think she's very attractive and always thought she was quite classy and elegant. You never see her going out without her underwear. Any interview I've seen her in, be it along time ago, she was always well spoken and polite and sweet. I dunno why people dislike her so much?
Comments
Maybe the Jap paedo crowd may love her in Japan ...lol (Max Clifford "Get the old St Trinians gear on !")
Talking of height .. Adele Silva is allegedly 5'1 3/4" on her site. I bumped into her in Starbucks last year, and she can't have been over 5'.
Like a lot of men, these celebs do tend to add the odd inch
Anyway, she'll always be hot to me :]
She is not the fresh faced SClub 7 babe that's for sure. She could easily pass for a 37 year old divorced socalled 'yummy mummy' in that pic
Tiny milf you mean when drunk ..lol
She was never a stunner in the first place. No, i think it's the ones who were pretty/ beautiful who suffer most from ageing process. Must be hard to be sexy young beaty with pick of men, then fast forward 10 years and suddenly the same men who would have killed their granny to bed you are now saying 'Rachel Stevens? A bit too old now. Droopy tits maybe. Give me Keely Hazel and Lucy Pinder!'
i read an article where she demanded stuff from an aeroplane and she was ALL like "Do u know who i am"
Sadley they didnt
Rachel Stevens hasn't done anything of note for years.
Tina (the dark haired one) and Hannah (the little blonde one who's now in Primeval) are both better looking than Rachel. Jo was the voice that carried the band.
How any girl with as dumpy and out of proportion a body and flat, frying pan smacked face as Rachel can be considered "fit" or "hot" is incomprehensible.
I don't know if she was or wasn't hired by Pretty Polly.
Anyway, nice legs are nice legs. As long as their width is in proportion to their length and the calf and thigh shape is right, the length is immaterial.
Christina and Kylie are both barely 5'1" and have great legs. Tina Turner is 5'4" and her legs are legendary (no pun intended
Rachel however has chunky legs. I doubt they would consider her leg model material.
I saw her in M&S and she was the same height as my friend who's 5'2".
Their management and/or PR can easily get them invites. A lot of these invites aren't sent out spontaneously, they are requested.
She looks orange.
She has turned into Pia Zadora.
I add 2 inches.