I hate Sex In The City.

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
It doesn't matter that she's ugly, just like it doesn't matter that half the characters in the movies like "Superbad" or teen-boy movies are fugly as hell, because they are funny. I don't think it's wrong to think she's ugly. But Maxim called her the Unsexiest woman alive. That hurts a girl's feelings. Do they have an unsexiest man alive list? I'm not just being sarcastic. Do they?

It's unfair, but we have to admit that female actors and stars are held to a different standard than male stars.

They do, it's called when women get their hair done. Maxim's probably not the greatest source for this kind of argument either, since it's a male magazine. You're telling me that articles in stuff like Cosmo or Vogue or whatever on "how to fix your man" isn't as degrading to men. It goes both ways, at least to some degree.

Oh, no question that male actors are held to a different standard than women, but it's always been that way. I'm willing to bet it's far greater for female actors now than it was during most of the 20th century.
 
Yeah Maxim is predominantly men. In fact, SJP was named something of the sexiest woman after the incident by another magazine. Of course women's magazines are degrading to men, but I haven't seen a list yet that degrades men for simply being ugly. Most of the time, being funny counteracts that. In women, we hardly see any famous women who go very far in the movie industry who are considerably homely.

I am not sure if female actors have it better now than they did considering the average woman shown on television now is considerably tinier than she has ever been. In the United States alone, only 5% of females look like (have the body type) what is shown in a majority of media. I am not sure about other countries, but U.S. standards for women have gone up drastically.

It's really not fair to anyone, man or woman. I am not blaming men at all because I think the system is what is screwed up.
 
But Maxim called her the Unsexiest woman alive. That hurts a girl's feelings. Do they have an unsexiest man alive list? I'm not just being sarcastic. Do they?

No. But consider their demographic, and consider that it's not really a magazine anyone in their right mind would a) respect; and b) hold to a high standard. I don't even think it takes itself that seriously.

That doesn't make it okay that they had that list, and I'm sure SJP was insulted by it, but I think the Maxim thing is just silly and doesn't deserve to be analyzed.

Edit: Oops, I should have read the last two posts first rather than be all repetitive. Oh well.
 
Women's magazines are pretty degrading to women, too. How often do you see stuff on the cover about "satisfying your man", "pleasing your man", etc? Seems like a lot of them only reinforce the low self-esteem that a lot of women already have.
 
In women, we hardly see any famous women who go very far in the movie industry who are considerably homely.

schmidt.jpg


I felt this had to be shown.

Anyway, I pretty much agree with you. Women are as much of a cause for these issues as well as men.
 
Women's magazines are pretty degrading to women, too. How often do you see stuff on the cover about "satisfying your man", "pleasing your man", etc? Seems like a lot of them only reinforce the low self-esteem that a lot of women already have.

Most of those women's magazines are pretty crap. Cosmopolitan is the absolute worst.

:up:

When I first started reading Cosmo in the 80's as a teen, back when Helen Gurley Brown was editor, and it had a feminist slant, it was a good read. Now when I see the cover of it in the check-out line, it just makes me really sad and angry to think of the crap that they're feeding girls and young women. But I suppose that's a rant for another thread.
 
:up:

When I first started reading Cosmo in the 80's as a teen, back when Helen Gurley Brown was editor, and it had a feminist slant, it was a good read. Now when I see the cover of it in the check-out line, it just makes me really sad and angry to think of the crap that they're feeding girls and young women. But I suppose that's a rant for another thread.
:lol: Tell me about it. They recycle the same garbage over and over, repackaging it with new headline.

Anyhoo, my best friend ordered me to watch all the seasons of SATC the other night :uhoh: She insists I go to the movie and that I'll just loooove it :coocoo:
 
Well, I guess/hope there won't be sequel. Big and Carrie get married. I don't think they'll be raising rugrats in the city, so that means they'd move out to the suburbs somewhere. Then, what are they gonna do? Call it Sex and the Suburbs.
 
I'm a woman and I wouldn't call SJP the "unsexiest" woman alive or even anywhere close, but I do feel that she's incredibly unattractive.

I nearly got dragged to see this thing last weekend until the person relented and allowed us to see Iron Man instead. Praise Jesus.
 
Here's something I don't get:

In the movie, Carrie hits Big with a bouquet of flowers and people see it as empowering. If, for whatever reason, Big did that to Carrie, I'm sure a lot of people would be pissed and wouldn't see it as so empowering.
 
Here's something I don't get:

In the movie, Carrie hits Big with a bouquet of flowers and people see it as empowering. If, for whatever reason, Big did that to Carrie, I'm sure a lot of people would be pissed and wouldn't see it as so empowering.

As much as I felt her pain, I couldn't help but think the same thing.
 
Yeah it's violent and it's not right to keep showing women hitting men and having it shown as an empowering moment. I guess it was meant to be something strong and visceral showing Carrie's pain that she has kept for so long inside herself. Of course there should have been a better way to portray that without having that violent fit. It also kind of implies that Carrie was just blindly hitting him and not really in control, but extremely emotional and vulnerable. That also kind of makes me a little mad.
 
Saw the film last week...thought it was the longest most boring 143 minutes I've ever seen!!! I cannot believe the producers didn't edit it down to at least 2 hours...what were they thinking??? :ohmy:
 
Saw the film last week...thought it was the longest most boring 143 minutes I've ever seen!!! I cannot believe the producers didn't edit it down to at least 2 hours...what were they thinking??? :ohmy:

Holy shit, that IS long for a chick flick! Now I really feel for those poor dudes who were dragged out to see it.
 
i'd probably hate the show/movie if i ever bothered to waste my time watching it. seems like they're re-running it all the time. as soon as i figure out that's not mike logan, i change the channel.
 
Back
Top Bottom