Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Chat

Join the discussion and chat with other Mumsnetters about everyday life, relationships and parenting.

Talented 'ugly' people now replaced by pathetic 'beautiful' people

21 replies

BareWallsNoMore · 18/01/2025 12:53

Anyone notice how gradually talented, not necessarily attractive people are being shoved out the way in favour of 'beautiful' (and I use that word loosely) vacuous people.

It started when I kept spending an an odd half hour here and there watching you tube clips of old TOTP shows. Now even allowing for changing trends and fashions and haircuts etc I noticed that in the seventies and first half of eighties the performers were not necessarily attractive (some where) but they all generally had talent and character. So think for example Phil Collins. I doubt anyone would say that a short, balding, overweight man was attractive but most would say he has talent. Alot of the performers are just dressed in jeans and tshirt (so not giving a hoot about image it was all about the music). Then from the late eighties onwards it became manufactured bands and pretty people. Not saying some of those songs weren't catchy because they were but generally the trend became towards attractive people singing songs others had wrote with a well honed image. Obviously bands like Coldplay etc don't fall into this.

Then Strictly come Dancing. If you go back to the very first season (which I loved) it was much lower standard of dancing with more real people. I stopped watching it after a few years when I noticed they were replacing the older professional dancers with very young model like dancers. Even the female older judges were not immune to being replaced (too old, not pretty enough). The difference between season 1 and now is like night and day. Also it was quieter with less shrieking and attention seeking.

Then I move onto women and their careers. I was leaving school in the eighties and women were very much starting to have careers rather than jobs and go to uni. A few had moved into male dominated industries like engineering and were been taken seriously. Still a long way to go but a start. Inspiring women in the media were the likes of Anita Roddick. Now I feel like it is all going horribly wrong. Yes there are still successful woman achieving great things but it all seems to be getting overshadowed by these silly, shallow 'influencers' and only fans people. I'm starting to feel ashamed of my gender. These woman of low moral values are making woman in general be seen as move vunerable and worth less consideration and respect. Again 'pretty' people are getting famous for wearing the right clothes, having the right hair, pouting alot and recommending products by other people. I find it all horribly depressing like the human race is destroying itself.

Finally on the topic of porn (slightly off topic as not so much about pretty people but about society going down hill). I know quite alot about this as I had a long term partner who was addicted to porn (this was twenty years ago by the way when internet porn has been around for a few years). I didn't really want to go down the porn wormhole but I did. Partly to try and understand and partly to try and help him (I couldn't and we broke up eventually). Even then the porn out there was just shocking. It was like any topic or subject you could think about, someone had made a video on it. There were videos on matters that just seem to strip females of their dignity and privacy (one a woman showing you her period blood on a pad (WTF), videos with lactating women (a big fantasy with some men it seems), a woman walking on taking a shit and walking off (seriously). I mean these videos were not in any way 'sexy' or 'pretty' they were just degrading for women. Plus a scary insight into what men want to look at.
I actually found it frightening what some of them contained. For point of reference I went into the 'vintage' porn sections to see what they contained. Now apart from the funny hairstyles and moustaches etc the videos were definately more about actual sex, contained far more what I would call normal sex and quite alot of them actually showed what would be normal foreplay for most people with the female getting pleasured. I realise now that as a teen in the eighties men giving woman oral sex was the new big thing (thankfully) and so all my boyfriends growing up wanted to do this. Now I despair at all this anal sex, choking, slapping, spitting. I mean this is not about sex anymore this is violence and degradation. I am so glad I grew up when I did with real music, talented people getting recognition, men courting women and treating them with respect and marrying them, women getting recognition in the workforce for their brains and talent and not just the size of their breasts.

Now I know I have generalised in some areas. For example in the seventies and early eighties woman were treated like pretty little airheads more in the workforce and nude calenders were commonplace. Gameshows on tvs had the trolley dollys (Play your cards right with Bruce) and we had Benny Hill smut to contend with. Even though alot of that was in your face and probably didn't potray women that well, there was an innocence to it that seems to be lost now.
Men would date you and 'try it on' and you would slap them away, be horrified and they would be most apologetic to your fact at least. Now I worry so much about what are men will be like in twenty years. When I am an old woman, the males of our society will have been brought up on a diet of violent porn, only fans and the like. That makes me feel very very vunerable and scared even now in my fifties and terrified for older me.
I remember giving up my seat on buses for old people or pregnant woman when I was a child and there did just seem to be much more care for each other and kindness in general.

