Women, doesn't it bother you that "attractive" women dominate the airways

1. 60

   RealityTalkposted 11 years ago

   Women, doesn't it bother you that "attractive" women dominate the airways
   
   I believe intelligence and talent is "attractive neutral."  I believe that attractive women can be talented, average women can be talented and unattractive women can be talented.  So, I ask the women in the world who are not considered attractive, doesn't it bother you that attractive women outnumber average looking and unattractive women on the airways?  I ask women, because although this happens with men too, it is a disproportionately greater happenstance with women.  I know a number of women who would not be considered "model" material who would make great media stars. 
   
   

   report
2. 60

   IDONOposted 11 years ago

   I'll go first, even though I'm a guy. That helps with being objective about your question.
        You are right, but also kind of wrong. When you are talking about local news or most of the cable news channels, you are correct. But when you are talking about the "Big Time", you are wrong. Look at the top correspondents. Barbara Walters, Candy Crowley, Martha Raddatz and even Oprah. None of them are attractive, but are at the top of the media ladder.
        Even though all may have a natural or educated talent, the attractive ones don't go to the top because they have too many outside distractions that have nothing to enhance their talents. The unattractive women, minus these distractions, tend to grow their talents far beyond natural or educated. They are far more focused on their talent and career than the model type.

   report
   1. 60

      RealityTalkposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I agree with your observation; I have seen it myself.  It seems to me however, that on average, it seems being attractive is a necessary qualification for many women.

      report
3. 93

   peeplesposted 11 years ago

   Quite honestly I can't see why it would bother anyone. The reality of our world is sex sells. Attractiveness sells. We are naturally drawn to things that are pleasing to the eyes. I think in all things though things level out somewhere. As IDONO stated there are many not so attractive famous women. Another thing everyone should consider is are these women really attractive? When they have no hair stylist, make up artist, and wardrobe specialist are they still that pleasing to the eye? I would venture to guess that more than half aren't so pretty without all the extras.

   report
   1. 60

      RealityTalkposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I'm not judging what is attractive.  What bothers me is that our society talks the game that it is what counts on the inside that matters, but does not walk the talk [boxing expression]. No one should be penalized by nature & birth.

      report
   2. 93

      peeplesposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      That's because society likes to be politically correct. The outside matters just as much as the inside in many fields. I don't think anyone is penalized, there are tons of options out there. We can choose any  field of work.

      report
4. 90

   suzettenaplesposted 11 years ago

   Since I believe ALL women are attractive in their own way, the question doesn't matter to me.

   report
   1. 60

      RealityTalkposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I agree with your first sentence.  But I believe women are more often held to a higher physical standard than men when it comes to employment on the airways.

      report
5. 60

   pauley13posted 11 years ago

   Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. What is attractive to one, may be repulsive to another.
   
   But your question is loaded, actually. It implies that the women reading your questions consider themselves unattractive - by contrast. As if women didn't have enough insecurity about themselves already!
   
   What makes a woman truly attractive is what's within. It comes through the superficial and you will view her as spectacularly attractive no matter what.
   
   And I can assure you that MOST women are easily just as attractive when considered as a "whole package" as any of those superficially attractive ones you may be thinking of.
   
   You will no doubt have seen "pretty" women with zero warmth or intelligence. Are they "attractive"? Only superficially so - and only to superficial men.
   
   If you have a superficially attractive AND "internally attractive" person, woman OR man, on television - that's perfectly fine. A person like that can inspire and bring out great qualities in everyone.
   
   So, your question would have been better if it didn't just zero-in on women AND then also make THEM the solicited target for the answer.
   
   "Does is bother anyone that attractive but shallow people are crowding the airwaves?"
   
   And in answer to THAT question, I'd say: hell no. I don't watch TV anyway, LOL.

   report
   1. 60

      RealityTalkposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I totally believe beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I'm not getting the responses I thought, so I might withdraw the Q. My intent was to pt out the superficiality media think we want & to pt out talented women not hired if failing a profile.

      report
   2. 60

      pauley13posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      MSM is in a closed feedback loop with the people it "serves". The viewers are SHALLOW, and so is the Mainstream Media. And vice versa.
      
      Their on-air "talent" policy is shallow and, predictably, aims at the "lowest" viewers. It doesn't offend THEM.

      report
6. 60

   RealityTalkposted 11 years ago

   To further explain where I am going with this question, the picture is one of my daughter.  I think my daughter is the most beautiful young girl in the world only rivaled by her sister.  But then, I am her dad.  But I don't want my daughter hired because someone thinks she is pretty.  Unless she goes into modeling. I want my daughter hired because someone thinks she is talented, smart, and able to handle the job at hand.
   
   I am not naive that I don't know sex sells.  But I want my daughters to know they can be anything they want based on what they have to offer the job, no different than a man, and not just because of their physical attributes of beauty.  That is one reason why I have discouraged my daughters from being cheerleaders.  I want them playing the sport being cheered, not cheering others who play the sport.  Both my daughters play soccer and volleyball.  My youngest daughter also plays basketball, softball and tennis.
   
