The aquaduct. Or was that Charlotte Crosby?


I'm an all-natural man myself, unless of course there's a good medical reason for someone to have an op. Even tattoos I can admire as works of art but find most of them very strange on the people's bodies. I can't wear a watch or jewellery myself - it feels alien to me, so these young to mid 20s lot doing things to themselves staggers me.


Absolutely, agree with every word

Like most 'movements' feminism was hijacked very early on to debase and basically mess up society, and it's utterly succeeded. Less than a generation on from my youth and all sorts of kinks that we would have shaken our head at in disbelief are apparently the norm, even amongst teens Porn's got an awful lot to do with it

But it's not just women who have suffered. Lots of us men don't like it either, and we're not 'allowed' to say so. Along with the loss of the 'divine feminine' we have a neutered, feminised male class who instead of fulfilling their ancient roles as (hopefully) wise leaders, protectors and providers, are often reduced to flailing around like impotent, petulant men-children.

I was thinking about tattoos too. Without wanting to sound like an old fogie...back in the day somebody who had a sleeve tattoo or a body covered in tattoos had usually built them up over a long period of time, we're talking years, and the tattoos often really meant something to them. These days teens and early twenty somethings seem to get a full sleeve or get half their body or their neck and face done over a few weeks/months to fit in with the latest trend. Made me wonder whether the older generation had a different view of tattoos because in our day they were permanent, they were going to be with you for life. whereas these days youngsters know that they can get them lasered off if they want

There was definitely a different view of tattoos in past years. The only people I knew who had them when I was growing up were some of my working class family from London. My dad got the usual drunken sailors tats in ports in the early 60s. In the 70s he tried the salt rub removals with limited success, and at some point had a then-cutting edge skin graft to remove one from his hand, because it was an absolute no-no for work in those days (and his job was pretty low-level and not interacting with customers!).

These days I'm surprised if I pop to the shops without seeing some - often not very well done - obvious tattoo on someone's arm, chest, or neck etc. And almost all the folks on a poor local estate (not many of whom work) seem to have them

Last BB they all had tattoos I believe. Not most of them, all of them

Playing devil's advocate here, you don't think that an old model of feminism, which was very white and middle class, has to be looked at and updated? As an example, intersectional feminism, which was coined in the 80s, which recognises that not every feminist is white, middle class, cis-gendered and able bodied? And it doesn't reflect on the experiences of all the multi-layered facets in life that women of all backgrounds face. And when it comes to female sexuality, I think that is something that does need to be addressed.

I've read that three times and I still don't understand. Sorry Blanche, can you simplify it for me.

Women need to stop having filler in their 20's, NEVER, EVER improves their looks. Lip fillers never look good.

Marnie has mental issues.

Great post cavalli. Bravo.

I've said as much during the week on this forum.

One can have the same opinion on both genders on the show, and yet, I have found I and other fm's have been accused of sl*t shaming. Nothing at all about what we have said about the male hm's. Conveniently ignored.

Double standards indeed.

Sorry, I repeated myself so I edited it.

It talks about the feminism we know as being very white and middle class and does not reflect the experiences in life that women of all backgrounds face. To quote, 'There is no one-size-fits-all type of feminism".

+1

Gives them a duck mouth, not attractive at all. She's past 20s now Aubrey's is particularly bad which along with her nose job does her no favours.

Pretty surprised to see her before pic (her after pic doesn't look as good today imo):

https://bossip.files.wordpress.com/2...rey3.jpg?w=700

It looks like two different people, some of these women it's like they don't really want to be who they are, they want to look like someone (or something) else.

Thanks Blanche. Understand it now.

No problem, I have tendency to waffle, so I am always editing. I need to edit before I press 'submit'.

Thanks for explaining as I didn't really follow you either

I can't really comment tbh as I haven't followed the history and politics of the movement, just the general thrust and how it's affected society. So all I can say is that you may well have a point

There were injustices and prejudices that needed stamping out, but looking at it today (or even twenty years ago, though nowhere near as extreme) did we as a society go the right way about it? I don't think so. It's affected the behaviour of our young men as well as women. And imo we've set back any chances for women in a lot of other countries too. The West preaches to the rest of the world about our values, our freedoms etc etc etc. And the stricter e.g. Muslim countries look at us, our violent porn culture (increasingly creeping into even mainstream TV), our promiscuity, our children out getting drunk and copulating with strangers in the street, our lack of respect for each other...it's madness.