Anyway I have kind of veered of topic from where I started but I am just feeling more and more uneasy with so much of society nowadays. I am very glad my best days are behind me and feel very lucky to have grown up in the eighties and nineties when houses were cheap and plentiful, places were less crowded, people seemed to be more considerate and kind, talented people were famous and people behaving in a poor manner where frowned upon and felt pressure to improve their behaviour. I even miss people dressing smartly and being slim.
And don't get me started on fillers, botox, plastic surgery. I love seeing how natural the movie stars etc were in the older stuff. Yes they were beautiful but natural. Hardly anyone had big boobs or whatever else women are getting done (butt lifts apparantely). I don't even think woman with all that stuff in their face in their twenties looks good. They look older, harder, less innocent,less sweet and fresh faced. I'm sure there are lots of natural young girls out there but there are lots who look ridiculous.

Anyway sorry if I have depressed everyone and again I know I have generalised and it does not apply to every band/person/man.

Love to hear what everyone else thinks

OP posts:
PinkArt · 18/01/2025 13:22

I'm not sure Strictly holds up as an example. It is more tits and teeth than when it started, but still casts plenty of 'real' people.
Series 1 winners were Brendan (28) and Natasha (32). The most recent series were Dianne (35) and Chris (47). Shirley is 64, Arlene was 61 for the first series. Arlene's contract not being renewed was a terrible bit of sexism and ageism but thankfully the balance has now been rectified and there are two women on the panel, both extremely experienced in ballroom and Latin.

littleburn · 18/01/2025 13:25

I'm a similar age to you OP (very late 40s), so a teenager in the late 80s/early 90s. You cover quite a lot in your post, but I do get what you're saying, particularly about being a young woman. Life wasn't perfect then, but it felt a better time to be a young woman in many ways compared to now. Opportunities were really opening up, but without the pressures of social media and nowhere near the constant focus on women having to be hot and fuckable to have value.

I think your comments about porn are very on point. I'm so grateful I was young at a time where lads were, frankly, enormously grateful to even be having sex with you. Extreme sex acts weren't expected and female pleasure seemed much more central to their understanding of what good sex should be like.

I work with a lot of younger women and when I've voiced similar views they look at me in horror. 'But marital rape was legal until 1991' is a common response to any suggestion that things were in any way better then than now. It's ... interesting. What I've observed is that my feminism is very different to their sex positive/nudity is liberating/sex work is work feminism. Things that I feel are a step backwards they are completely blind too. I think they've been hoodwinked into a 'feminism' that benefits men, they think I'm a Victorian pearl clutcher.

Obviously I'm not saying things were perfect then. It's very complex and nuanced and (as with the marital rape example) I think legally women are in a much better place today. But socially and culturally in many ways it feels things are worse.

Hanto · 18/01/2025 13:33

I think you’re conflating too many things. No argument on the normalisation of sexual violence in porn - that is a genuinely appalling development. But women in the workforce are in a far better place now than they were in the 80s and 90s in terms of equality legislation, the pay gap, workplace sexual harassment etc. (Divorce and abortion were not legal in my home country when I was an undergraduate, either! ) I don’t think the real workplace advances have been altered by the advance of airhead influencer culture. I’m considerably more worried as a fifty something about the erosion of the ‘women’ as a legal category.

BareWallsNoMore · 18/01/2025 22:49

littleburn · 18/01/2025 13:25

I'm a similar age to you OP (very late 40s), so a teenager in the late 80s/early 90s. You cover quite a lot in your post, but I do get what you're saying, particularly about being a young woman. Life wasn't perfect then, but it felt a better time to be a young woman in many ways compared to now. Opportunities were really opening up, but without the pressures of social media and nowhere near the constant focus on women having to be hot and fuckable to have value.

