So many girls these days think they have to put it all on display to appeal to the opposite sex. Here's an article by someone who met Marilyn Monroe in the 60s and like many of us is still enchanted by her.

Yes Daily Fail but interesting read.

I particularly liked this line from Jacqueline Bisset



Celebs today think allure means flashing acres of flesh. But REAL sex symbols knew less is more

Those photo comparisons are trolling, an indicator of where society is at, or both.

All from an outlet that thrives on telling you what women are wearing. The Mail - evil genius.

Interesting that you have focused on the pictures and the website rather than the actual content of the article.

I don't think there is much content to the article other than the headline tbh, it looks like the usual excuse for a series of photos. Comparing the movie and TV stars of the past to 'reality TV stars' in different fields? It's not a well thought out argument IMO.

Less is more, as they say.



I find the old Hollywood publicity photos from the 40s through 60s are often a lot more alluring than modern actresses' hanging it all out".


Sent from my Lumia 1020 using Tapatalk

I'm more interested in why women feel they have to show so much flesh and be overtly sexual and the male opinion about it.

What a pointlessly retarded article (no offense Caz!) There are plenty of women that could have been chosen from the current crop who look just as classy and elegant as those from 40 years ago, and I'm pretty sure given the time I could find a fair selection of women from 40 years ago looking positively trampy, it's just a matter of being entirely selective with one's examples, and completely ignore any kind of counter example.

I've got to stop reading that article now, the woman is so stupid it's making me angry.

"The male opinion" is [LIFTED] up. Just like the female opinion.

Even Emma Watson this week saying we need to look at gender as a spectrum and everyone can be sensitive or whatever. [LIFTED].

Without male and female, there is no polarity. Without polarity, there is no attraction. With no attraction, there is the need to "be feminine" in a physical way only, in order to attract boys.

Everybody needs to grow the [LIFTED] up and start being a role model for those around them, but particularly for younger people.

Content, in a Daily Mail article, are you serious?

Any difference would be more likely down to generation than girl. And I'm sure the local rag at the time would have been saying the same things comparing Marilyn Morone et al to women from generations before.

I'm hugely over tired right now, and I'm struggling to string a sentence together so I'll possibly return to this tomorrow.
That said:


Fonda's pose and gaze is, I'd suggest, defensive rather than inviting. That's not fun. We're looking slightly up at Caprice, which whilst not necessarily giving her 'defiance', it does give her a slight position of power. Not having her arms crossed suggest she's relaxed. It feels more comfortable - to me - than Fonda's pose.

Don't agree at all, for a lot of people gender is far from a binary state. I remember listening to a very interesting piece on Radio 4 on it some while ago. In particular, Richard O'Brien (he of Crystal Maze and Rocky Horror show fame) saying he identified as being roughly 70% male and about 30% female.

For you and I, I suspect we'd both be quite solidly 100% male on that scale, but there are plenty of people who simply don't feel that way.

So women were wearing clothes in public like this years ago? To me this is a nightie, for the bedroom and not the sort of thing a woman should be wearing in public.

They can feel whatever they want as long as there is somebody else who compliments how they feel at the opposite end of the scale.

If our planet just had two south poles, everything would be [LIFTED]. Magnets have to have a +ve and -ve. People are no different. I'm not talking about what body parts you have. I'm talking about the roles that both genders play in the team environment that is a relationship. WOMEN are attractive to MEN for more reasons than what they look like or wear. Girls and boys don't know this.

Possibly not quite that much boob on display, but the general principle that there will have been plenty of women from that era already dressed in a trashy fashion. The general point about the article being entirely selective in its examples still stands.

I think the issue here is that no, women aren't wearing clothes like that in public.
Attention seeking celebrities are.
Also, I'm told by people at work that I'm a feminist so here goes - if a woman chooses to wear that in public, then who am I to throw my hands up and say she can't? It's her body, she can wear that if she feels it's appropriate. Just like that fella off the telly can wear a single sided banana hammock in Ibiza if that's what he feels wants to wear.