To say that women look bloody weird ….

[GoingbackwardsForwards]

.. when the only part of their face that moves is their mouth and eyes.

And don’t get me started on the massive fish lips.

Never see any naturally beautiful young women on TV these days. Such a shame

True. However, if you state your opinion that it looks odd you will be attacked by people who have had it done and think it isn't odd at all. Differing opinions, some think it looks odd and doll like or robotic and others thinks it's natural or a look they want to 'improve themselves'. Some get very aggressive stating their opinions!

YANBU. It's awful. It's so refreshing when you do see someone with a natural, non plastic face these days!

God these threads are so tiresome
Why does anyone else care about someone else’s face? I might look at other women and not like their hair or think they look frumpy but that’s fuck all to do with mr and I’d not give it more than a fleeting thought. Live and let live

I'm almost certainly going to get flamed for this, but here goes:

Imho plastic surgery should be limited to two categories:

• Disfigurement as a result of cancer, burns or injury
• Physical abnormalities/problems, ie back pain, deviated septum, inverted eyelashes

Nobody needs fuller lips or botox. Or BBLs. Or breast augmentations.
Your natural looks, what you were born with, are far more attractive than any highly-skilled plastic surgeon can ever achieve. Remember that.

It takes a certain amount of arrogance to believe your opinion about someone’s face is more valid than the person the face belongs to.

In your opinion they don’t look good, in their opinion they might be very happy with how they look.

Imagine someone started a thread saying how ugly wrinkled women are, how it’s a shame they let themselves go.

Why can’t we all just look after our own face in whatever way we see fit and not comment on other people’s.

For the record, no, I haven’t had Botox or cheek fillers etc.

-

Some women just can’t wait to have a go at other women, there are several women on I’m a celeb, only two have had work, vogue and ruby, the rest seem completely natural, or did you not bother with them op?

Cillian Murphy looks terrifying recently?! He used to be stunning.

It's worse with the men I think.

But Vogue Williams used to be absolutely gorgeous about 20 years ago, her face was totally different. Not just because she was young as her figure looks the same.

Possibly the rise of all this cosmetic work coincides with the ease of access to online pornography. Women think they have to look a certain way 🤷‍♀️

I have no beauty to speak of. What I do see are naturally very attractive women corrupting their beautiful appearance - I suspect because they see themselves primarily through screens. I think they are succumbing to peer pressure, and feel they are not attractive enough. I'm not blaming individual women. But I am saying that that the effect of getting that work done is to perpetuate the environmental pressure that is felt by women who succumb to it. It is a self feeding loop which is expanding and affects how all women view themselves and judge their appearance. If you don't know anyone with fillers it would never occur to you to consider it. If you know many women with fillers, to many it feels more like justifying why you haven't already. The industry predates women's insecurities and often deep vulnerabilities. The normalisation of these procedures affect us all.

But lots of people are saying in this thread that men prefer the natural look

I wont flame you! you are entitled to your opinion.

However, nobody "needs" makeup, or hair dye, or brand new clothes or a nice new car, or holidays, or a house bigger than their requirements (eg if there are two of you in a couple, you dont "need" more than a one bedroom property) etc etc

The argument that we shouldn't have what we dont absolutely "need" would apply to every single person online I would think because every single one if us has something we dont "need".

I get what you mean OP. Watching MAFS really makes me sad, it seems like most of them in recent years have had work done. It’s fine to get some treatments but the sheer volume of it shows it’s becoming more of a societal expectation now. Like I wouldn’t dream of going to work without make up due to my experience, a lot of younger people also feel that pressure to have treatments.

I watched that new Xmas movie on Netflix with Alicia Silverstone and was amazed that she doesn’t appear to have had anything done! The fact this felt so different to me, shows that it is quite rare nowadays.

I can’t believe the strength of the negative responses to you, I’d be interested to know if they are all from people who have fillers/botox etc and are defensive?

Some probably do and some probably don’t. It’s up to the individual woman to decide how she wants to look. Not sure it’s a good idea to pump yourself full of whatever it is they use but hey ho.

Eh, alcohol is a known carcinogen and people dont judge others for drinking that and its definitely known to cause cancer.

Yes, I have noticed it on the MAFS contestants, and the Love Island ones too. Young women, as young as 19, with fillers, trout pout, and clearly fake boobs, eyelashes like tarantula legs, teeth that are ultra bright white, (and veneered, so each tooth looks the same as the last,) and hair extensions 2 feet long, that you can see are not real hair.

I have seen women as young as 19 to 23 with all this shit done to themselves, and they look like they are in their mid to late 30s. God knows what they'll look like in 10 years time, or 15, or 20. (You only have to look at Katie Price to see what they may look like!)