I think your comments about porn are very on point. I'm so grateful I was young at a time where lads were, frankly, enormously grateful to even be having sex with you. Extreme sex acts weren't expected and female pleasure seemed much more central to their understanding of what good sex should be like.

I work with a lot of younger women and when I've voiced similar views they look at me in horror. 'But marital rape was legal until 1991' is a common response to any suggestion that things were in any way better then than now. It's ... interesting. What I've observed is that my feminism is very different to their sex positive/nudity is liberating/sex work is work feminism. Things that I feel are a step backwards they are completely blind too. I think they've been hoodwinked into a 'feminism' that benefits men, they think I'm a Victorian pearl clutcher.

Obviously I'm not saying things were perfect then. It's very complex and nuanced and (as with the marital rape example) I think legally women are in a much better place today. But socially and culturally in many ways it feels things are worse.

Thanks for understanding. Yes I do get of course that some things were worse. Like you say marital rape. That one did not affect me as I would have only been a teenager still in 1991 and definately not married. In fact before you pointed it out I had probably forgotten all about it.

I think it just feels there is an awful lot of threads on mumsnet recently about these awful 2 onlyfans 'stars' and their exploits with 100/1000 men. I just wonder if men are not laughing their heads off at how things are going for women now. I mean they used to have to get married to get sex (in sixties say), then they could have sex before marriage but they had to court a girl, treat her well, meet her parents etc but they did get sex before marriage. Now wayhay they log onto a computer and match with someone to meet with to get a leg over. I know lots of young women defend their right to have sex like men etc but my own experience backs up that for women sex means emotional attachment and so casual sex is way more hurtful, dangerous and emotional for women.

The threads on mumsnet about a women who has slept with a man and then waits anxiously thinking she has been ghosted seem to happen fairly regularly and I can't imagine a bloke going I got my leg over last night jeez i hope she phones me today. Never mind I'll have a nice bath, ring my friends and talk about it.

My mum was a SAHM. Nothing else was expected of her. She ruled the roost though. It was her way or the high way. My dad at one point had 2 jobs and was out of the house for really long days and evenings. My mum meanwhile did the housework, met neighbours for coffee, dealt with the kids. My dad might have been in charge of the money coming in but no way was he in charge of the big decisions. I look now at young women now 'having it all' and think wait a minute - now they are doing all these things, plus working full time and you see thread after thread of women who are exhausted, burnt out and resentful. The trouble is a vast number of modern men fully expect women to work now and are/would be hugely resentful if they didn't. That's of course if it is even feasible financially to do so. Now I absolutely get that my mum would have actually not been able to do alot of things herself without my dad but her life just seemed so easy and carefree compared to today's struggle. I think for woman who married a good, reliable, honest man their quality of life was actually pretty good. Obviously if you got stuck with a wife beater then yes you were up shit creek.

I say all this as someone who is now retired, who went to uni and had a career and worked long hours. My life seemed much more difficult and tiring than the life my mum had. For most woman they don't actually have a choice anymore - they have to work whether they want to or not (and raise the kids and do the housework)

I just wonder if women's rights to have it all or have a choice has not backfired.

For me it seems that the nineties and perhaps early 2000's were a sweet spot for women. Sex was still respectful and good. Women had decent rights for careers etc. There was none of this bullshit woman who are actually men. There probably were awful creatures like the onlyfans idiots of 1000 men but they must have been rarer or nobody knew about them. Girls at school were aspiring to be lawyers, doctors, engineers, accountants. I just feel it has all gone horribly wrong since then

I am just finding the constant threads of disrespectful dating, porn addicted men, woman burnt out working and doing housework/mental load, young woman ruining their faces with filler, botox etc utterly depressing. Not to mention all these men pretending to be women so in our changing rooms etc and these awful women having sex with 1000 men. Go girl power (not!)

Life you my ideas of feminism are very different to what these youngsters seem to think it is.

Sorry I know my thread has covered alot of areas but hey ho isn't that the beauty of mumsnet.

OP posts:
CheeseQuiche · 18/01/2025 22:52

Bruce Forsyth and anal sex in the same post. Never thought I'd see the day.