   If my daughters choose to go into acting (they both do theater), I want them to succeed because they can act.  I want them to be a Meryl Streep or a Katharine Hepburn, not a Pamela Anderson.  If my daughters choose to go into news casting, I want them to be a Christiane Amanpour or a Greta Susteren, not merely a good-looking cutout to appease an intellectually suffering audience.
   
   Frankly, I am a little surprised that I have not received any responses from women who agree with me.  I would like to believe there are - some - people in the world who still believe there is hope to move beyond sex and the superficial, but maybe that is hoping for too much.

   report
   1. 93

      peeplesposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      It's not that I don't agree with you. I do to a certain extent. As a mother I would hope for the same. But I see things how they are and there is nothing wrong with some people using what they have to succeed. It's all supply and demand.

      report
   2. 66

      lupineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Reality Talk, if more people thought like you, there wouldn't be a need or a market for all the plastic surgery, lipo, hair extensions, that women go through to look, as they believe to be considered beautiful. It doesn't last forever.

      report
   3. 81

      Lee Teaposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Your views are a bit askew - ALL experience is worthwhile.  I was a cheerleader and became an event promoter. For confidence sake, don't stuff them into roles out of fear of what they might become - develop their natural talents, whatever they are.

      report
7. 62

   duffsmomposted 11 years ago

   No, it does not bother me. I am aware that the media has to please advertisers, and their audience.  Frankly, I don't want to watch a bunch of unattractive people. It might not be fair, or PC, but it is the way it is for me.
   
   I want to be entertained. If I want to look at regular people, I will just head to town to the grocery store.

   report
8. 71

   ocfirefliesposted 11 years ago

   I am reminded of an old "Twilight Zone" episode called, "Eye of the Beholder."
   In that twilight world, those whose faces favored pigs were considered beautiful, and those who looked like a "beautiful" human were considered ghastly.
   
   Your question is a tough one because of the dynamics involved in addressing such an issue. 
   
   I applaud you for encouraging your daughters to focus on their individual successes and talents instead of relying on just their good looks.
   
   I know I had a female professor tell me one time that women should use whatever is in their feminine arsenals to compete because the competition was so lop-sided in favor of men.   That never seemed quite right to me.
   
   All I know is that the older I get, the more comfortable I become with me.

   report
   1. 60

      RealityTalkposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Thanks for your comment.  I remember that Twilight Zone episode as well.  It was a story with a moral ahead of its time.

      report
9. 81

   Lee Teaposted 11 years ago

   These women aren't attractive to me.  They're as plastic and fake as the news they spin and the products they sell.
   
   They can have the spotlight.  They're right where they belong.  Taking money to do a dirty job and look good doing it.  And 3...2...1...
   
   All of mass media is a pre-written stage.  Being on air doesn't mean you're insightful, intelligent, or talented - it means you took a job in propaganda entertainment and can read a teleprompter.  Nothing about that attracts me.
   
   Which makes this bachelor's degree I have in Communications and Media one expensive dust-covered memento.

   report
   1. 60

      RealityTalkposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I hope you can brush the dust off of your degree and make use of it.  I wish you all the best.

      report
   2. 81

      Lee Teaposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I use it for research

      report
10. 60

    dianetrotterposted 11 years ago

    Your daughter is beautiful.  It may give her an extra edge on a job; however, what you instill in her will be there when the beauty fade.  I can understand your concern as a father.  Sounds like she has everything in order to succeed:  looks, character, and education.

    report
    1. 60

       RealityTalkposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Thank you!  This is very nice of you to write.

       report
11. 86

    Georgie Loweryposted 11 years ago

    Truthfully, it doesn't bother me at all because I know that, once these women on TV take off their makeup, they're pretty much just as average as the rest of us. They've got money for people to do their hair and makeup. They've blown who knows how much money on new noses and new boobs and new whatever else they're getting these days. In a way, I almost feel sorry for them. When they do go out in public without all the hair and makeup, they end up on the internet on those "Stars Without Their Makeup - Look How Ugly They Are" pages. Heaven help them if they have cellulite and there are paparazzi at the beach.

    report
12. 45

    DDEposted 11 years ago

    I don't see any other woman as not attractive those who feel attractive are not always naturally attractive.   Attractiveness shouldn't count but knowledge which is more powerful than looks

    report
13. 71

    Abby Campbellposted 11 years ago

    Hi RealityTalk. I don't want this to come out the wrong way, but are you sure you're not the one who is biased on what "beauty" is? As another person answered, "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder." It seems that you've made "women on the airway" as beautiful.
    
    As a professional personal trainer who works with mostly women, I have also worked with many women in media and those who are stage competitors. As you may see these women as flawless on television in physical appearance, they still have all the same flaws as women who are not in the media with stretch marks, extra skin from fat loss, acne scars, gray hair, etc., etc., etc. Many in the media are airbrushed and perfected prior to being displayed. I don't see anything wrong with this as people are attracted to beauty. Why do you see it as a flaw? Why should beauty be punished?
    
