![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/user_ontd.gif?v=92.2){kind=small}
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif?v=92.2){kind=small}
1:01 pm - 01/19/2010
By yesterday evening the Paper of Record published not one, but two takedowns of women — somewhat unsurprisingly, both centered around weight and penned by the fairer sex. The stage for the scrutiny was the Golden Globes red carpet, which many an actress strolled down on Sunday night.
The first piece, written by Andy Port (yes, a woman), declares that Jennifer Aniston, Courtney Cox and workout queen Kate Hudson have all "put on a little weight." Though she says they are "sporting sexier curves" she then goes on to say it's concentrated in their upper arms.
Then, Cathy Horyn decides to take down the gorgeous Christina Hendricks — the Mad Men actress known for her sexy curves... which are decidedly not concentrated in her upper arms. In her piece she writes, "Not pretty Christina Hendricks in Christian Siriano’s exploding ruffle dress. (As one stylist said, 'You don’t put a big girl in a big dress.')" Whether you agree or disagree (you disagree, right?), it should be noted that the photo running with Horyn's piece was most definitely distorted, possibly to (falsely) illustrate her "point." Check out the side-by-sides above. We've contacted Horyn for comment and we'll update when we hear back.
Source.
What do you think, ONTD? Strike 3 for the NY Times?
ETA: The Times has since replaced the picture and stated that the picture was distorted due to "routine processing." Suuuure.
NY Times Thinks Christina Hendricks is Fat
By yesterday evening the Paper of Record published not one, but two takedowns of women — somewhat unsurprisingly, both centered around weight and penned by the fairer sex. The stage for the scrutiny was the Golden Globes red carpet, which many an actress strolled down on Sunday night.
The first piece, written by Andy Port (yes, a woman), declares that Jennifer Aniston, Courtney Cox and workout queen Kate Hudson have all "put on a little weight." Though she says they are "sporting sexier curves" she then goes on to say it's concentrated in their upper arms.
Then, Cathy Horyn decides to take down the gorgeous Christina Hendricks — the Mad Men actress known for her sexy curves... which are decidedly not concentrated in her upper arms. In her piece she writes, "Not pretty Christina Hendricks in Christian Siriano’s exploding ruffle dress. (As one stylist said, 'You don’t put a big girl in a big dress.')" Whether you agree or disagree (you disagree, right?), it should be noted that the photo running with Horyn's piece was most definitely distorted, possibly to (falsely) illustrate her "point." Check out the side-by-sides above. We've contacted Horyn for comment and we'll update when we hear back.
Source.
What do you think, ONTD? Strike 3 for the NY Times?
ETA: The Times has since replaced the picture and stated that the picture was distorted due to "routine processing." Suuuure.
While the dress colour sucks for her skintone, Hendricks still looks like a fucking goddess.
Isn't the "___ BITCH", part of the macro supposed to go first?
Meanwhile, can't stop staring at her figure in that dress.
I'm also happy to read that she's sweet IRL. Where did you meet her, if you don't mind my asking?
she looks like an old, giant-chinned kstew.
... the fuck? those three are in great shape
courteney cox and jen aniston looked fucking amazing. these bitches are so jeliz.
Edited at 2010-01-19 08:17 pm (UTC)
christina looked pretty fierce and she has a curvy and amazing body...she is just not a skinny boring hollywood bitch