BareWallsNoMore · 18/01/2025 22:58

PinkArt · 18/01/2025 13:22

I'm not sure Strictly holds up as an example. It is more tits and teeth than when it started, but still casts plenty of 'real' people.
Series 1 winners were Brendan (28) and Natasha (32). The most recent series were Dianne (35) and Chris (47). Shirley is 64, Arlene was 61 for the first series. Arlene's contract not being renewed was a terrible bit of sexism and ageism but thankfully the balance has now been rectified and there are two women on the panel, both extremely experienced in ballroom and Latin.

Ah thanks for posting that. I have to admit I stopped watching it quite a few years ago. Probably after Arlene got the boot. I also remember their was a dancer called Karen who won it with Mark Ramprakash. I thought they were great and I really liked Karen who seemed really smart, down to earth and a good dancer too. Not long after that she got the boot for being 'too old'. I think at that point I was just disgusted with what was happening. I mean she won the competition so how was she too old? Oh right she wasn't 'hot' enough or 'young' enough or 'sexy' enough. Never mind the fact she was a really great dancer and teacher.

If things have improved since then I am very glad to hear it (maybe a big proportion of the female viewers stopped watching it in protest so they had to do something)

OP posts:
BareWallsNoMore · 18/01/2025 23:09

Hanto · 18/01/2025 13:33

I think you’re conflating too many things. No argument on the normalisation of sexual violence in porn - that is a genuinely appalling development. But women in the workforce are in a far better place now than they were in the 80s and 90s in terms of equality legislation, the pay gap, workplace sexual harassment etc. (Divorce and abortion were not legal in my home country when I was an undergraduate, either! ) I don’t think the real workplace advances have been altered by the advance of airhead influencer culture. I’m considerably more worried as a fifty something about the erosion of the ‘women’ as a legal category.

Sorry. Yes I did throw rather alot in my post didn't I.

Yes I feel like the late nineties, early 2000's were a sweet spot for women.

Since then I feel like we are being eroded or stuffed down. The whole men who are now woman is awful and the trend of young girls wanting to be 'influencers' or 'only fans' is just a real backwards step. I mean some of them are really rich but where is their dignity, their achievement, their striving to progress.

I do feel men's respect for us has gone down and we are regressing in terms of not being respected or listened to or taken seriously.

I have a really great hairdresser. She cuts hair well, she is most welcoming and pleasant and I enjoy going to her. However she looks utterly ridiculous. She is early thirties and has huge blow up lips and her face just looks distorted. This kind of shit is not good for us. Anyway I digress again.

OP posts:
BareWallsNoMore · 18/01/2025 23:11

CheeseQuiche · 18/01/2025 22:52

Bruce Forsyth and anal sex in the same post. Never thought I'd see the day.

yes that does sound quite funny when you say it like that.

Mind you after that newscaster Hew what's his name nothing would surprise me anymore.

OP posts:
CheeseQuiche · 18/01/2025 23:16

BareWallsNoMore · 18/01/2025 23:11

yes that does sound quite funny when you say it like that.

Mind you after that newscaster Hew what's his name nothing would surprise me anymore.

We'll not see him on our screens again.

As for 2000s being peak times, hard to say. That was peak lads mag era and ladettes.

Nikitaspearlearring · 18/01/2025 23:28

I am the same sort of age as you, OP, and I agree with your title, that celebs now are easy on the eye but dim. Celebrity versions of Mastermind and Pointless are really dumbed down. Then there's House of Games, where a historian TV presenter couldn't find Egypt on a map of the Mediterranean area and put it in Morocco.
But something else - back in the day, Terry Wogan had a chat show and he had some really interesting guests - ordinary people as well as celebs. I remember one woman (British) who was blind, and had lived in the Amazon jungle (I think) with her DH, but he had got ill and died. Anyway she had found her way out of there, and came onto the show to tell her mind-blowing story. And the equivalent we have now is Graham Norton and an endless parade of airheads promoting forgettable films.

Nikitaspearlearring · 18/01/2025 23:30

And also the lauding of people like Cher as great singers when they are auto tuned to hell.

NCembarassed · 18/01/2025 23:31

I agree with so many of your points.

