Susan Boyle looks like Hyacinth from "Keeping Up Appearances" which is to say a matronly British woman in her 60's. She does not look like a 47 year old woman--at least none I know--and I'm 43.

I work out, but otherwise don't do any excessive grooming, and I've never had any kind of plastic surgery. I don't wear makeup. I am not a beautiful woman, but am commonly taken for 10 years younger than I am. It's just that I won the genetic lottery in that respect.

There's no reason to disparage her looks as they are, but OTOH, don't pretend that she looks like a 47-year old woman is supposed to look. Defining that, to me, is just as anti-feminist/sexist as disparaging women for "trying" to look younger than they are. In my case, and I am sure many other women's cases, nobody's "trying".

I agree.

Susan Boyle aside, the thing is, what do you mean by natural, and how much 'deliberate beauty enhancement' do you feel is ok, and how much is too far? (I dont mean you personally of couse, but i hate to use the work 'one, lol)

Most skin aging is due to sun damage (hard on your hair, too). I am 48, and my skin looks far, far younger than my mother's did when she was 38, even tho she tans easily and i dont really tan at all. The difference? She has always loved being outside, and has spent huge aounts of time in the sun (and never wore and still wont wear sunblock, even tho she is 73 and complains constantly about how old she looks), while I am not really an outdoor person, and since my mid-20s, have faithfully used sunscreen. My partner is 55, and her skin looks younger than mine, b/c while I grew up on a farm and spent lots of time outside when I was young, she has rarely spent time outside, ever.

Not that I am recommending never going outside, but you can buy good sunscreen pretty cheap, and if you use it faithfully, your skin isnt giong to age so fast. To me, protecting skin from damage is where you see the 'natural,' built-in aging, not letting your skin get destroyed by too much sun.

Also, even daily moisturizer does wonders, and if you use something with anti-aging in it (again, can be pretty inexpensive),it helps even more. Some of the creams and lotions (esp by Aveeno) are even made from natural materials, like soy or mushrooms. So is this already too far, and you are 'striving'? Maybe for some, maybe the more extreme treatments like prescription retinoids or chemical peels. For some plp, maybe it is surgery. Like you say, why should there be a set rule for what is ok and still be a feminist, and what is too far and you are just a shallow, self-indulgent person? Who gets to decide that?

The same with clothes and hair. I buy lots of clothes from WalMart and Meyers, and shoes from Penneys.I know perhaps for a lot of ppl, maybe even this is expensive, but you dont have to shop at Saks or something to get pretty clothes. Same with make-up, and you can get a nice cut even at Supercuts or something. You can look nice without being rich, if you want to (and if you dont, that should be your choice, not some line in the sand).

And really, you can see that with Susan Boyle. At first I thought the way she looked on the show was how she usually dressed, but now I dont think so. In the interview tape, she looked like she had straight, styled hair with gray streaks in it, and he clothes looked really nice on her. I thought she was very cute (and she has an amazing smile when she laughes, and a 'cheeky' sense of humor, which makes her attractive besides appearance). Maybe what she wore was her way of dressing up?

My main annoyance was all the bloggers going on about how great it was that she didn't get all made up, but just 'dressed her age.' I wonder if since they are all so impressed with this, are they going to stop exercising, and not wear sunscreen or make-up or dye *their* hair, and wear 'old people' clothes? I just dont see the virtue in this all by itself. Will be interesting to see how they feel when they are in their 40s...

Carol :)

I'm not really sure how to respond to a post when the longest paragraph is on sun damage. Susan is from Scotland, that has the most rain of any country in Europe and is known for it's cloudy days. Believe me, Ms. Boyle did not get too much sun.

I agree that what she wore was probably her idea of "dressing up". Remember, this is a woman who over 20 years ago, gave up her dreams to take care of her mum. If she's been out in public much, it's probably been to church. She probably has never thought about what might look good on her. What woman who gives up their life in their 20's, is sitting around thinking what sort of clothing they'd look good in? We don't even know the popluation of where she lives or how close she is to major shopping areas.

