Women being nasty/body shaming other women

The image you shared to prove your point was of 3 men, that’s what I based my reply on…?

Are you the journo looking for traffic to her article??? (I’m not being serious before you suggest I’m attacking you and should leave you alone after you started a thread).

It’s true that society pits women against each other, and that many of us have internalised that. But you’re being very judgmental of other women, considering you did it too. You read a comment saying she looked good (not by the journalist you’ve attempted to incite people to contacts btw) and didn’t even entertain the fact that it could be true. You judged her appearance so negatively, that you’re started an entire thread to discuss the fact that no one could possibly genuinely think she looks good!

More than one person has said comment this was relating to. I didn't tag or quote anyone.

I'm also not being nasty. You're now pulling a "I feel so attacked right now" because you've been told by multiple people you were wrong and you're also potentially causing problems for the journo contrary to your "be kind" belief

Why aren't you calling any other poster out? Stop attacking me...

The DM does this all the time, come on. They post unflattering pics of celebs with the faux naivety of 'Looking good!' because they know people (idiots) will fall over themselves to comment on them, but they themselves can't possibly be accused of anything underhand because they've just written something nice and all that. It's part of their brand at this point.

A women's worst enemy is another woman. The most judgmental opinions are from other women. Just like you have done op.

Those headlines directly call attention to the body type of the subject though

This one is about her smiling with her daughter on a trip out.

With a caption on SM, so not by the journo, that is a generic "looking good"

DM do this all the time and it's so bloody obvious I'm surprised posters on here are responding so naively.

The headline is usually something along the lines of "X flaunts her fabulous curves" or "X can barely contain her assets" while using photos of women at unflattering angles/mid conversation/slumped over/face contorted etc.

It's a tactic used to bait people into engaging with their content. Bizarrely people will fall over themselves to point out that the women don't actually look attractive in the photos.

Because you're the one posting all the photos?

Who else would be commenting towards??

Knowing some basic stuff about how things work online doesn't mean I'm in media and what would it matter if I did?

Of course they are having a dig but I think people don’t help themselves when they post very airbrushed photos.

Seeing these photos and going "must be bait" means at least some part of your brain went "she looks a mess and everyone will judge her"

And stop posting open pictures of people's FB accounts....

I agree with you OP, they know what they're doing, all they're worried about is engagement though and don't care.

No
No she's not
She didn't caption on SM
She isn't writing the comments underneath
She probably didn't even pick the photos

Completely agree

I also see it as baiting and they have done this for years. They can’t get away with putting circles over lumps and bumps now so they just leave it open to the comments. It was either the DM or another outlet that published photos of Kim K on the beach (papped) that were really unflattering and although they didn’t say anything in the article, all hell broke loose online about her cellulite.

The women you’re quoting there are supporting her. The men you quoted above aren’t.

I think you are on to something. There is no reason for them to have posted so many photos from so many angles for a trip to the theatre.

There's nothing in that article that is negative about her appearance. It reads like one of those "where are they now?" Articles. However, there are A LOT of photos so the article does seem a bit random.

Am I in another dimension - the Daily Mail has a long history of holding up women to be judged and bodyshamed by posting unflattering photos of them. Just because they have craftily avoided doing that outright in this particular article verbally, they are showing you these photos clearly so you can judge her on her appearance. Because there's no story here, she's literally on a day out with her daughter. But by rigid modern beauty standards that in part upheld by the fucking cesspit that is the media, she is not posed and in an outfit that highlights her body in the way society has deemed 'correct' or 'flattering' and they are using photos where she is mid expression, not smiling etc. What's with all the disingenuous comments pretending that this newspaper has just casually picked these photos, of a C list celebrity, in her private life, because that's newsworthy? I also believe beauty standards are trash, but the Daily Mail do not, so that's why they've posted these - they think she looks bad and they know other people will and that gets them the clicks and the ad revenue. It's not some kind of ultra progressive feminist move to cock your head and act all confused as to what's intended here because you think she looks fine - I do too, but a lot of people won't, and that's what's being sold here. Pretending that exchange hasn't taken place, between the media and it's audience, to make awful people richer, for decades, makes a mockery of the fact we are trying to do better for future generations by not engaging in discourse that will make our daughters think if they look a certain way that's 'good' and anything else is 'bad'
Once again: acknowledging that this woman's photos are being published by this newspaper because they do not meet the 'beauty standards' still lingering in society, in order to make money, does not mean you personally are thinking she looks bad.