Re feminism now, I despair of many teens at the moment. I work with teenagers as my job (and love it), but at times they do come out with some interesting thoughts. Their sexual boundaries are non-existent, and what they consider normal terrifies me. I'd love to be more ignorant about that, but they love to talk loudly about their sex lives.

There's a total lack of desire to be independent. It's all "Daddy will sort it", or "I don't need to learn that (v.v.basic financial stuff), I'll have a man/husband who'll do that" - some very close to literally saying 'I don't have to worry my tiny Lady brain about that'.

My students are great in many ways, but I find this attitude very frustrating. I have a DC in late teens, who gets frustrated her friends can't even change a light bulb - they tell her it's for Daddy (or mum's boyf) to do. DD routinely changes lightbulbs/fittings/lightshades. She is epic.

From what I see/hear they have no interest in feminism or how it can benefit them. We fit in the same lazy tropes/stereotypes there were about lesbians back in the 80s eg feminists are all unfashionable/loud/short-haired/fat/shrill/sexually frustrated. Back in the 80s the feminists I knew (and those I follow now) are undeniably cool. Wtf happened?

SprinkleOfSunak · 18/01/2025 23:40

I completely agree OP. I’ve had enough of it all. I was disgusted to hear about Bonnie Blue the other day and the number of people she’d shagged in such as short space of time (over 1000) and all to become more famous!

When a true talented star dies, I have noticed in the last few years that even if I wasn’t a huge fan or know much about them, I mourn their loss and despair more and more about the current and the future as there do not seem to be many talented people making it through and becoming successful anymore. I find it very sad and depressing.

Even on tv I notice more and more that when a successful/well known presenter leaves, that their shoes just cannot be filled and we either end up with a succession of presenters, or a group of them who take it in turns to present, or they do so in groups instead. Countdown is one example after Richard Whiteley’s death, and then Pointless after Richard Osman left they’ve had all manner of people presenting and in my opinion none of them are on a par with him for his knowledge, or just for being genuinely lovely and down to earth. Match of the Day has recently announced a team of presenters who will replace Gary Lineker. It’s like they don’t bother anymore to try and find one solitary individual who can do a job really well.

BareWallsNoMore · 19/01/2025 00:00

CheeseQuiche · 18/01/2025 23:16

We'll not see him on our screens again.

As for 2000s being peak times, hard to say. That was peak lads mag era and ladettes.

Yes it was and whilst they were quite smutty those lads mags they seem so innocent in comparison to the violent internet porn are men are watching now.

OP posts:
TheAverageJoanne · 19/01/2025 00:08

What a thought provoking thread. I agree with so much of what you say.

Shows like Traitors are really only a vehicle for someone to become "famous" That woman called Diane who stuffs herself in everything, and another contestant is on Dancing on Ice. Same with footballers wives.

BareWallsNoMore · 19/01/2025 00:11

Nikitaspearlearring · 18/01/2025 23:28

I am the same sort of age as you, OP, and I agree with your title, that celebs now are easy on the eye but dim. Celebrity versions of Mastermind and Pointless are really dumbed down. Then there's House of Games, where a historian TV presenter couldn't find Egypt on a map of the Mediterranean area and put it in Morocco.
But something else - back in the day, Terry Wogan had a chat show and he had some really interesting guests - ordinary people as well as celebs. I remember one woman (British) who was blind, and had lived in the Amazon jungle (I think) with her DH, but he had got ill and died. Anyway she had found her way out of there, and came onto the show to tell her mind-blowing story. And the equivalent we have now is Graham Norton and an endless parade of airheads promoting forgettable films.

Ah yes - I forgot about the forgettable films. I think the late seventies, eighties were great for films. Films tended to have proper big 'stars' in them and they spoke clearer (I think they all had mikes) and it was like the directors really put their heart and souls into making good films. Nowadays I do see some good stuff but I hanker back to the big films of past years.

I understand why this has happened. Nobody goes to the cinema now so they make far less money from films so spend less on them.

Whenever I watch the towering inferno I think wow this was made in the seventies and the huge amount of famous people in it then. Going to see a film back then was a 'big deal' and worthy of a good night out. Actors and Actresses were proper 'stars' with training. I know the towering inferno is not anything that stretched the brain but it was highly entertaining and I reckon the budget must have been huge.

