Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
 [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 06-19-2013, 10:11 PM
 
2,096 posts, read 4,749,078 times
Reputation: 1272

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Listener2307 View Post
You are kidding, right?
I mean more like pre-1920 or so. The 40s-50s-60s was more like today.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-19-2013, 10:11 PM
 
Location: Lower east side of Toronto
10,567 posts, read 12,761,719 times
Reputation: 9398
Quote:
Originally Posted by Listener2307 View Post
I don't know when she's talking about!

Belmont!....What period are you talking about?

This one?
That is not a masculine woman...It appears to be from the great depression era...This is worn down and strained human being...if you look closely she is attractive and has beauty - but her face is scared from a hard life.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-19-2013, 10:40 PM
 
31,387 posts, read 36,899,935 times
Reputation: 15037
Quote:
Originally Posted by Basiliximab View Post
I think she's talking about prior to that, like turn of the century or before that. Perhaps some of it has to do with how there were no hormonal replacements,
Say what?!?!?

Ok fine, let's go back to the 19th century


Anne Held




Lillie Langtree

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-19-2013, 10:57 PM
 
10,219 posts, read 19,095,917 times
Reputation: 10880
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto View Post
Say what?!?!?

Ok fine, let's go back to the 19th century


Anne Held
But to be fair, give him a good waxing and a corset like that, and Brad Pitt would look similar :-)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-19-2013, 11:19 PM
 
Location: Parts Unknown, Northern California
48,564 posts, read 23,968,969 times
Reputation: 21237
Quote:
Originally Posted by Retroit View Post
[*]During the early photography era, posers for photographs didn't smile because 1. they had to hold their expression for the longer-timed exposures and 2. it hadn't become common to smile...so people look more serious (masculine). Also black and white photography can give people a harsher (more masculine) appearance.[/list]
3) Dentistry was still in the frontier stages. The first dental college was founded in Baltimore in 1840, the second didn't appear until one opened in Philadelphia in 1863. Licensing didn't start until the end of the 19th Century. In the early age of photography, teeth were generally not a good feature for most people. A noted exception was Teddy Roosevelt who appears to have had around 240 teeth.

4) When photography first appeared, people thought of it as mechanical portraits, much the way the first cars were horseless carriages. The tradition in formal portraits was to convey the gravitas of the subject, and that was carried over into early photography.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2013, 10:00 AM
 
Location: Right were I should be!
1,081 posts, read 1,641,822 times
Reputation: 1126
I think it has more to do with what is considered an attractive trait for the time period. What we consider feminine now is not what was desirable for females 200 years ago. They wanted sturdy, capable women with breeding hips who could take care of themselves and the children. Now it appears that wispy figures and symmetrical faces are in demand. That which is found attractive is what is breeding, so....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2013, 11:18 AM
 
3,695 posts, read 4,960,337 times
Reputation: 2069
That is rather a complex question as what is considered sexy can vary over time and what clothing need to do and what is appropriated to wear to what can varry over time(i.e. Blue Jeans were around in the 19th Centuary as work clothes but they were not fashsionable till the 70ies).

For instance in the 1900 it was the hour glass shape forcedby the corset. In the 1920’s it was the flat boyish figure. In the 20ies and 30ies women began to wear trousers or the first time(or at least in modern times) driven by Katharine Hepburn. Women raided their closets and put on their husband’s trousers! Make up was worn sparingly till the 20ies. In the 20ies it was young flappers pulled out their compacts(invent that decade) and put on make up in public(a shocking flaunting of previous socal normals!).

Anyway for the 80ies it was all about the shoulder pads. It was called power dressing. The shoulder pads were meant to help women appear to be more assertive this spilled over into all women’s wear. Basically in the 80ies women not only have entered the workforce heavily but are attempting to get to positions of power(i.e. someone’s boss). Sure women have worked before the 80ies but very few were in a position of leadership or attempting to get there that is what drives 80ies fashion.

Last edited by chirack; 06-20-2013 at 11:54 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2013, 12:18 PM
 
31,387 posts, read 36,899,935 times
Reputation: 15037
Quote:
Originally Posted by Siobjuan View Post
I think it has more to do with what is considered an attractive trait for the time period. What we consider feminine now is not what was desirable for females 200 years ago.
Sorry but I'm not buying it.

Alexandros of Antioch's 130 BCE depiction of Aphrodite the goddess of love and beauty is as contemporary as any depiction of the female ideal outside of the anorexic look of today which in the light of history has to be seen as a cultural outlier.

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2013, 05:01 PM
 
Location: Alaska
3,146 posts, read 4,055,706 times
Reputation: 5470
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oleg Bach View Post
That is not a masculine woman...It appears to be from the great depression era...This is worn down and strained human being...if you look closely she is attractive and has beauty - but her face is scared from a hard life.
True, she is worn down and strained but I'm still not seeing the attractiveness and beauty. Perhaps, you prefer a harsher, manlier-looking woman but to each his own. I think this is a good example of what belmont22 is referring to and I have to agree with her/him (sorry, I don't know your sex).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2013, 05:44 PM
 
31,387 posts, read 36,899,935 times
Reputation: 15037
Author, author...author the audience cries for the author.... but not in a good way.
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 > History

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top