superfoxes of the 21st century you are so sexolicious but wot about the music man, the music?

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
in her hott new video, leanne rhimes looks like they've fed her nothing but raw oysters and viagara for ladies for the last four years and i got no problem with that but can the ugly still get a shake in this hypersexualized environment?

have pop stars gotten "better looking" due to advancements in hair-plug/make-up/surgery etc (eg they're actually normal-to-ug folks like us underneath it all but enhanced thru tricks of the trade [and if it is all smoke & mirrors, will pop star sex appeal trickle down to ordinary folks eventually, like colour televisions & college educations and other treats formerly only availablke to the moneyed?])

OR

are the ugly-but-talented being kept out of the bizness by nefarious forces

OR

is it same old same old, nothing to worry about?

could ric ocasek today have become the star he certainly deserves to be?

Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Wednesday, 4 December 2002 00:28 (twenty-two years ago)

presuming ric ocasek was an unknown today i mean - lots of uglies are already made men, grandfather-claused into fame but youthful talent are expected to have star-powered cheekbones these days

Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Wednesday, 4 December 2002 00:33 (twenty-two years ago)

now i just want to say that i dont endorse the popular misconception that superfoxiness inhibits any ability (this may be due to my own superfoxiness however), only that i hope the normals are not being denied their shots at glory

Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Wednesday, 4 December 2002 00:41 (twenty-two years ago)

(sub-question: anyone else feel biologically maladaptive for finding most superfoxes - m&f - hideously repulsive?)

jones (actual), Wednesday, 4 December 2002 01:40 (twenty-two years ago)

hey hey hey! we have feelings you know

Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Wednesday, 4 December 2002 01:43 (twenty-two years ago)

It always confuses me that pop stars aren't *better* looking, if it's all so dependent on looks. I think with pop stars in particular, their looks are part of a broader context - most of these kids seem to have come off some child talent quest circuit where the parents push them obsessively to make names for themselves (surely the preponderance of Mickey Mouse Club members is not merely a cosmic joke). Obviously good looks are important if the kids want to have any staying power at that sort of game, but I bet it's the parents' networking that really counts in the jump from talent quest to pop single.

This is why Popstars as a phenomenon makes so much sense to me - the "ordinary people becoming pop stars" angle only works if you believe that the good looking, competently singing/dancing finalists who make the cut are actually different to the "real" pop stars. The difference is that Popstars the show is an isolated experience; the "real" pop stars have probably been effectively competing in Popstars their entire lives. The "judged on their merit (according to chartpop values)" philosophy behind Popstars is in some ways a democratisation of the real process, allowing the contestants to basically walk out of their "other" lives and straight into the heart of the machine.

Tim Finney (Tim Finney), Wednesday, 4 December 2002 07:38 (twenty-two years ago)

one word: photoshop

geeta (geeta), Wednesday, 4 December 2002 08:42 (twenty-two years ago)

I can photoshop nearly anyone into perfection.

Melissa W (Melissa W), Wednesday, 4 December 2002 08:49 (twenty-two years ago)

nelly furtado complained recently that her head had appeared on someone else's body in maxim (or maybe blender)

Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Wednesday, 4 December 2002 14:03 (twenty-two years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.