Also you saw more older actresses in big budget films than what you do now.

For example The Cassandra Crossing had Ava Gardener who was pretty old by then. Again the film had lots of famous stars in it.

I'm going to get slated for my films choices!!!!

OP posts:
BareWallsNoMore · 19/01/2025 00:15

SprinkleOfSunak · 18/01/2025 23:40

I completely agree OP. I’ve had enough of it all. I was disgusted to hear about Bonnie Blue the other day and the number of people she’d shagged in such as short space of time (over 1000) and all to become more famous!

When a true talented star dies, I have noticed in the last few years that even if I wasn’t a huge fan or know much about them, I mourn their loss and despair more and more about the current and the future as there do not seem to be many talented people making it through and becoming successful anymore. I find it very sad and depressing.

Even on tv I notice more and more that when a successful/well known presenter leaves, that their shoes just cannot be filled and we either end up with a succession of presenters, or a group of them who take it in turns to present, or they do so in groups instead. Countdown is one example after Richard Whiteley’s death, and then Pointless after Richard Osman left they’ve had all manner of people presenting and in my opinion none of them are on a par with him for his knowledge, or just for being genuinely lovely and down to earth. Match of the Day has recently announced a team of presenters who will replace Gary Lineker. It’s like they don’t bother anymore to try and find one solitary individual who can do a job really well.

Yes I felt very sad when Maggie Smith died. It's like the end of an era when these stars die.

OP posts:
RedToothBrush · 19/01/2025 00:24

So think for example Phil Collins. I doubt anyone would say that a short, balding, overweight man was attractive but most would say he has talent. Alot of the performers are just dressed in jeans and tshirt (so not giving a hoot about image it was all about the music). Then from the late eighties onwards it became manufactured bands and pretty people.

I raise you Lewis Capaldi and Ed Sheeran.

The Monkeys were a manufactured band. And Pans People were just there for their talent.

Terry Wogan had a chat show and he had some really interesting guests - ordinary people as well as celebs.

Terry Wigan had the 7pm slot. The same slot as the One Show which has a mix of ordinary people and celebrities.

I've just watched a 90s music show with lots of clips from TOTP. On comes Tina Turner and the comment I made to DH was "just how much work did she have done?". Michael Jackson had an entirely different face in the 80s compared to the one he had in the 90s so I don't think this is remotely a new thing.

Girls at school were aspiring to be lawyers, doctors, engineers, accountants. I just feel it has all gone horribly wrong since then

I think they still do, given more women than ever are signing up for courses to do this.

My experience of the 90s wasn't so enlightened given the media lecture I had when the class was asked how many of them would use their sexuality to advance their career and almost everyone said they would. And the warnings I got about harassment in the industry. A current good friend worked in it back then and the stories she has are toe curling. Porn was kinda irrelevant to the fact that sexual harassment in the workplace was almost a given in certain lines of work.

You are picking and choosing things to prove a certain point, but take off those rose tinted specs and be honest.

The 90s were great for certain things but for others they were really not that different or where they were they weren't necessarily better.

SinisterBumFacedCat · 19/01/2025 00:52

I’m the same generation and pretty much agree, although I do remember in my youth older people saying things were better.

I agree regarding porn, in the 90’s it took a certain degree of money and effort to see porn (unless you found old magazines in the woods) so it wasn’t as accessible to people underage, now it’s instant and free and has had to become more degrading as people get more desensitised leaving many young men with ED and more extreme fetishises. In all honesty the men I dated in the 1990s and 2000s were proud of giving their partners an orgasm, now it’s anal and choking?

Fern95 · 19/01/2025 00:58

I'm 29 and I agree with what you say about celebrities and actors/actresses being much more conventionally attractive now but far less interesting. Lots of TV shows and movies seem full of beautiful people who can't actually act and you have to work hard to find something decent to watch! I love watching things like Mad Men and Breaking Bad because the characters are so diverse and the cast members are chosen for talent.

Obimumkinobi · 19/01/2025 01:22

I think the 80s & 90s will go down history as the only time women were allowed to have public hair and oral sex simultaneously.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread