U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Fashion and Beauty
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-03-2009, 07:05 PM
 
Location: Indiana
562 posts, read 2,089,566 times
Reputation: 493

Advertisements

I was in the checkout lane today and was met head on by the new issue of Vogue, I guess its the October issue, with Posh Spice on the cover. It was a very edgy photo, of Victoria Beckham looking sidelong at the camera in the sunlight, wearing a bustier with very defined bust cups, which was I think black and white, very sharp and modern, like Gautier or Versace style.

Over the molded bust cups were Beckham's own cups, just like two freshly scooped servings of vanilla ice cream. The sun hi-lighted the exact edge of Posh's scoops against her fatless chest. The overall effect was a shame free exposure of her implanted figure. There was none of the usual efforts to make her look natural or softer.

Are the days of attempting to look natural and surgery free over? Here we have the biggest fashion magazine, which caters to women, not men celebrating the thin with implants physique. Does this , along with the advent of the robotically beautiful Megan Fox, spell the end of natural beauty? If any one can get this image on my post, that would help. I was surprised at this image, was anyone else?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-03-2009, 08:02 PM
 
Location: Oklahoma
620 posts, read 1,589,081 times
Reputation: 414
I haven't seen the picture of Posh that you're talking about, so I can't comment. I'll have to see if I can find it online somewhere. I do have a question, though: What makes Megan Fox robotically beautiful? I'm curious since I know she's an actress, but not much beyond that. Does she have visible implants too or something?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-03-2009, 09:01 PM
 
6,039 posts, read 9,219,724 times
Reputation: 3933
Quote:
Originally Posted by fabumom07 View Post
I was in the checkout lane today and was met head on by the new issue of Vogue, I guess its the October issue, with Posh Spice on the cover. It was a very edgy photo, of Victoria Beckham looking sidelong at the camera in the sunlight, wearing a bustier with very defined bust cups, which was I think black and white, very sharp and modern, like Gautier or Versace style.

Over the molded bust cups were Beckham's own cups, just like two freshly scooped servings of vanilla ice cream. The sun hi-lighted the exact edge of Posh's scoops against her fatless chest. The overall effect was a shame free exposure of her implanted figure. There was none of the usual efforts to make her look natural or softer.

Are the days of attempting to look natural and surgery free over? Here we have the biggest fashion magazine, which caters to women, not men celebrating the thin with implants physique. Does this , along with the advent of the robotically beautiful Megan Fox, spell the end of natural beauty? If any one can get this image on my post, that would help. I was surprised at this image, was anyone else?
I know the photo of which you speak, and yes it is quite obvious that she has implants. As far as it being "acceptable"? Well, when you have as much money and fame as Posh, you can do what you want and damn the torpedoes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-03-2009, 11:06 PM
 
1,367 posts, read 4,978,569 times
Reputation: 867
I don't know that they've ever been "unacceptable." Depending on the type of implant/surgery, they frequently look like that... it's just that your average woman doesn't show as much skin as often and probably isn't that thin.

Personally, I don't think there's anything wrong with it. I have a friend who's implants/body are very similar to Victoria Beckhams. She eats pretty healthy, but isn't obsessed or anything, and no matter what she did would never have much fat on her chest to make implants look more natural. Before she had them done, she really couldn't wear very many clothes without massive alterations, looking boyish, or wearing icky padded bras.... if I were her I'd do it too even if they didn't look natural!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2009, 10:32 AM
 
Location: Indiana
562 posts, read 2,089,566 times
Reputation: 493
I probably should have said are visible implants suddenly "fashionable", in a world where anything can be corrected with airbrushing, I was surprised to see an implant line so visible on the top fashion magazine in the world. I am not saying there is anything wrong with it on an individual , but it seems to me that the standard of beauty is getting harder and harder to achieve without surgery. And that now the hallmarks of surgery have become fashionable instead of something to play down.

I have read that Megan Fox, who is so gorgeous its unreal and has oversize lips , implants on a model thin frame, is beating out other beauties for lead roles despite her mediocre talent. Her look is not attainable for any woman, even Angelina Jolie!

