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

Oranage2 · 02-10-2010 10:04am

She's alright second best looking out of all em

1) Dark haired one
2) Horse
3) Blonde
4) Lesbian

Da Bounca · 02-10-2010 10:05am

Who_owns_this? · 02-10-2010 10:07am

Big Steve wrote: »

I've been with a married woman her being married doesn't bother me . Matthew Broderick isn't exactly a deterrent.... Her face on the other hand is.

I don't think that's something to boast about. I put in the separated from her husband option because I didn't want my stats tainted by conscience. It's a horrible thing to sleep with a married person without giving regard to the person that they loved enough to marry - IMHO.

biko wrote: »

Sorry OP but she's the ugly one, I'd shag Prude in a heartbeat and Slut and ever Ginger but not her.

I always thought that Charlotte (Prude) was the prettiest, followed by Carrie (ok - Foot), then Miranda (Ginger) and, finally, Samantha (Slut). Not that Samantha or Miranda aren't pretty, but their attitudes render them unattractive.

Wibbs · 02-10-2010 10:12am

jesus_thats_gre wrote: »

I agree OP. Us men don't have a clube when it comes to what makes the opposite sex attractive.

Yep.

Who_owns_this? wrote: »

Myself and my female friends think she is generally good looking.

Yep but like the men(and a couple of the ladies) have been saying, you're the wrong audience. It doesnt really matter what you think is good looking. 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. Same in general with gay fellas take on what's attractive in women. You usually miss that "oh damn I so would" factor unless it's really obvious. Similarly you tend to look at parts of the package that barely register with men, rather than looking at the whole(leave it!

).

Look at high fashion. Populated in general with other women and gay men. Then look at most of the models involved and the clothes too and what's considered gorgeous dahling. Most straight men aren't attracted to that look at all. Its like a completely different culture running along with the rest of the world. A sometimes dangerous one, when that internally set criteria has women starving themselves to fit it.

SJP. I found her attractive. Though I do like sinewy women body wise, which most men dont. I think she was very cute when younger and she's put in the work as she aged. Of the four she'd get my vote. Her and the brunette.

Of the rest of her pussy posse? I'd say a poll of straight men would have the brunette at the top. A woman that passes most women viewers by and is barely mentioned. Gay guys would go more for the Kim Catrall one I reckon. Gay women, the red head. SJP for straight women. To be fair they casted it well to hit each demographic.

mfceiling · 02-10-2010 10:14am

Who_owns_this? wrote: »

Yes. Yes it is. Thanks.

I figured. But how can you say you find somebody so unattractive but yet be willing to bonk them? Seriously, I'd rather pay for sex with somebody I found attractive than hook up with somebody who repulsed me.

I think I get you though. Well, as a subscriber to the Bill Clinton school of sex, I would say that it's not possible to have sex with something that has a face covering its entire body.

Wait, wait, wait.......i now have to pay to have sex with SJP??
Whoa.......giddy up

pablomakaveli · 02-10-2010 10:17am

I would say no to SJP on the basis that i'd be commiting bestiality by having sex with her.

Who_owns_this? · 02-10-2010 10:23am

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. Same in general with gay fellas take on what's attractive in women. You usually miss that "oh damn I so would" factor unless it's really obvious. Similarly you tend to look at parts of the package that barely register with men, rather than looking at the whole(leave it! ).

Look at high fashion. Populated in general with other women and gay men. Then look at most of the models involved and the clothes too and what's considered gorgeous dahling. Most straight men aren't attracted to that look at all. Its like a completely different culture running along with the rest of the world. A sometimes dangerous one, when that internally set criteria has women starving themselves to fit it.

I think, although I initially started this thread for the pure purpose of unveiling a trend of getting typecast, I chose a bad example. The SJP phenomenom is more of a case of an ideal being shown which isn't true to real life.

opinion guy · 02-10-2010 10:24am

Who_owns_this? wrote: »

God, this is going against me so far.

I may add a poll.

