I would do anything to look like her (Pamela Anderson).

[CoverGirl]

Such a beautiful woman, especially in her prime. Seriously, I don't think I've ever seen anyone more beautiful.

 

[emily_3383]

thats cool.

 

[pinksugar]

she's a bit over-plasticised now, but in her day she definately was beautiful. Considering her age now, I couldn't even hope to look that good when I reach that same age, that is for sure!

 

[S. Lisa Smith]

I saw her in real life about 5 years ago when I was in Malibu surfing. She really doesn't look that good. Sorry.

 

[daer0n]

You wouldnt have to do much, all you need is money and a good plastic surgeon

 

[ZebraGarden]

I agree, she is more plastic than a Barbie. Anyone could look like that if they had the money.

 

[Retro-Violet]

Originally Posted by pinksugar /img/forum/go_quote.gif she's a bit over-plasticised now, but in her day she definately was beautiful i agree.

 

[CoverGirl]

Her face isn't plastic. The only ps she had were the implants, which she didn't even need. I believe I read somewhere that she naturally had a C cup.

 

[Annia]

Pamela Anderson is on the feminine-masculine list. Ever since a poster on MUT commented about her curves, and I have been studying anthropology, I have been noticing the difference between feminine bodies vs masculine in women.

The first and second pic, she looks masculine. The third and fourth pic you see lack of curves and backside. The last picture, broad shoulders.

Edit. Cleaned up some words, to be more clear.

 

[Annia]

Not to be mean, I am just interested in anthropology. I am seeing a huge difference in feminine and masculine females.

 

[CoverGirl]

^ The makeup/styling in the first couple pics are terrible. As for the 3rd/4th pics, yes Pam is thin, & I don't think her shoulders are manly.

 

[fawp]

I think she's really pretty, too. I'm not too big on her chosen style but she does have a naturally beautiful face and figure.

 

[Annia]

Originally Posted by CoverGirl /img/forum/go_quote.gif ^ The makeup/styling in the first couple pics are terrible. As for the 3rd/4th pics, yes Pam is thin, & I don't think her shoulders are manly. I was not even commenting on how thin she was. I guess curves can have different meanings for the reader. I meant Pamela Anderson's skeletal proportions are not consistent with a feminine body. Curves, to me, is not only determined by adipose tissue.
Again, I just want to put this out there: This isn't really my opinion, and I am not trying to make you upset. I am just into anthropology.

 

[puncturedskirt]

Pfft, That's the makeup. Did you ever see her without it? :|

 

[CoverGirl]

^ Yes, I have. I know that makeup does transform her a lot, but her facial design is still amazing. Very, very few women can look that stunning, even with the best makeup artists in the world. Also, when she first hit the scene, she wore minimal makeup & most people think she was her most beautiful at that time.

Annia, I believe that you aren't trying to make me upset.

I still say her shape is feminine. The long legs, the big boobs, & while she doesn't have the very obvious curves that seem to be more popular today (which I honestly do not find as attractive as I do a beautiful thin body), she's not built straight up & down like a boy either. She does have some little hips. You're entitled to your opinion though.

 

[magosienne]

i'm sure she looked good in her old days, but now, to me, it's like she's all barbie and plasticised. as a kid though, when seeing her on tv, i used to dream of having a thin body like hers.

 

[Annia]

Originally Posted by CoverGirl /img/forum/go_quote.gif ^ Yes, I have. I know that makeup does transform her a lot, but her facial design is still amazing. Very, very few women can look that stunning, even with the best makeup artists in the world. Also, when she first hit the scene, she wore minimal makeup & most people think she was her most beautiful at that time.
Annia, I believe that you aren't trying to make me upset.

I still say her shape is feminine. The long legs, the big boobs, & while she doesn't have the very obvious curves that seem to be more popular today (which I honestly do not find as attractive as I do a beautiful thin body), she's not built straight up & down like a boy either. She does have some little hips. You're entitled to your opinion though.

I think you are misunderstanding me. I said it was not my opinion, it is an opinion of science in anthropology. You can't say that research data is wrong. That's like saying 2+2 does not equal 4, when it really does.
Let's take the word curves out, and replace it with skeletal structure. The female pelvis is broader when viewed from the front or side and its vertical length is smaller. In the pictures I have posted, it clearly shows the opposite of this.

As for you not finding obvious curves not attractive--I believe you are picturing a hyper-feminine body. One can still have a feminine body and be thin.

Okay, the morning lecture is over. lol

Edit: This isn't theory, it is based on research data.

 

[missmelaniem]

I don't think that can be determined visually very well. I think it has more to do with measurements and waist to hip ratio. OH and lots of science is theorhetical. Its annoying when people represent scientific theory as absolute fact.

ANYWAY....

I think shes gorgeous also. Few people really look that great without MU

 

[Aquilah]

Lately, based on almost any pics I've seen her in, she's really starting to look rough. Sorry, no offense meant, but yeah.

 

[Lia]

I remember seeing pics of her when she was 18. She was really gorgeous. Nowadays i think that her brows are too thin, her body a bit too plastic, and the hair too much blonde