fuckable. I prefer shorter hair on girls anyways and some can pull off a grade 1, look at Sinead o'Connor for example. Gail Porter hair's all but just fallen out with alopecia, she's just got this little mohican dyed red on the top of her head and she still looks great too ;) piccy here http://www.sky.com/showbiz/article/0,,50001-1195214,00.html and here http://www.thisislondon.com/showbiz/articles/20313431?source=Evening%20Standard
Now you have me thinking, and it's not often that happens, I can tell you.
Sinead O'Connor was without doubt beautiful in her hairless moments, and Natalie Portman carried the look off admirably recently (possibly more so), so it still works.
I think that a beautiful woman will always look fuckable, regardless of hair quantity. It just makes their beauty more accessible with the 'right' amount of hair. I have always had a thing for long hair, and a woman with short hair doesn't turn my head as much as one with short (or no) hair. So I guess I am saying that a woman with no hair is less noticeably attractive. It takes a longer look to appreciate them if the hair level is not optimum to your expectations/pre-conceptions.
Basically, whie I don't find the no-hair look a hot one normally, anyone can carry it off to the same level of attraction as they had before. It just isn't as accessible to a member of the eligible sex that has a short attention span...
Fuckola, that was philosophical. I might have to go and lie down now.
11 comments:
I hope that if I ever go bald, I'm still fuckable.
Thanks Charby....now I need to go invest in a wig....just incase the population disagrees with me.
: X
I might be investing in a wig sooner than you will!
I just wanted to post so I got the word "axtec"
I even spelt it wrong in my excitement! It was aztec. lol
No baldies here thanks!
:( sigh.
I have a lot of wigs (although it's because I'm theatrical, not bald). I'd be happy to share my collection with you ladies at any time!
-h
So, Charbs, are you in imminent danger of going bald?
fuckable.
I prefer shorter hair on girls anyways and some can pull off a grade 1, look at Sinead o'Connor for example.
Gail Porter hair's all but just fallen out with alopecia, she's just got this little mohican dyed red on the top of her head and she still looks great too ;)
piccy here
http://www.sky.com/showbiz/article/0,,50001-1195214,00.html
and here
http://www.thisislondon.com/showbiz/articles/20313431?source=Evening%20Standard
Hmmmmm.
Now you have me thinking, and it's not often that happens, I can tell you.
Sinead O'Connor was without doubt beautiful in her hairless moments, and Natalie Portman carried the look off admirably recently (possibly more so), so it still works.
I think that a beautiful woman will always look fuckable, regardless of hair quantity. It just makes their beauty more accessible with the 'right' amount of hair. I have always had a thing for long hair, and a woman with short hair doesn't turn my head as much as one with short (or no) hair. So I guess I am saying that a woman with no hair is less noticeably attractive. It takes a longer look to appreciate them if the hair level is not optimum to your expectations/pre-conceptions.
Basically, whie I don't find the no-hair look a hot one normally, anyone can carry it off to the same level of attraction as they had before. It just isn't as accessible to a member of the eligible sex that has a short attention span...
Fuckola, that was philosophical. I might have to go and lie down now.
:)
Don't you just hate it when random people post long rambling posts on your blog from nowhere?
:)
Maybe I should link to an Indian web consultancy just for a laugh...
Post a Comment