I happen to agree with a more natural look. Since when did make-up become a requirement to be a woman? I thought it was terrible when girls have wanted lipstick and eye-shadow at 12, now the age is 10! How many of us want our 10- or 11-year aged daughters to want "beauty" parties for their birthday?

Excuse me for not being as politically correct as you, but I am allergic to most make-up and totally gave it up in my 20's -- now in my 60's. These 40 years have provided me with plenty of compliments on my skin and how I looked in general -- so natural and beautiful. I've been asked what make-up I use, what creams I use, etc. I've never used a skin care care product on my face. My cousin used to use lots of make-up and wouldn't be caught dead without her fake eyelashes. She is now happily married and without any make up except for a touch of lipstick. She says that she receives more compliments now than when she was wearing make-up.

You're right. There is no rule book!!!! So please stop trying to give us yours.

Marie,

I am sorry that i gave you the impression that I felt everyone should beauty themselves up the maximum! That wasnt really my point, and I said something in another thread about knowing lots of women who dont dye their hair, use anti-aging products, wear much makeup, or dress stylishly, and that is their choice. In that thread, I said if you want to do that, do it, or if you dont, take the beauty stuffs to the max, like girl on The Cougar (which I hate, btw). And of course, anything in between.

I have to say that I *am* heavily biased toward my own ideal of beauty, and I feel those women I know would look so much younger and fresher if they did their hair and wore some different clothes. Of course, that is fitting right into the stereotype that the bloggers were hitting, the one where we need to look younger to be pretty, the whole definition of pretty, and who gets to define it. To me, we each get to define it ourselves (personally, the fake eyelash thing and really heavy makeup is way over the top *to me*, and i love the light looks that are more in style these days).

I grew up in a farming community, and knew so many wonderful women who didnt take care of their skin or use much in the way of beauty products, and they were wonderful, sweet, funny, caring, smart, hardworking women, and i respected them very much. My Mom and a friend of mine's Mom are two of my biggest heroes, and they didnt fuss over looking young. However, that isnt how I want to look. It is just a difference in personal taste.

As far as the young girls go, I dont see much wrong with them wanting to wear makeup, have fun, and look pretty. The problem I have with it is that so often they are buying into someone else's idea of what beauty is, and even worse, perhaps getting the idea that there worth is derived from how they look. I vehemently disagree with both those things.

You personally sound very lucky with your skin! (Really tho, how much time have you spent in the sun?) Most of us are going to get wrinkles and agespots, not to mention precancerous lesions and outright cancer (most of my relatives over 65 spend a lot of time having all these things removed, and have had some pretty invasive surgeries in some cases).

I didnt mean to set out a rule for everyone, and my post wasnt really about Susan Boyle (yes, I too thought about her living in a place with less sun intensity, and prolly that was why her skin looked pretty good). Altho I guess I didnt do a good job, my point was more about letting yourself get fatter and wrinkled and dressing as if you were old doesnt seem to me to be some kind of virture in itself (again, i know my perspective is biased, but to me, ppl who do that are giving up, much like Susan Boyle did). I dont get the growing old gracefully thing, really. Yes, we age, and I dont see trying to recapture or never let go of your youth, but if you like to wear makeup and dress with the times, I just dont see that as an evil thing. I am 48, and I know that, and i am not trying to be 24 again (tho i wish i were), but i love doing the beauty stuffs and i love clothes. Others may not, and i leave that to them.

Another point i was trying to make (I think more in my other thread) was that I disagree with the notion that is you pay attention to your appearance and spend lots of time on it, you are a sellout and disgrace to feminism. Yes, I certainly disagree with the common notion that if you have spent a lot of time on your appearance, you are a lightweight, but to me the answer isnt to look plain and drabby just to be taken seriously. To me, we should insist that no matter how we look, prettied up or not, that we be taken seriously as ppl (yes, I am an idealist, and I my two fave musical artists in my teens were Anne Murray and Linda Ronstadt). I use makeup and dress nicely for work (no, i dont look like a Vegas streetwalker), but I insist on being taken seriouisly and listened to, and can be assertive when I need to be (tho it has taken me a long, long time to be able to do that).

