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

Doesn’t it mean women can’t just age without doing anything to their faces?

Does someone else own our faces, and we use them on leaseback?

To me it means that the world and its dog feels justified in telling women what we can and can't do to our faces.
This is not new. Society had always felt entitled to have its say about what we should look like.
The latest development in this is that its now being given the green light as a 'feminist' thing when it comes to cosmetic procedures, even heavy make up, false eyelashes and so on.
While there obviously are feminists issues about this, rather than simply stick to an objective discussion about them, there appears to be a compulsion to opine on whether the woman in question looks nice or not and for people to consider themselves entitled to say what other women 'should' and 'shouldn't' do aesthetically.
In a nutshell, this new 'ownership' of our faces comes from a lobby that feels entitled to impose their idea of beauty (natural, glow of youth) on other women, and dictate that young women should not 'ruin' it, and older women must accept it and wear the visible signs of aging on our faces, whether we wish to or not.
Which is just 'how you look is our business because your appearance is public property' in a new guise.

I'd suggest the solution to that is to come off social media.

The solution to what? The judging of women who have cosmetic procedures appears to happen when they are spotted in the street and people take exception to their appearance.
It's on SM that they feel free to share their opinions, but SM hasn't caused them to feel entitled to hold them. The entitlement to expect women to look a certain way and judge them if they don't long pre dates SM.
SM is just the modern day version of the 1950s tut tutting in the post office about the woman down the road who's a 'bottle blonde' and wears her lipstick too bright, so is 'no better than she should be'.

So what if some random you don't know walks past you judging you (presumably in their head). Who cares. You won't know what they think.

Unlike social media where anyone can criticise any woman for their looks. Like on here where we can give our opinion to the world in writing on the wisdom of distorting plastic surgery.

So is your point that women who don't want to have their face insulted should just stay off SM then? If so, I misunderstood.
Yes, indeed. Anyone who doesn't want to have their face insulted, or indeed anything else about them, their weight, ethnicity, disability, class, family set up, yes, they could all just stay off SM. They would then be none the wiser that other people were insulting them.
However, another way of looking at it would be that on some SM, such as a site targeted at being supportive of women, we could discuss issues of interest to women without insulting the appearance of women.

Well I meant (on the basis social media cannot be controlled) that if you don't like people commenting directly to you about your looks, don't go on social media. And social media is also instrumental in giving women a view of themselves and how they should look. It is possible to live a fulfilling and happy life without social media. People used to be able to do it.

Also I would argue that MN is supportive of women but not in all areas. And perhaps its more supportive of women to point out that to mess around with their face might not be the best thing and may make you look weird.

Yes, I agree. I think some types of SM have done a lot of harm with regard to increasing pressure on women (men too as it goes) not just in terms of appearance, but all aspects of life. Because we are constantly being bombarded with messages about what we should look like, own and achieve.
However, there are other types of SM that are beneficial, like this site, where we can discuss and learn from other people. I've personally learned loads and had my thinking 'stretched' and my opinions changed by engaging in discussion on here.
For this reason I think its unfortunate when what could be an interesting discussion about pressure on women to look a certain way always ends up having the tone lowered by insult slinging and name calling.

Trouble is it might well look great the first /second time but it's not going to be looking real a few years in! How can being injected with toxins work out best in the long run?? T he really wealthy people who can afford the absolute best treatment don't look real after a while... I'm not putting anyone down.. It's my opinion..

I dunno, @Lilacblu ... Claudia Peltz (70) has looked the same for 20 years or more. It must take phenomenal amounts of time & money, but I'm not knocking her results.

She looks amazing. There was a recent thread pretty much unanimously and justifiably praising Emma Bunton for her appearance too. Despite the fact the total absence of any fine lines, and the fact her cheek fat is apparantly defying gravity and still where it was 30 years ago, is a clear indication of skillfully executed botox and filler.

I wonder if they all go to the same practitioner?

Could it be also ‘collagen banking’ from Ultherapy, ‘Sofwave, or thermage?

Why praise her? It’s all down to money!

Posters were commenting positively on her appearance, so praising as in 'expressing admiration' of her looks. However they've been achieved, she was considered aesthetically pleasing. Is it any more questionable to admire a woman's looks if they are the result of the money she's spent on them, as oppose to her youth and an accident of her genes? Neither is worthy of praise as an achievement, either can motivate praise under the definition of admiration.