Not sure about this you knowMay 6, 2016 Tim WorstallFeminism19 Comments Bit unkind of the Mail to label ladies so. previousMencap has a slight problem herenextBit of a disappointment 19 thoughts on “Not sure about this you know” The Stigler May 6, 2016 at 8:50 am Difference between men and women. Women will utterly obsess about women having a flawless, sculpted look. Men like pretty, reasonably thin and for women to be a bit fun. Michael Hutchence left Helena Christensen for Paula Yates, who just shouldn’t have been a competitor. My guess? Paula Yates is a lot more fun in the sack. Bloke in Wales May 6, 2016 at 9:08 am Difference between men and women. Women will utterly obsess about women having a flawless, sculpted look. Men like pretty, reasonably thin and for women to be a bit fun. No idea if any of the women pictured are supposed to be slebs as I don’t recognise any of them. But they all look utterly fake to me. The only one that might get a second glance if I passed her in the street is the one on the right. Tel May 6, 2016 at 9:33 am The captions were gone when I looked at the article. BraveFart May 6, 2016 at 9:43 am In order of bonkability based on the photos, I would put them 1, 3, 4, 2, although on a good day Kelly Brook who is 4 might come in at number 2 in that ranking. I don’t know who 3 is. Tim Worstall May 6, 2016 at 9:44 am I lifted it from the front page, not the article Jonathan May 6, 2016 at 9:59 am @ The Stigler “Michael Hutchence left Helena Christensen for Paula Yates, who just shouldn’t have been a competitor. My guess? Paula Yates is a lot more fun in the sack.” Remind me how that worked out? AVOID CRAZY. MC May 6, 2016 at 10:03 am @The Stigler – I see your point, but i was going to say that Michael Hutchence left the world during an advanced wank, making his judgement on these matters questionable. Then I checked wikipedia and found they ruled it as suicide, with several people suggesting Yates had driven him to it. Helena Christensen is very nice, I’m told. The Meissen Bison May 6, 2016 at 10:08 am I’m with BiW on this. I’ve no idea who any of them are (and the names probably wouldn’t help either) but number four looks like a real person whereas the other three look contrived. As far as the captions go, “cheap” seems to correspond to being broader in the beam and “chic” to an idealised confection. Odd. Ian Reid May 6, 2016 at 10:37 am @The Stigler et al My suspicion is that Paula Yates just knew more dealers, and could get good gear easily. So Much For Subtlety May 6, 2016 at 10:39 am Kelly Brook has long been the sort of girl men like. Even though (or is that because?) she is an idiot. But if they are judging the dresses, not the girls, then their judgement is way off. Ms Brook’s dress is nice. It doesn’t suit her more rounded figure, but it isn’t bad. The two labelled “chic” are not wearing stylish clothes. bloke in spain May 6, 2016 at 10:48 am Oh, is about the togs? I’ve been trying to assess them on rental prospects. Bloke no Longer in Austria May 6, 2016 at 11:19 am Pictured are: Leanne Wood Ruth Davidson Hillary Clinton and Nicola Sturgeon (ps Michael Hutchence also “squired” Kylie for a while, I wonder who ditched who there ) Theophrastus May 6, 2016 at 2:15 pm Women are often very nasty about other women’s appearance – much more ‘judgemental’ than men. Also, articles in the DM are designed to make readers feel either fearful/insecure or angry. This one falls into the fearful/insecure category. Liberal Yank May 6, 2016 at 5:23 pm My initial reaction was that they feel a woman covering her shoulders somehow made them cheap. According to this DM ranking system strippers must be some of the classiest dames in the world. If it was my daughter I would say 2 is the best dress. No comment on the ladies themselves. Enough beer will make it a moot point. Mr Pants May 6, 2016 at 5:27 pm I’d do number one four times if she was up for it! Bloke in Costa Rica May 6, 2016 at 6:02 pm Kelly Brook’s put on a bit of weight lately but ten or fifteen years ago she looked like she’d been designed in a lab by a talented group of horny teenage boys. She was spectacular. Edward Lud May 6, 2016 at 7:13 pm Pull the other one, you lot. Second from the right’s prime crumpet. polidorisghost May 7, 2016 at 12:32 am BraveFart: “In order of bonkability based on the photos, I would put them 1, 3, 4, 2,” I’ll take any of them in any order. Lucky you, if you can afford to be fussy So Much For Subtlety May 7, 2016 at 1:10 am Bloke in Costa Rica – “Kelly Brook’s put on a bit of weight lately but ten or fifteen years ago she looked like she’d been designed in a lab by a talented group of horny teenage boys. She was spectacular.” A pity about her taste in men and refusal to pass on those prize genes. But it depends on what they are assessing. If it is the frocks it is one thing. They need to draw a line between what men like and what works as a model. Tall and thin is great for a model if she wants to show off clothes. Not many men are that interested in their wives and girlfriends looking good in a frock. Edward Lud – “Pull the other one, you lot. Second from the right’s prime crumpet.” She is a prize crumpet but that photo makes her look like Bruce Jenner. Leave a Reply Cancel replyYour email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *Comment Name * Email * Website Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.