Bet you guys would not say no to SJP!!!

Who_owns_this?

Wibbs wrote: »

...

I disagree that SJP is less attractive than your ordinary woman on the street, but that kind of thing is subjective.

She's not a classical beauty - I never said that. Although, I'd much prefer her over Angelina Jolie - SJP has personality in her features rather than scariness.

I really think that a lot of SATC was about making fashion more accessable, and the leotard scene was the beginning was part of that. You say you have watched some of the episodes - fair enough. What it did for those who actually followed the series was expose them to unusual and daring dress amongst the four girls and side characters. As somebody who watched the entire series, I can say that SJP pulled off many outfits that most people couldnt not.

***********************

And, I still say that most guys would have sex with her if they had half a chance.

Logical Fallacy

Who_owns_this? wrote: »

And, I still say that most guys would have sex with her if they had half a chance.

Saying things over and over again doesn't exactly make them true though.

prinz

JaxxYChicK wrote: »

I agree with you though when you say she isn't "plain". She is actually quite striking when you think about it. Now this doesn't mean she is beautiful or attractive, it just means that she'd probably stand out in a crowd. Personally I think she's a horrid looking thing, but I would probably look twice at her if she passed me on O'Connell St., strutting her stuff like a catwalk model in an outfit that offends my eyes.

I do also happen to think she was more attractive when she was younger. Being so thin I think has aged her badly. I disagree that she has a body to die for, I don't think she does. Her legs are horrible, her knees scare me and seriously, you know all of the "good" pictures are airbrushed and photoshopped to excess.

This sums it up perfectly for me. Looks like a decent drag-queen a lot of the time tbh, just plain off-putting the rest of it. Body to die for my arse.

Logical Fallacy

Who_owns_this? wrote: »

I really think that a lot of SATC was about making fashion more accessable, and the leotard scene was the beginning was part of that. You say you have watched some of the episodes - fair enough. What it did for those who actually followed the series was expose them to unusual and daring dress amongst the four girls and side characters. As somebody who watched the entire series, I can say that SJP pulled off many outfits that most people couldnt not.

***********************

And, I still say that most guys would have sex with her if they had half a chance.

Hardly making it more accessible then, by your own summary of the wardrobe departments achievements?

Who_owns_this?

Who_owns_this? wrote: »

Check out the opening sequence. Every time that SATC started and SJP was walking around in that pink leotard, did you think - wow - weirdo? Of course you didn't.
.

Yes I did
I thought it was very weird

Who_owns_this?

dotsman wrote: »

I have no idea why they do it, and I have no problem with a girl finding that look unattractive. Nor will I ever start a thread asking why girls don't find that look "sexy".

Why not? If you don't ask, you'll never learn.

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

Has it occurred to you that your thread may have gone a lot better if that is what you had asked, rather than implying all men are full of **** and will **** anything, whether they find her attractive or not?.

But I did ask that in my very first post, and I never said men are full of **** and the point I was making was that guys may say that somebody is unattractive but will still **** them.

ncmc wrote: »

My issue with SJP is that on SATC, they had these ridiculously handsome men falling over themselves to date her. In reality, men like that wouldn't look twice at her, especially in NYC, where the women tend to be stunning. As executive producer, SJP would have had a big hand in the storyline and casting. So for me, she comes out of that as being extremely big-headed and maybe has a distorted sense of her own attractiveness. You never really saw her in the show date an unattractive man (unless he was rich )

That's also weird to me, but, I've seen this happen. I've lived in New York and other cities and when it comes to going out in the trendy bars, etc., guys will fall over themselves for a high pair of boobs and a tight ass rather than a pretty face any day. But, maybe that's why Carrie didn't find a lasting relationship until her 40s - too many superficial guys!

phasers

SATC didn't show fashion, it showed whatever crazy tacky crap Patricia Field could get her hands on.

Who_owns_this?

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

Hardly making it more accessible then, by your own summary of the wardrobe departments achievements?