I hope something in here makes sense? I didnt have time to go edit and reorganize my post, so maybe not.~

And finally, I apologize if i made you feel i was dictating to you or others how they should look. I really was just trying to point out that a lot of ppl see as 'aging' really isnt.

Respectfully,

Carol :)

my point was more about letting yourself get fatter and wrinkled and dressing as if you were old doesnt seem to me to be some kind of virture in itself (again, i know my perspective is biased, but to me, ppl who do that are giving up, much like Susan Boyle did).

What makes you think that Susan Boyle gave up? Maybe she likes who she is the way she is. Everyone has to do what it takes to make them feel good about themselves. She didn't seem to be ashamed of herself when she was on that stage. That seems to be the perception of others. As far as I can see, she must have some sort of self worth to be able to get up on that stage and still sing so beautifully, even while everyone was laughing at her because she is so "plain" and didn't go out of her way to become glamorous. The virtue is that she was true to herself and didn't allow what society would think turn her into someone that she isn't.

I guess i dont understand how many times i have to say this, but i will try again (I know i must be doing a bad job of explaining how i feel~):

I wasnt referring to Susan Boyle in my overall post; I was reacting to other ppl saying that she gave up, and then recovered her drive and dreams in later life. I think Ms Boyle looks fine, and if the way she currently looks is what gives her confidence, rather than being plucked and styled, that is fine with me. I didnt so much like her hair or what she wore in the contest, but i really liked what wore in the interview, and loved her look in the pics they showed of her as backstory for the interview.

However, she was used by the bloggers as an example to say (as I understood it, anyhow) that being frumpy instead of working on keeping up your appearance, including wearing modern styles, was somehow that way that women should lead their lives. I was mostly trying to say that if women *want* to do that, fine, but if they dont, I dont see why they are wrong.

And yes, I feel that Ms. Boyle has *plenty* of reason to have self worth! She has an amazing singing ability, she is funny, she spent most of her life taking care of her mother, and seems like a wonderful person. However--and I feel really uncomfortable saying this, so maybe i shouldnt--it struck me right away that she didnt seem to have a lot of social cognition, from the way she interacted with the interviewers and the camera (I havent watched the vid of her performance), and I have seen this in a lot of ppl.

The ppl I have known were very trusting and outgoing to a large degree b/c they couldnt read ppl's reactions to them, which in many cases was negative in some way; sarcasm is esp lost on them. If ppl are laughing at them, very often (not always; my nephew with Apserger's certainly understands, he just cant understand that he needs to change how he interacts to fit in with the kids he wantes to be friends with), they laugh with them, thinking that the person is nice and friendly. It was not so much that they are extremely self confident and adjusted to the point they have low social anxiety, they just werent afraid b/c they didnt know to be afraid. Honestly, I find this charming and endearing, but omg it hurts to see ppl treat them mean, when all they want is to make friends and interact with ppl. To me, Ms. Boyle seemed pretty wary of the interviewers and all the attention...I dont know, maybe she just isnt used to so much attention, or maybe she is cautious around new ppl b/c she knows how ppl can be.

Of course, I dont know Ms. Boyle, so part of me being evil here is that I have maybe presumed far, far too much! It could very well be that she is very aware when ppl make fun of her or whatever, and she really *is* just extremely well-adjusted and confident! She even said in the interview something like 'you cant listen to others you have to believe in yourself.' Hopefully that is a belief that she understands and came to on her own (perhaps even with her mother's help or support from other ppl), and not just something her mom told her to say when ppl were being cruel and mean.

Sorry if i have offended you with any of this, I feel i have explained it poorly...

Carol :)