I am not criticising the photo on Vogue, Posh looks gorgeous and we all know she has implants . But does any one else see this as a significant shift in the recent history of fashion, which unlike pop media and p@rn, sets the tone for taste and style? I believe our society is changing to where a beautiful woman is no longer naturally possible, but an impossible combo of cheekbones, lip augments, hair weave, thinness, and bre@st implants. Computer enhanced beauty, like a video game heroine . Thats my humble opinion, anyhow......does anyone else see it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2009, 12:04 PM
 
23,964 posts, read 31,184,409 times
Reputation: 28620
I've not seen the photo. But I've seen a ton of pics where the implants were pushed up so high it was impossible to not know what they were. I don't think that's anything new, but I wouldn't say that that means it's "fashionable" either. I think some people are just more critical than others, and some simply don't care. Remember the gal on Survivor a couple of years ago? Commentary on her (awful) implants was all over the internet.


But check THIS out...

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/po...-cover/479744/
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2009, 12:07 PM
 
8,415 posts, read 34,366,931 times
Reputation: 6197
Well I can tell you it is a lot easier to digitally edit a photo than to just take a good photo. I do not thing there are any great photographers out there that do ad/commerical work these days. I think posh's line is kinda her "thing" of hyper processed beauty. I don't know why she would not go fully under the muscle and pick a shaped implant instead of the ball shaped ones...

If you want to see a cool cover and more natural looking type photos pick a "W"
I just am flipping through the covers from them and there is a lot more natural type covers. One even show's Kate Moss's freckles. They did a beautiful cover last nov(ithink) of angelina jolie nursing and a follow up headshot of brad pitt that was so textured and lovely. You could see every pore and wrinkle in brad's face. There is another cover that looks just strait up 60's with a model/lighting.

So that being said...hyper processed beauty is dying out I think. One of the trends for fall is long loose waves and curls. Rejection of structure and stick strait styles. Just get a "W" and a "Nylon" instead and know real is out there! Even Tyra took out her fake hair!

Or an implant free beauty Miranda Kerr. I do not think she had anything done at all and have a different looking face that is pretty. I think Megan Fox looks pretty obtainable if you get your hair done at the salon and workout. There were nude shots of her filming Jennifer's body and she looked almost chunky because of being short and pale. The secret to a lot of these perfect people is in the people shooting them and the personal stylists. I mean..just think about how much better people look on make-over shows and that is without the weeks of dieting and working out!

I love making people over....so I think anyone can be looking pretty alright as long as they have a decent set of teeth. Everthing else can be styled around.

I kinda think what is different from now compared to what I remember/have seen from 70's beauty and up is that now there are more types of looks that are beautiful. And they are bringing more ethinic beauty of all types into mainstream commercial looks.

I was watching an older James Bond film (moore - octopussy) on tv the other night...Those bond girls would be harder to try to look like than posh. A lot of them were natural looking.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2009, 03:38 PM
 
Location: Indiana
562 posts, read 2,089,566 times
Reputation: 493
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChessieMom View Post
I've not seen the photo. But I've seen a ton of pics where the implants were pushed up so high it was impossible to not know what they were. I don't think that's anything new, but I wouldn't say that that means it's "fashionable" either. I think some people are just more critical than others, and some simply don't care. Remember the gal on Survivor a couple of years ago? Commentary on her (awful) implants was all over the internet.


But check THIS out...

Posh goes under the knife for Vogue cover

Wow, if that's true , that Posh had her implants reduced, its very ironic that the cover shot showcased them to that point. Sounds like maybe everyone was looking for some publicity! And here I am falling for it!


Pitt, I am sure you are much more aware of high fashion magazines than I am. I only look at Vogue, Bazaar and other magazines that end up in Midwestern grocery stores. And usually just the cover. I usually splurge on the Fall fashion issue. But I did not want to purchase that issue because I really don't want to spend $5 or $6 and make Vogue think that's what women want to look like.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2009, 05:37 PM
 
8,415 posts, read 34,366,931 times
Reputation: 6197
I subscribe. Its so much cheaper.
But W's site:
Wmagazine.com

Almost 40 cover model Uma T. this month

Cover examples:
Magazine: Wmagazine.com

I love that magazine.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2009, 07:49 PM
 
Location: CA
3,469 posts, read 6,943,960 times
Reputation: 4779
Yes, I noticed it and thought it looked awful also. I think we all need to write to Vogue :P

It's not fashionable to have bolted on boobs though....the fashion industry usually frowns on implants, at least very obvious ones. Designers usually prefer smaller busts. I think that's just what she looks like, and only so much can be done to obscure it.

It's harder to edit photos to look natural than you might imagine. The photo you start with makes all the difference. I imagine the Vogue staffers just said "she wants to look like a mannequin, well then let's show her that way".

It's sad because I think she was very pretty when more "natural" (not sickly thin with fake boobs). I don't know why people go and mess with themselves like that....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Fashion and Beauty
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top