Your username is so apt! By wearing daring outfits and them making more sense than the swimsuits mixed with curtains that one sees on the catwalk, one was inspired to dip one's toes into the realms of current fashion. Not necessarily wear what SJP's character was wearing, but to take inspiration from it.

Who_owns_this?

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

Saying things over and over again doesn't exactly make them true though.

Doesn't make them false either.

Cutie.

bnt

I probably wouldn't: not because of her looks (which I don't mind), but because she's so tiny. She makes Matthew Broderick look like a man, and SATC's Aidan (John Corbett, 6'5") looked like Lurch (from the Addams Family) next to her. I'd be worried about breaking her. :eek:

Logical Fallacy

Who_owns_this? wrote: »

Your username is so apt!

Oh do explain, i haven't used a single logical fallacy in this entire thread.

SugarHigh

Who_owns_this? wrote: »

I really think that a lot of SATC was about making fashion more accessable, and the leotard scene was the beginning was part of that. You say you have watched some of the episodes - fair enough. What it did for those who actually followed the series was expose them to unusual and daring dress amongst the four girls and side characters. As somebody who watched the entire series, I can say that SJP pulled off many outfits that most people couldnt not.

***********************

And, I still say that most guys would have sex with her if they had half a chance.

What was it you said to the other guy?

Oh yea

Btw, you spelled a number of words incorrectly...

Bad spelling has as much to do with intelligence as choice of reading material

And, I still say that most guys would have sex with her if they had half a chance.

What does that prove?

Jaxxy

I think it's unfair to say that just because it has a hole a man will stick his manhood in it, or that even if he says she's unattractive he'll go ahead and do her anyway. Not all men live by "a ride is still a ride even if it's with a horse" philosophy.

skregs

I wouldn't enter Crufts with the fugly bitch

Posh girl, I would savage, I'd bail into the lesbian when I'm done and whatever I had left I use on the slutty one.
SJP could go to the shop and get me a coke if she wanted.

Wretched face, with a body like an anorexic gym freak.

OP, the reason 99% of straight men say she's a munter is because she a ****ing dog

Who_owns_this?

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

Oh do explain, i haven't used a single logical fallacy in this entire thread.

No - it was more that you were identifying fallacies and explaining them away logically.

Not, of course, that there have been any fallacies in my logical and well thought out arguments...

Who_owns_this?

Ok guys - I can admit when I'm losing. Lots of good points made and the like, but I guess that the majority of people do not consider SJP to be an attractive woman.

I still don't understand why she is the brunt of so many jokes - there's so much worse out there, but you do what you want.

I just hope that the day she comes up to you wearing her cute little tennis skirt and some sort of top that you find attractive and offers you her body for gratification that you will be able to hold on to your standards and send her on to the next unlucky mo-fo.

Me, I'm going to take her to my apartment and into my bedroom and hold her for ransom from her rich husband.

Takes all sorts eh!

ejmaztec

Until I saw her on Who Do You Think You Are U.S. version, I wasn't bothered either way, but after listening to her 4000 "Oh my God"s in the space of about 25 minutes, I'd quite happily put her in touch with a modern-day live equivalent of Vlad the Impaler.

Wibbs

Who_owns_this? wrote: »

I disagree that SJP is less attractive than your ordinary woman on the street, but that kind of thing is subjective.

True, but even objectively speaking one wouldnt be waiting long to see more pretty women walk by. I wouldnt say she's less or more attractive, she's "superaverage". The updated version of the girl next door. I'd lump Jenny anniston in with that too.

I really think that a lot of SATC was about making fashion more accessable, and the leotard scene was the beginning was part of that. You say you have watched some of the episodes - fair enough. What it did for those who actually followed the series was expose them to unusual and daring dress amongst the four girls and side characters. As somebody who watched the entire series, I can say that SJP pulled off many outfits that most people couldnt not.

Oh no doubt. She certainly pushed the kooky look. I can see that much and Ive little interest in women's fashions. That's the thing, your OP has little bearing on this aspect. Men simply don't care nearly to the same extent.