Myself and my female friends think she is generally good looking. Amazing hair, lovely eyes, her nose is big but it adds character. Mouth is fine, jaw line is great. Body is fantastic. I think her mole was very offputting. I, for one, don't like moles at the best of times so one on the face can be a bit nasty, especially on a sharp chin. But, it seems as though she's got that removed and I really can't see how guys are so against her!!!

Out of curiousity what age are you and your friends ? Whats interesting is that you seem to have some sort of fixation with her - having analysed her looks in such detail. Why is it that you and your gal pals have fixated on her ?

Sardonicat wrote: »

Sex in the City :rolleyes: "Four Vacuous Bitches and their Shoes" more like. Could never understand how so many women fell for the hype around that pile of tripe and saw it as some kind of inspirational life guide.

lol. Refreshing to hear that from a woman!
I've long blamed The Secret for melting a good friends brain. I consider this stuoid show a cofactor. Then again I'm starting to wonder was she not so bright in the first place given the effect these things seem to have had.....

strobe · 02-10-2010 10:30am

Who_owns_this? wrote: »

I try to log onto the You Laugh You Lose thread for at least 3 minutes for every hour I spend in work. I missed a couple of weeks and am catching up now - and I do not get the two "Sarah Jessica Parker looks like a horse" jokes.

I've heard similar on Family Guy (which is hilarious, but she does not look like a foot), and have come across it from other (mostly male) people.

It seems like its mostly only us girls who are willing to admit that she is a very sexy woman; and that you guys think that's it's cool to say that you think she is a dog.

But, I challenge you. If you were single and SJP walked up to you with an average amount of make up on her very well structured face, strutting that body to die for... She told you that she had a room nearby and asked you to accompany her to that room and take her from every angle...

If you didn't have important work to be at or somewhere to get to and you weren't supposed to be meeting a good friend in the next few minutes... If you weren't suffering from some bug that rendered you unimpressive as a lover... If she told you that she wasn't with her husband anymore, so, relieving you from any sense of guilt in being with a married women...

Basically, don't tell me that you wouldn't have no strings attached sex with the original sex and the city girl!

You got SJP in that "what celebrity do you look like" thread that Links started didn't you?

Tough break, but she is manky looking.

strobe · 02-10-2010 10:33am

Sardonicat wrote: »

As a female I would have to agree that SJP, on a good day, looks like a horse.

Now, I don't claim to be an oil-painting, and I don't think looks count for everything (or all that much to be honest) but I'm not being held up as some kind of template of beauty when I'm clearly not.

Sex in the City :rolleyes: "Four Vacuous Bitches and their Shoes" more like. Could never understand how so many women fell for the hype around that pile of tripe and saw it as some kind of inspirational life guide.

Will you marry me?

Who_owns_this? · 02-10-2010 11:14am

opinion guy wrote: »

Out of curiousity what age are you and your friends ? Whats interesting is that you seem to have some sort of fixation with her - having analysed her looks in such detail. Why is it that you and your gal pals have fixated on her ?

lol. Refreshing to hear that from a woman!
I've long blamed The Secret for melting a good friends brain. I consider this stuoid show a cofactor. Then again I'm starting to wonder was she not so bright in the first place given the effect these things seem to have had.....

We're mid 20s to early 30s. I'm 25. There's no fixation - I was just listing out the attractive properties that I can think she has off hand. If I was to analyse her I'm sure I would come up with a lot more.

Are you one of those people who think that intelligence manifests itself in one way and one way only? I bet you are.

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

strobe wrote: »

You got SJP in that "what celebrity do you look like" thread that Links started didn't you?

Tough break, but she is manky looking.

I actually always come out Samantha unfortunately...

Who_owns_this? · 02-10-2010 11:24am

Sardonicat wrote: »

As a female I would have to agree that SJP, on a good day, looks like a horse.

Now, I don't claim to be an oil-painting, and I don't think looks count for everything (or all that much to be honest) but I'm not being held up as some kind of template of beauty when I'm clearly not.

Sex in the City :rolleyes: "Four Vacuous Bitches and their Shoes" more like. Could never understand how so many women fell for the hype around that pile of tripe and saw it as some kind of inspirational life guide.

Ah now, did anybody ever claim it to be some kind of inspirational life guide? Come on. It was light entertainment and to think it was ever meant to be otherwise is a bit foolish.

Wibbs · 02-10-2010 11:28am

Who_owns_this? wrote: »

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

You were doing fine up to that point.

I think, although I initially started this thread for the pure purpose of unveiling a trend of getting typecast, I chose a bad example. The SJP phenomenom is more of a case of an ideal being shown which isn't true to real life.

True though interesting how that ideal was jumped on by so many. It defo seems to be an aspirant one for many out there. I think SJP and her character appeal, because of her relative plainness. She was pretty, but by the time of SOTC she was more plain, but hard work in the gym and hair and kooky clothes, makes her more realistic to aspire to for the average woman. The "if I eat less, murder the gym and throw money at fashion and hair, I could be like her" kinda thing. If they had cast say Monica Belluci in the role, she wouldn't have been nearly so popular. If they had cast the brunette in the role, ditto.

Logical Fallacy · 02-10-2010 11:33am

Millicent wrote: »

maybe slag off some midgets

No point, everything goes over their head.

NoQuarter · 02-10-2010 11:40am

Her head is HUGE!!!!!

never in a million years!!!

*shudders*

Who_owns_this? · 02-10-2010 11:42am

Wibbs wrote: »

You were doing fine up to that point.

Thanks for approval. Wouldn't have added the last bit but for the fact that intelligence is subjective and I wanted to counter condescending point with a condescending point. Indulge me.

Wibbs wrote: »

True though interesting how that ideal was jumped on by so many. It defo seems to be an aspirant one for many out there. I think SJP and her character appeal, because of her relative plainness. She was pretty, but by the time of SOTC she was more plain, but hard work in the gym and hair and kooky clothes, makes her more realistic to aspire to for the average woman. The "if I eat less, murder the gym and throw money at fashion and hair, I could be like her" kinda thing. If they had cast say Monica Belluci in the role, she wouldn't have been nearly so popular. If they had cast the brunette in the role, ditto.

I would like to say that I was trying to make a statement in that a plain enough girl became a style icon through her actions, but I was not.

SJP, in real life, is in no way plain. And it wasn't that wearing the clothes made her look good - wearing the clothes made them look good!

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.

argosy2006 · 02-10-2010 11:42am

I'd back her EW, for small stake only,

dotsman · 02-10-2010 11:45am

Dudess wrote: »

I've never understood the talk of her being utterly hideous - much of it just seems like bandwagon-jumping.l

My guess is that much of it is the reaction to the over the top "she's so beautiful" etc comments from those girls who like her. The fact is, I have never met a guy who thinks she's very hot. She just doesn't seem to have any features that would put her in that category, and many features that would put her in the unattractive category.

Who_owns_this? wrote: »

strutting that body to die for...

Don't you mean the body that is dying? Arguably her worst feature is her unhealthy looking body. When are girls ever going to accept that there should only ever be one bone between a couple? If guys wanted to fcuk a skeleton, they go to the friggin museum more often.

opinion guy · 02-10-2010 11:51am

Who_owns_this? wrote: »

We're mid 20s to early 30s. I'm 25. There's no fixation - I was just listing out the attractive properties that I can think she has off hand. If I was to analyse her I'm sure I would come up with a lot more.

Jesus if that offhand you scare me!

Are you one of those people who think that intelligence manifests itself in one way and one way only? I bet you are.

Who said anything about intelligence ? THere is a difference between common sense and intellience.

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

I type fast. And care littel for speeling. And what does that have to do with intelligence ? I know plenty of dyslexics you've just insulted.

Who_owns_this? wrote: »

Thanks for approval. Wouldn't have added the last bit but for the fact that intelligence is subjective and I wanted to counter condescending point with a condescending point. Indulge me.