One look that is in right now, is that bizarre super shiny look. A few women in MAFS this year had it. And I know a few young women in their 20s and 30s who sport this look. They look like they've been fecking varnished!

(Example of the 'super shiny look' here in the pic below...)

!

I partially agree. On the hair dye thing, I find there is something rejuvenating about having had a hair cut, yet nobody needs a hair cut in the same way nobody needs to dye their hair. Hair dye is okay to me as long as it's a colour that occurs naturally, ie blonde, black, brown, ginger/red. My favourite colour is purple, so while I do appreciate the colour purple, I don't like seeing it as a hair colour. Does that make sense? It's unnatural. Your appearance plays a huge part in your identity and if someone with naturally mousy brown hair suddenly shows up with purple hair, it has a shock factor to it. It does to me, anyway.

I understand people wanting new clothes, new car, a nice house etc because if it's something they can afford, they should never be held back. But if they're quite hard-up and don't really really need new stuff quite yet, then it makes sense to save their money.

I don't know any young women who are into this look - all the ones I know are either sporty or 'alternative'. It's something I've only ever seen online where it mostly seems to be mocked. Perhaps it depends where you live.

It isn't for me so wouldn't bother to get it. Individuals (men or women) can do what they want and I am not fussed however, where I do get bothered is when it goes wrong and they look to the NHS to fix it for them, free of charge.
If individuals can't afford to go to reputable people then they take that risk of it going wrong, and shouldn't place more strain on an already overburdened system to 'correct' it.

Using phrases like 'naturally very attractive women corrupting their beautiful appearance' is coming from the exact same place though.
On one hand you're arguing (justifiably) that it is harmful for women to feel they need to meet certain beauty standards, on the other reinforcing them yourself, by waxing lyrical about the beauty of SOME women.
What about the women who are not very attractive and have no beauty to 'corrupt' are procedures OK for them? And if not, why bother to emphasise the 'corrupted beauty' thing at all?
If you're serious about reducing the insecurity women feel about their looks, you need to start with the thing that is within your power, and stop using such loaded language around appearance.
It shouldn't matter in the least how beautiful a woman is naturally to whether cosmetic procedures are harmful or not. Nor should it matter if the procedures make them look better or worse.
This is either a point of principle or one of aesthetic taste. Conflating the two weakens your argument significantly.

That approach also applies to allowing women to discuss what they want, especially the topic of ageing

They can be conflated because they are one and the same, truth and beauty are not in conflict with aesthetics. Natural and healthy is always more aesthetic.

You need to go back to the point of my post, my original argument was not "we should reduce feelings of insecurity" it was "these procedures are nobody else's business and concern nobody but the woman undergoing them". They are distinct points and although related, as you pointed out, one strand of my argument was about contributing to the psychological stress of those who feel they might need these procedures my actual and over arching argument/objection was against the liberal notion that we live in these individual vacuums where we do not influence nor are influenced by the actions of others.

Agree with you @BlueJuniper94 . ^

@5128gap You're just being pedantic now. Of course no-one is saying that it's OK for women who aren't classed as conventionally pretty/beautiful to have procedures and fillers!

And you know no-one is saying this!

Am I? I'm reading here about how it's such a shame that 'naturally beautiful' young women are 'corrupting their beauty' with procedures THEY don't NEED.
If I was reading this as a women who is not young and naturally beautiful, or as a young woman who like the majority of young women, doesn't see herself as one of the 'naturally beautiful', it would be quite understandable if I thought people were talking about a group of women who didn't include me.
You can call it pedantic, but language matters. If procedures spoil faces and are not 'needed', then there is no need to single out a particular group of women to apply this to on the basis of your own assessment of the quality their looks.

You can't win.

Old women look "weird" apparently
Tattoos on "old" skin will look "weird" or worst.

Might as well do exactly what you want and enjoy it.

We are lucky to have access to cosmetic procedure of all kind, to look better, or younger, or whatever we want.

Use them, don't use them, nothing wrong in wanting to look as young as you can.

In your opinion natural and healthy are always more aesthetic. However realistically nature bestows a wide range of physical traits upon us and then proceeds to alter these traits as we age. The results of this for some are without doubt more aesthetically pleasing than for others. This always impacted the self esteem of those women less blessed by nature in a world where the most important thing about a woman is often her looks.
You see procedures as causing a problem, whereas I'm more inclined to see them as a solution some women tend to choose for an existing problem. They feel they are not as beautiful naturally as they'd like to be in a society obsessed with beauty, so rather than allow this to cause distress, they take advantage of available products to change things.
The problem for me is that women should have to see their appearance as so important in the first place, not how they choose to navigate this. Rather than attacking their choice of 'cure' we should be fighting the disease. And I don't think going on about how beautiful some women are naturally helps.