***********************

And, I still say that most guys would have sex with her if they had half a chance.

I would, but like I say I like that body shape.

But I did ask that in my very first post, and I never said men are full of **** and the point I was making was that guys may say that somebody is unattractive but will still **** them.

Its called "Beer" or "desperation". But broadly yes, more men than women would on balance do that IMHO. Men who don't know they have choice.

[/QUThat's also weird to me, but, I've seen this happen. I've lived in New York and other cities and when it comes to going out in the trendy bars, etc., guys will fall over themselves for a high pair of boobs and a tight ass rather than a pretty face any day. But, maybe that's why Carrie didn't find a lasting relationship until her 40s - too many superficial guys!

Which kinda proves your point in a way. That while some men would hop her, most wouldnt if presented with a prettier woman.

Who_owns_this? wrote: »

Your username is so apt! By wearing daring outfits and them making more sense than the swimsuits mixed with curtains that one sees on the catwalk, one was inspired to dip one's toes into the realms of current fashion. Not necessarily wear what SJP's character was wearing, but to take inspiration from it.

Yep, but like I say, no interest to straight men and would have no bearing on her bangability.

Logical Fallacy

Who_owns_this? wrote: »

Me, I'm going to take her to my apartment and into my bedroom and hold her for ransom from her rich husband.

Takes all sorts eh!

I think at this point she probably has more in the bank the Ferris to be honest. :pac:

Who_owns_this?

... But, she has such a nice soft accent...

No, doesn't matter. Nothing to do with me anymore.

But Vlad the Impaler? Seriously? She doesn't deserve that!!

strobe

Who_owns_this? wrote: »

Why not? If you don't ask, you'll never learn. But, maybe that's why Carrie didn't find a lasting relationship until her 40s - too many superficial guys!

I'd say it was more to do with the fact that the show was primarily based around the girls dating different guys. And because, you know, it was in the script........

This thread has been an unfortunate addition to your boards.ie career all round. If I was you I'd cut my loses re-reg.

phasers

Carrie ended up with a cold, distant, creep who didn't suit her at all, the writers just seem to think that a happy ending involves all the women being paired up.

That is way more offensive to me than any of the "superficial guys"

Who_owns_this?

Wibbs wrote: »

True, but even objectively speaking one wouldnt be waiting long to see more pretty women walk by. I wouldnt say she's less or more attractive, she's "superaverage". The updated version of the girl next door. I'd lump Jenny anniston in with that too.

Oh no doubt. She certainly pushed the kooky look. I can see that much and Ive little interest in women's fashions. That's the thing, your OP has little bearing on this aspect. Men simply don't care nearly to the same extent.

***********************

I would, but like I say I like that body shape.

Its called "Beer" or "desperation". But broadly yes, more men than women would on balance do that IMHO. Men who don't know they have choice.



Which kinda proves your point in a way. That while some men would hop her, most wouldnt if presented with a prettier woman.

Yep, but like I say, no interest to straight men and would have no bearing on her bangability.

Not dignifying this with a reply, but pretty much all you've said is in agreement with my point that most guys would bang SJP.

Wibbs wrote: »

Which kinda proves your point in a way. That while some men would hop her, most wouldnt if presented with a prettier woman.

And, no, I said the exact opposite. That I found guys going for the girls with the hot bodies over those who were pretty.

Yup. Not going to dignify this at all... !!! :cool::o:cool::o

jfrmbray

Who_owns_this? wrote: »

Although, I'd much prefer her over Angelina Jolie - SJP has personality in her features rather than scariness.

Who_owns_this?

strobe wrote: »

I'd say it was more to do with the fact that the show was primarily based around the girls dating different guys. And because, you know, it was in the script........

This thread has been an unfortunate addition to your boards.ie career all round. If I was you I'd cut my loses re-reg.

You're weird - I'm enjoying this thread which went from answering my initial question to providing me with points of interest. Would do it again tomorrow.

Obviously the script provided the story, but, oddly, scripts take inspiration from actual events and occurrences.

Why are you so weird?

SugarHigh

Who_owns_this? wrote: »

I've lived in New York and other cities and when it comes to going out in the trendy bars, etc., guys will fall over themselves for a high pair of boobs and a tight ass rather than a pretty face any day. But, maybe that's why Carrie didn't find a lasting relationship until her 40s - too many superficial guys!

guys will fall over themselves for a high pair of boobs and a tight ass

Neither of which she has.

too many superficial guys!

As opposed to her character?

iguana

Wibbs wrote: »

From the sexual point of view anyway. I used to reckon women were much better than men at spotting the good looking among their own gender. I really don't anymore. They have a different criteria. One internally set by the gender.

I'm not sure that's so true. The women I find most attractive are ones that I see something in them that reminds me of me (or at least an idealised me). I like hourglass shaped women, with somewhat muscular limbs and large facial features, especially eyes and lips. Personality wise I like them to be confident, overtly sexual while also tomboyish, a good example is Max in Dark Angel.

I think it makes sense that what we find attractive in the gender we aren't attracted to is something that we recognise in ourselves or someone who has something we wish for ourselves.

Who_owns_this?

phasers wrote: »

Carrie ended up with a cold, distant, creep who didn't suit her at all, the writers just seem to think that a happy ending involves all the women being paired up.

That is way more offensive to me than any of the "superficial guys"

I agree on that though. The ending of the series and the movie afterwards (which I though was awful) was very unfair to Carrie. But, I never said it was a feminist thing - thank God!!

Who_owns_this?

SugarHigh wrote: »

Neitherof which she has.

But do you really not think that she has a good chest and some curves? I know there's arguments pro and con her face, but I would have thought that her body was good without question. I can't believe I'm getting this so wrong - I'd make a terrible lesbian!!!

prinz

Who_owns_this? wrote: »

But, maybe that's why Carrie didn't find a lasting relationship until her 40s - too many superficial guys!

Oh ffs. The entire premise of SATC was superficiality. She didn't find a lasting relationship because she and her ilk were shallow twats*. I think what we're dealing with here is a poster who idolises the whole SATC concept, and needs male approval to reaffirm the wish to be a SJP-alike. Sad, sad, sad.

*characters, not celebrity abuse.

Ben Hadad

Listen she isn't drop dead georgous or anything, but she is at least healthy, doesn't have any obvioes mutations or contortions. Not my thing personally, but whatever.
Horses for courses.

strobe

Who_owns_this? wrote: »

You're weird - I'm enjoying this thread which went from answering my initial question to providing me with points of interest. Would do it again tomorrow.

Obviously the script provided the story, but, oddly, scripts take inspiration from actual events and occurrences.

Why are you so weird?

I might be weird but then again I'm not the one talking about a character on an awful sit-com like they are a real person and repeating the same thing over and over and over again despite every single person on the thread universally telling you you are wrong. Seek help.

phasers

Ben Hadad wrote: »

Listen she isn't drop dead georgous or anything, but she is at least healthy, doesn't have any obvioes mutations or contortions.

She has a second head growing out of her chin!

Who_owns_this?

ncmc wrote: »

My issue with SJP is that on SATC, they had these ridiculously handsome men falling over themselves to date her. In reality, men like that wouldn't look twice at her, especially in NYC, where the women tend to be stunning. As executive producer, SJP would have had a big hand in the storyline and casting. So for me, she comes out of that as being extremely big-headed and maybe has a distorted sense of her own attractiveness. You never really saw her in the show date an unattractive man (unless he was rich )

Who_owns_this? wrote: »

That's also weird to me, but, I've seen this happen. I've lived in New York and other cities and when it comes to going out in the trendy bars, etc., guys will fall over themselves for a high pair of boobs and a tight ass rather than a pretty face any day. But, maybe that's why Carrie didn't find a lasting relationship until her 40s - too many superficial guys!

prinz wrote: »

Oh ffs. The entire premise of SATC was superficiality. She didn't find a lasting relationship because she and her ilk were shallow twats*. I think what we're dealing with here is a poster who idolises the whole SATC concept, and needs male approval to reaffirm the wish to be a SJP-alike. Sad, sad, sad.

*characters, not celebrity abuse.

Oh Jeez - take what I say into context before going into a rant. Are you always this angry or did you scratch one of your favourite dishes this morning?

old_aussie

The truth is that "any woman" who offered "free rides" would be ridden into the ground, not just SJP

Who_owns_this?

strobe wrote: »

I might be weird but then again I'm not the one talking about a character on an awful sit-com like they are a real person and repeating the same thing over and over and over again despite every single person on the thread universally telling you you are wrong. Seek help.

But I admitted I was wrong about my perception of other people's perception of Sarah Jessica Parker - who, last time I checked, is an actual real person...

(Although, admittedly, I don't check these things very often.)

SugarHigh

Who_owns_this? wrote: »

But do you really not think that she has a good chest and some curves? I know there's arguments pro and con her face, but I would have thought that her body was good without question. I can't believe I'm getting this so wrong - I'd make a terrible lesbian!!!

I didn't realse she got a boob job
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_vZr34SwUNws/S_eAqd3698I/AAAAAAAADBk/hLFkHC-OyjE/s1600/sarah-jessica-parker-boob-job.jpg

She still does not have nice rack though and has no ass.

Wibbs

Who_owns_this? wrote: »

Not dignifying this with a reply,

Ah jeez its hardly like I insulted you. Yep SATC "chick" by the sounds of it.

And, no, I said the exact opposite. That I found guys going for the girls with the hot bodies over those who were pretty.

For pretty read fat maybe? Any guy given the choice is gonna go for hot body(in his taste bracket) with pretty face. Many studies tracking mens micro looks have shown this. Men look at hip waist ratio, breasts and face. The ass doesnt get that much of a look in funny enough.

Yup. Not going to dignify this at all... !!! :cool::o:cool::o

Eh maybe you're missing the notion of dignity in a debate.

But do you really not think that she has a good chest and some curves? I know there's arguments pro and con her face, but I would have thought that her body was good without question.

Curves? Are you serious? Like I said, I like her body. That's closer to my "type" than most men Ive knows type, but there is no way on earth the word curve should be in the same sentence as SJP. She is very thin. No wonder there are women with unrealistic views of theirs and other women's bodies when SJP is described as having curves. Good chest though. You're not the only one to mention it. I caught someone on TV3(bug shock) describing george clooneys current squeeze as "showing off her curves". Sweet zombie jebus, SJP has more and she's like a matchstick with the wood whittled away.

Jaxxy

iguana wrote: »

I'm not sure that's so true. The women I find most attractive are ones that I see something in them that reminds me of me (or at least an idealised me). I like hourglass shaped women, with somewhat muscular limbs and large facial features, especially eyes and lips. Personality wise I like them to be confident, overtly sexual while also tomboyish, a good example is Max in Dark Angel.

I think it makes sense that what we find attractive in the gender we aren't attracted to is something that we recognise in ourselves or someone who has something we wish for ourselves.

+1.

Excellent observation. This explains all of my girly crushes.

Wibbs

SugarHigh wrote: »

She still does not have nice rack though and has no ass.

Like I said people differ, I'd say she has nice little bum. Probably well toned too judging by her core muscles.

Gummy Panda

I'd ride her. Waste not, want not.

If I had a choice, it would be Angelina Jolie.... RAWR!

phasers

Meh

amacachi

phasers wrote: »

Meh

That would be the definition of having no arse as far as I'm concerned.

Millicent

Who_owns_this? wrote: »

I agree on that though. The ending of the series and the movie afterwards (which I though was awful) was very unfair to Carrie. But, I never said it was a feminist thing - thank God!!

Unfair my arse! She was a whiny, selfish, self-obsessed whinge bag who cheated on the lovely Aidan with Big, even though he was the nicest character they'd had her go with -- attentive, kind and good to her friends. The Carrie character annoyed me for her vacuousness and self-obsession. Honestly, had the show just featured the other three, it would have improved 200%.

Who_owns_this?

Wibbs wrote: »

Ah jeez its hardly like I insulted you. Yep SATC "chick" by the sounds of it.

Come on Wibbs - I was obviously messing when I said that. I was just trying to lighten the situation. Conversation - not argument - is what I was looking for. Debate don't hate... (just made that up)...

Wibbs wrote: »

For pretty read fat maybe? Any guy given the choice is gonna go for hot body(in his taste bracket) with pretty face. Many studies tracking mens micro looks have shown this. Men look at hip waist ratio, breasts and face. The ass doesnt get that much of a look in funny enough.

For pretty read not completely toned all over. I'm talking girls sized 8 who are pretty v. girls sized 6/8 who have toned tummies and big boobs and tiny waists. Regardless of faces, I have seen guys go for the tight assed, high boobed girls (like I've said) over the pretty girls. Or, to put it another way, great body / good face wins over good body / great face.

Wibbs wrote: »

Eh maybe you're missing the notion of dignity in a debate.

Another joke there Wibbs.

Wibbs wrote: »

Curves? Are you serious? Like I said, I like her body. That's closer to my "type" than most men Ive knows type, but there is no way on earth the word curve should be in the same sentence as SJP. She is very thin. No wonder there are women with unrealistic views of theirs and other women's bodies when SJP is described as having curves. Good chest though. You're not the only one to mention it. I caught someone on TV3(bug shock) describing george clooneys current squeeze as "showing off her curves". Sweet zombie jebus, SJP has more and she's like a matchstick with the wood whittled away.

I'm getting the sense that people are not agreeing with me on this... I, personally, thought that SJP had curves. Not huge breasts, but some. And, slim or skinny though she is, she's not straight up and down - she is curvy. Proportionally. Her bum might be tiny, but she is tiny. Blow her up 200% and you'll see curves everywhere. It's all about proportion people!!

Wibbs

amacachi wrote: »

That would be the definition of having no arse as far as I'm concerned.

That's the beauty of different tastes. I think she's got a nice little pert bum. I don't like big arsed women myself.

prinz

Compare the two..

http://www.marieclaire.co.uk/imageBank/s/Sophie-Dahl13.jpg

http://girlstalkinsmack.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/SARAH-JESSICA-PARKER-2.jpg

One has attractive womanly curves. One doesn't. Don't need to blow her up 200% or anything else.

SugarHigh

It's scary how serious some people take this show.

ncmc

prinz wrote: »

Compare the two..

http://www.marieclaire.co.uk/imageBank/s/Sophie-Dahl13.jpg

http://girlstalkinsmack.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/SARAH-JESSICA-PARKER-2.jpg

One has attractive womanly curves. One doesn't. Don't need to blow her up 200% or anything else.

Christ that picture of SJP is scary, in her defence though, it's only recently that she has become emaciated like that. She was very slim during the SATC run, but not near as malnourished as that.

And a bit off topic, but it bugs me when magazines talk about women having 'curves' when in fact they just have a big rack (normally fake) and the rest of their body is that of a prepubescent boy :mad:.

iguana

Who_owns_this? wrote: »

Come on, if you poured many other girls into the outfits that SJP wore during SATC, they would have just looked silly. Check out the opening sequence. Every time that SATC started and SJP was walking around in that pink leotard, did you think - wow - weirdo? Of course you didn't.

From the leotard to the "newspaper dress" to the fluorescent creations, SJP brought the crazy catwalk fashion to the city, and she in a way that some plain girl never could.

She looked like a freakin' clown. I was 20 when the show came out and while the sex part of the show obviously got my peer group talking once we got past that, the ridiculous clothes Carrie wore was the big talking point.