The purpose of my condescension was to get you to reveal more about yourself and this frankly, bizarre, teenage thread to better understand are you just a vacuous adult or a tennager, chiefly because my attitued towards you would be adjusted depending on your age. You provided the necessary information. Thank you. Since you are not a teenager I won't kick into "ah bless" mode.

Who_owns_this? · 02-10-2010 11:51am

dotsman wrote: »

When are girls ever going to accept that there should only ever be one bone between a couple? If guys wanted to fcuk a skeleton, they go to the friggin museum more often.

Do those horrible looking (IMO) body building, muscle bound guys do what they do their bodies just to get a girl? Doubt it.

If a girl wants to be slim and eats and exercises accordingly, then I guess she's just not the girl for you. Don't worry - she won't lose any sleep over it.

Logical Fallacy · 02-10-2010 11:59am

OP,

it is not necessary for men to find a women attractive just because you want us to. You seem to be having some issue with people finding her unattractive when in your last post you just detailed an unattractive quality of someone expressed as your own opinion.

That's largely what it all boils down to and is no great mystery.

Who_owns_this? · 02-10-2010 12:01pm

opinion guy wrote: »

Jesus if that offhand you scare me!

What? Listing maybe five or six or seven attractive features of a person is beyond your off hand capability? You should be scared.

opinion guy wrote: »

Who said anything about intelligence ? THere is a difference between common sense and intellience.!

...

opinion guy wrote: »

lol. Refreshing to hear that from a woman!
I've long blamed The Secret for melting a good friends brain. I consider this stuoid show a cofactor. Then again I'm starting to wonder was she not so bright in the first place given the effect these things seem to have had.....

Um - you did. Ok - you said "bright". I took that to mean intelligence. Maybe I'm wrong. Don't think so though.

opinion guy wrote: »

I type fast. And care littel for speeling. And what does that have to do with intelligence ? I know plenty of dyslexics you've just insulted.

I type fast too. And I know I make mistakes, but I try to reduce them by spell checks. Bad spelling has as much to do with intelligence as choice of reading material (see your comment above). And, btw, dyslexics are not bad spellers as far as I'm aware so I think you may have insulted them more than I have.

Who_owns_this? · 02-10-2010 12:04pm

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

OP,

it is not necessary for men to find a women attractive just because you want us to. You seem to be having some issue with people finding her unattractive when in your last post you just detailed an unattractive quality of someone expressed as your own opinion.

That's largely what it all boils down to and is no great mystery.

You're right. It doesn't mean anything to me as to how attractive SJP is. The reason I started this thread was because of the powerful "how ugly is SJP" propaganda going around. I'm not expecting anybody to turn around and say, why yes, she's beautiful. I'm just trying to understand why the woman is getting such negativity - far more so than I think she deserves.

Wibbs · 02-10-2010 12:08pm

Who_owns_this? wrote: »

I would like to say that I was trying to make a statement in that a plain enough girl became a style icon through her actions, but I was not.

SJP, in real life, is in no way plain. And it wasn't that wearing the clothes made her look good - wearing the clothes made them look good!

I wouldnt agree TBH. She's pretty enough, especially when young, but objectively she is pretty ordinary. When you hear guys say "oh you see better looking women than [insert current hot babe here] everyday on the streets of Dublin" they're being subjective. You really don't. However in SJP's case you do.

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.

The leotard looked daft to me so yes I would have said weirdo. Most men would, even those who like very thin women. It was not a sexy look, however "fashionable" it may have been. This is what I mean by a different criteria.

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.

Again I would disagree. One, because again that catwalk fashion is aimed at women and since your OP posed the question "bet you guys would not say no" it's largely irrelevant to us(EG Ive actually watched SATC and have no clue about the items you referenced). Two, my contention is that her relative plainness is what appealed to women. She's not classically pretty, she's short, she's not model tall, with a model face. Shes a gym honed fashionista next door. In much the same way that Jennifer Aniston garnered way more sympathy than Angelina Jolie around the time of oul Bradders doing a runner. Above and beyond the sympathy over him doing a runner, she's girl next door in looks, than the haughty angie.

dotsman wrote:

Don't you mean the body that is dying? Arguably her worst feature is her unhealthy looking body. When are girls ever going to accept that there should only ever be one bone between a couple? If guys wanted to fcuk a skeleton, they go to the friggin museum more often.

Yep. A lot of women dont get this at all. Most men don't go for that look. I have noted this over the years. Maybe moreso as I would be one of the few enough men that do. I prefer small framed low bodyfat women. A women with a four pack stomach does it for me. I'm pretty unusual in this. Even more if these kind of women body shapes were standing in front of men. They're even smaller in the flesh. Interesting study here http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0013010 It seems men prefer bodyshapes slightly slimmer than their partners, but men who like slimmer women have partners well below average slimness.

dotsman · 02-10-2010 12:09pm

Who_owns_this? wrote: »

Do those horrible looking (IMO) body building, muscle bound guys do what they do their bodies just to get a girl? Doubt it.

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".

Who_owns_this? wrote: »

If a girl wants to be slim and eats and exercises accordingly, then I guess she's just not the girl for you. Don't worry - she won't lose any sleep over it.

There's a massive difference between slim and unhealthy.

Logical Fallacy · 02-10-2010 12:18pm

Who_owns_this? wrote: »

You're right. It doesn't mean anything to me as to how attractive SJP is. The reason I started this thread was because of the powerful "how ugly is SJP" propaganda going around. I'm not expecting anybody to turn around and say, why yes, she's beautiful. I'm just trying to understand why the woman is getting such negativity - far more so than I think she deserves.

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?

If you think about it carefully, as i am sure you are capable of doing, you will see you kicked things off to a bad start.

With regard to the point you are are looking to discuss, it's a a relatively complicated answer.

The actually "attractiveness" of the actress herself. SJP is not conventionally good looking and may be seen as a bit of brave casting from the Producers of the show....as such she was never gonna have average men falling over themselves to look at her. However, this didn't really matter when average men were never going to watch the show nor was it a show that was being aimed at that demographic. Add in the fact that the character she portrayed has very few redeeming qualities and it just gets worse.

People tend to allow the types of roles that an actor or actress plays to colour their view of the person, silly but it happens. It's normally something that we do when we are quite young, carries through the teenage years and then dies out. For a lot of people it doesn't, or so it seems.

The fact that the show normally portrayed males in a less than stirling light, or women for that matter, meant the show itself was natural divisive. I know plenty of women who hate the show, with some degree of passion because they feel it portrays women as shallow, money and sex obsessed cowards who are endlessly worried about what their friends and everyone else thinks about them.

The show itself was polarising but a huge hit, the movies even more so and SJP was in the public eye a lot, possibly far more than any other female actress has been in the last 5 to 6 years. As such, she was always going to take more flack.

When something is thrust upon the public as an ideal, which lots of fashion magazines and style obsessed folk tried to do there will always be a backlash.

ncmc · 02-10-2010 12:22pm

I also agree with the OP that the SJP bashing is excessive (I'm a woman btw). While I don't think she is beautiful, there is something striking about her, I would use the word 'handsome' to describe her. She has mannish features, but on her they work. However, I would disagree with the 'body to die for' comment. She is excessively skinny, especially in recent years. Ironically, I think her body is working against her now as it is making her already sharp features, even more gaunt.

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

)

BraziliaNZ · 02-10-2010 12:24pm

I'd bang the bejesus out of her

Jaxxy · 02-10-2010 12:25pm

Who_owns_this? wrote: »

I would like to say that I was trying to make a statement in that a plain enough girl became a style icon through her actions, but I was not.

SJP, in real life, is in no way plain. And it wasn't that wearing the clothes made her look good - wearing the clothes made them look good!

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.

I always thought the pink leotard looked absolutely ridiculous. Actually I thought most of the outfits looked ridiculous. But then again I don't like "high fashion", don't follow it and don't watch SATC.

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.

McChubbin · 02-10-2010 12:32pm

What kin of SJP are we discussing here?
Sex and The City era or....this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qsda4GJuzcQ

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

Comments