    Now, don't take all that the wrong way. I just ask to see your response. As a parent of three young women, I also want society to see each of them for the beauty within first. However, I am not offended if society sees their external beauty as well.
    
    However, I have given my girls the freedom to choose what they want to do if it's within reason. One of them was a cheerleader for two years in high school, and I never looked at it as a "beauty" contest. It is actually one of the most difficult sports there is, equally tough if not more to volleyball, softball, soccer, basketball, or tennis. In fact, that same daughter played volleyball and soccer. She also ran track and was on dance team. I hope that you would not eliminate a certain activity like cheerleading because you feel it is a "sexist" type sport. Giving our children the freedom to experiment many activities will help them to determine their own individuality.
    
    We must support our girls no matter what. Just because we may want them to be a "Meryl Streep" or a "Katharine Hepburn," they may not want to resemble those ladies. What would you do if your daughters wanted to be more like "Pamela Anderson?" We are all made differently... uniquely. Just because you favor a certain type of personality or look does not mean it's wrong to be another. I may not agree with the morals of certain women who are beautiful, but that doesn't make someone who is asthetically pleasing to the eye ugly on the inside either.

    report
    1. 60

       RealityTalkposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       You misunderstand my question. Maybe my fault. My pt. is that beauty, whether air- brushed or real is what media displays. Just as male muscles encourages steroids, female pinups encourages boob jobs & starving. Not a great lesson for our childre

       report
    2. 71

       Abby Campbellposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       This is definitely true! I think the younger generation does see the "fakeness" in it all though. I see a change coming in HW as well as less younger women are going that route. We can thank all those stupid women reality shows for waking them up.

       report
14. 83

    gmwilliamsposted 11 years ago

    It is a fact of life in this look obsessed society.  Attractive women have preeminence in terms of career viability.  This applies not only to entertainment professions but in careers where there is a high visibility level.   Companies and corporations want people who have "drawing" ability.  Women who are plainer have a harder time being hired for such visible fields although they may possess the prerequisite education and credentials.   It is perceived that women who are plain are repellents as far as companies and corporations are concerned.
    
    If a plain woman happens to be hired in a high visibility career whether it is entertainment or otherwise, she oftentimes possesses phenomenal talent i.e. Madonna, Barbra Streisand, Bette Midler, Whoopi Goldberg, Joan Rivers, and Oprah.  Such women have to prove their talents.   
    
    These women did not have it easy at all. Madonna had to fight her way to be noticed.  So did Bette Midler and Barbra Streisand.    Ms. Streisand has a beyond phenomenal voice but her physical appearance was questioned.  In the early days of her career, she was asked to have plastic surgery which she refused to do.
    
    Whoopi Goldberg, a superstar, is still considered to be quite attractive although she has talent as an actress and comedienne.   Joan Rivers had to also prove herself endlessly to be a celebrity of note.   Although such women were not considered to be attractive in conventional terms, these women are respected, powerhouses, and are considered to be no one's fools.  They have a substance that their more attractive sisters DON'T have.
    
    Yes, it is easier for attractive women to have highly visible careers although they may be lesser qualified.  That is a sad fact of life.  People are drawn to more attractive women and they have wider crossover and sex appeal.   Even an attractive woman may be of mediocre talent, chances are that she will be more successful than her plainer counterpart with phenomenal talent.   This is the name of the game these days.

    report
    1. 60

       RealityTalkposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Sad commentary, but well said!  Always a pleasure to read your comments.

       report
    2. 83

       gmwilliamsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Thank you ever so kindly.

       report
15. 66

    Rosana Modugnoposted 11 years ago

    Really, I shouldn't be answering this because you stated "I ask the women in the world who are not considered attractive"...LOL  See what I did there?
    
    Seriously, I have always been pretty sensible and realistic.  With that said, I see what's pretty and what's not.  Personally, I don't care what I'm looking at as long as I get what I need from it.  With that being said, the majority rules.  And the majority is very much in favor of attractiveness because it's nice to look at.
    
    We are physically attracted to the prettier things and people than the not so pretty ones. It's a fact.  I've done it, still do it, don't mean to, it happens.
    
    We're not looking for a relationship with the person, we're just getting information or watching something for a couple of hours.  When it's a deeper intent, then I suppose the looks would fade away and we're left with what's underneath it all.  But we don't know them, we're only buying what they're selling, which is a quickie, so to speak.

    report
16. 0

    Lybrahposted 11 years ago

    Not really.  Who wants to see ugly people?

    report
    1. 59

       wish-list-giftsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       I do if they're intelligent.

       report
    2. 60

       RealityTalkposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       What has amazed me about the responses to this question is that some - women - do not mind being judged by their outward appearance as much as I believed. So as a man, should I chose a mate based on her looks & learn to love her?

       report