We all deserve equal respect and protection, no question. Beyond that I feel men and women are different in good ways and those too should be honoured and respected, and partly as a result of 'feminism' as it transpired that is no longer the case

Since that can be said without invoking intersectionality (as you've just shown), is it leaving something important out?

How have we set back their chances?

I was trying to spark up a debate about the waves of feminism having evolved over the years but it came out a little..well, I started going on a tangent I don't know a huge amount, but I try and read about it. So feel free to add!

The discussion came from Marnie's surgeries and, in other threads, Chloe's hyper sexualised behaviour in the house. Dependent on your view, they could be seen as women who have the choice about what what to do with their bodies, and they are empowered. Then there is another view, which is what others were discussing - how, in many ways, this behaviour is actually bringing back sexism in many ways, because these women are being staright-jacked by how they look. The view is that these women, who should promote sexual freedom, turn out to be little more that objects of exploitation (glamour models, pole-dancers, sex workers, etc..)

So, the long standing debate is how do we know what the difference between sexual empowerment and sexual objectification? Some say that power is the distinction. I guess it depends on your perspective.


Also thanks for your reply, nattoyaki.

It's because of the lip fillers. She must have limited feeling in them. They look a bit duck like at certain angles

What is Beauty?

You can tell she has a lot of work done. Her nose is far too chiselled and her lips are ridiculous.

I'm back from my jolly hollies so haven't a clue what's happening on BB - though from a quick read through, it seems I haven't missed much!

Finding this thread fascinating though. Marnie is a very pretty girl. She's clearly had some work done. But she was a very pretty girl before she had the work done.

One thing I often wonder about - do these young people who go in for so much self-alteration realise that, when they have children - perhaps with fellow self-alterers - their children will inherit THEIR features. Not their cookie-cut out a la carte features; their natural features. How weird will it be to see all these families strolling around the park; two perfect parents with button noses, strong chins, saw-like cheekbones and perfectly oval eyes - and their chinless, skew-nosed, dumbo-eared children? Won't it just make those children even more self-loathing when they realise that their parents so loathed what they gave to them that they altered it in themselves?

On the feminism discussion; I'm as dismayed as many others. My ma tells me I came out of the womb a ranting feminist. As a female in a large Irish family, I used to - quite literally - make my brothers beds, wash their dishes and iron their shirts; while they did... well shag all, really. But, and it's a big but, I grew up when a night out was a pair of jeans, a favourite t-shirt and maybe a dab of concealer and mascara. My favourite shoes were my Doc Martens. Then I went a bit pretty boho, but I still kept the Docs.

My daughter's approaching 15. When she goes out for a disco with her friends they start doing their tan, make-up etc. at 4pm. The disco starts at 9 They wear RIDICULOUS clothes. I never make an issue of it - because I don't want to add to the incessant pressures of her Snapchat streaks, or whatever they're called. But I've made it subtly clear to her that a bit of individuality and self-expression that didn't result in hypothermia would make a nice change.

Having said ALL of that (sorry, I've a lot of pent-up DSness after my holiday) my daughter is 40 times more self-confident than I ever was in many ways. She hates things about herself, in the way that 14 year olds 'hate' things about themselves. But she's got genuine friendships with boys that I never had. I think the sexes are more in synch with each other than they used to be and that feminism is and always will be an ongoing challenge; not a battle. We've got to stop making it a battle.

Nice post! Thanks for your input, especially as a parent. And welcome back from your holiday

Teeth nose and eyebrows.

Christ anyone who says she's au natural wants their eyes tested!!!

Although she's a pretty girl, she's always reminded me of a ventriloquist dummy (even before someone put a pic up of one) its the mouth I think, but the fact that her face barely changed when she cried says it all.

lips too - and above lips