She has a nice body, but I don't think she is pretty. (It would have been a
miracle had she been considering the gene pool she was spawned in.) She
certainly wouldn't be a working model if she didn't have a famous name giving
her novelty value.
Emma Smoot
Emma Smoot wrote the above.
I agree, sort of. I think she is just blah average with a rich and powerfully
connected ( also repugnant and creepy) father . You could take dozens of
young women off any street, do their makeup and clothes and have them look a
lot better that Ivanaka, Iwanka, Ivernka, whateverka her namka iska......
Hmmmm, well since she looks just like her dad......................
Maybe, but it's an alluring ugliness. Some women might be considered ugly but
are still very hot.
She also has a great body.
(np: David Bowie - Earthling)
O, god, dahling, don't say *that*! She *has* to be a model, she's as dumb as a
stump. She makes Stephanie de Monaco look like Stephen Hawkings left foot.
Reigning and Deigning
Pink Wishes
The Princess \^*^*^/
Maxime Fabulosum!
Thank God! I thought I was the only one! She does have amazingly long legs,
I'll give her that. But the face? Yeesh! And she gets like $10,000 a day to
model? Sounds fair to me...
Tara
Yes, I agree. Good body, but an impossibly ROUND face. Very un-model-like.
No chin, no cheekbones. It looks like they stuck someone elses head on her
body.
I've been subscribing to Vogue for several years, and have yet to see a
picture of her in the magazine, and I don't care what her Daddy says, you're
not a *supermodel* until you show up there.
My guess is that she's a runway model, in which case the fact that she's tall
and lanky with very long legs would matter, and the fact that she has a
round, expressionless face would not.
Linda
ASGTPR#106
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
Not one for diversity, are you? *sigh* Looks like the populist school of
thought is that models shall remain sunken-eyed, shallow-faced stick
figures.
-V.
Blame the camera and fashion. People with noticable bone structures photograph
better. Tall, thin women can wear a wider variety of clothes and get away with
it. Ivanka has the
height without the bone structure--ergo, runway more
than photography.
It's really not a populist thing--high cheekbones weren't
considered a sign of beauty until after the camera came
into being--even then it was Garbo who really pushed
'em to prominence as a standard of beauty.
--margaret (sucking in her cheeks)
>
>-V.
>
>
It takes more than just being tall and thin to be a good runway model -- it
takes grace, a certain dramatic sense, a physical attractiveness if not always
real beauty OR IN IVANKA WANKA's case, a repugnant but mega rich dough boy
daddy -- The Donald.
Brazenly,
Sher
http://www.brazenhussy.com
>In article <199803301314...@ladder03.news.aol.com>,
>only...@aol.com (Onlyoneb) wrote:
>
>> Yes, I agree. Good body, but an impossibly ROUND face. Very un-model-like.
>> No chin, no cheekbones. It looks like they stuck someone elses head on her
>> body.
>
>Not one for diversity, are you? *sigh* Looks like the populist school of
>thought is that models shall remain sunken-eyed, shallow-faced stick
>figures.
>
I certainly can live without the "i'm-a-skinny-junkie" look, but
Ivanka has NO cheekbones, NO browbones, and NO chin.
I'm sure she shows up in runway shows because her name gets publicity.
"One day in Teletubby land, it was Po's turn to wear the skirt"
All I can say is she wouldn't be anywhere if it weren't for mommy and
daddy...can we say Tori?
Paula
Yeah, but the difference is if you layer on enough
makeup on Ivanka, she can look passable. Nothing
seems to help Tori--what a waste of plastic surgery.
--margaret
>
>
>
>
>
>