What in the world is the point of this video?
From the NYPost article:
"I just don't want to be thought of as a monster," she said. "This has been a very difficult time. It is complicated."
Interesting choice of words.
Her arm fat alone probably weighs 105!
There, are you happy now, you sick fuck? We're ruining this woman's life!
I still say she's very pretty. I'm sticking by that.
Looks like filming scenes from a hip hop video.
Sifu has good taste.
I feel dirty for having watched that.
The linked photo looks so much like a male commenter here (with a wig) that I'm inclined to think this is all a put-on.
Perhaps she's built out of balsa wood and styrofoam.
Like I said, I'm guessing that '5'5'', 105' was used as a shorthand for 'slender and pretty like how you like' rather than an accurate guide to her weight. (Frame size or no, people.)
I still say she's very pretty.
I haven't been paying attention. Is this controversial somehow?
From the article: On her MySpace page she has posted a single song, called "What We Want" -- a amateurish R&B song about love
What a bitchy little swipe.
She is pretty, and the entire discussion about whether or not she is is so gross. (Not the discussion here, which if one happened I missed. I just mean, as a general topic. Leave the poor damn woman alone, I say.)
1. Trolling your own blog is its own reward, ben.
2: Love the headline on that article. The NY Post really puts the "ass" in class.
Leave the poor damn woman alone, I say.
Yeah, I kind of agree.
Note to self: don't hire hookers with MySpace pages.
I really do like that body-picture site, though I suspect by looking up the people my height & weight and then the heights & weights of everyone whose heights and weights I know is probably not approaching it in the correct spirit.
Threadjack: GOD DAMN IT TPM has a picture of Obama making the "I got caught" face on the obligatory "I profoundly disagree with Wright" story.
17: Yep, I'm a West Coast liberal elitist. Also effete.
They're already talking about that in the other thread, Hammy.
Hamlove, a hooker with a Facebook page is no better. Especially if she starts a group called "Women Hamilton-Lovecraft has paid to have sex with - Let's see if we can get to 10,000!".
18: Wright made me love him with that video. God damn America, indeed.
And people, really, leave this woman alone. I read the bitchy NYT piece and even through the writer's condescending "I don't have to have sex for money, neener neener" snark, she came across as an ordinary, decent human being who doesn't deserve to be preyed upon by media jackals.
I LOST MY PHONE and AM FinALLY! getting around to making a thread---- FORMER JOHNS PLEASE POST!
"I don't have to have sex for money" is snark now? Talk about defining deviancy down.
Die verlorene Ehre von Kristen Blum
(Or, The Lost Honor of Kristen Blum, by Heinrich Boell, but trust me it's funnier in German.)
24: If you're doing an article about a prostitute? Yes.
I have a small-ish frame and am only 5'2 3/4, and I weigh 112 or 113. My arms are miniscule, because I'm a muscleless wimp. I don't see how she can weigh only 105.
"I don't have to have sex for money" is snark now?
It is if you think it makes you any better than the person who has sex for money. Especially if your job is "paid hack for the New York Times."
Die verlorene Ehre von Kristen Blum heisst Treue.
BTW, I agree (I think) with Tim in 5. Something very creepy about the vid (although to an extent that's often true watching footage that lacks its soundtrack). I avoided the NYT article on her. I'll admit to having felt some curiosity-satisfaction seeing her picture, but I would have been perfectly happy never having known a thing about her. Not Important.
AM New York, or whatever the freebie subway paper is called, had as their Spitzer resignation headline, "OUT WITH A BANG!"
Or if you're simply doing a prostitute, for that matter.
My name is Vickey Alvarez I am 5'5 and weigh 97 pounds
If you'd have asked me to guess her height, I'd have said she was 5'11". I think partly it's because she's so skinny, but also because she seems to have a small head.
Oh yeah, FWIW, based on the linked site, I agree that the weight can't be right. 105 is light for a short woman, much less a (slightly) taller-than-average one.
Defining 105 up, or something.
105 is light for a short woman
Maybe it's in Celcius.
"I don't have to have sex for money"
I thought that's what made it a luxury?
It is if you think it makes you any better than the person who has sex for money. Especially if your job is "paid hack for the New York Times."
Ironic, much?
What in the world is the point of this video?
iMac product placement, as far as I could tell.
According to Ogged's system her boobs alone are 20 lbs., right? On the other hand, she cleansed the clay ropes out of her colon.
"Celsius"
Rats. I knew I should have written centigrade.
The "105 pounds" thing is obviously supposed to be shorthand for "she's skinny and pretty," going with the assumption that men don't really know how much real women weigh anyway, and some exaggeration in the numbers is needed to get the point across.
Maybe it's in Celcius.
I think you mean Kelvins!
Defining 105 up, or something.
By 20 lbs. or so, I'd say. Not that it matters, but it's strange that the 105 lbs. thing is being repeated everywhere (I assume) without any eyebrows being raised (I gather), given that it's pretty absurd. Is it culturally similar to not saying a word when, say, a clearly 30s woman claims she's 24 or something? You know, the 'we do not ask a woman how old she is' thing.
I might as well answer my own question and agree with myself that it's a politeness thing.
My sister is 100-105 lbs., 5 feet tall, and is noticeably slender. She looked at the video and agrees, no way is Ms. Spitzersbabe 105 pounds.
Maybe in that culture all weight reports include and implied "or more", sort of like restaurants whose selling point is strong drinks and generous portions.
Ogged isn't the boob-estimating guy? It was someone here. All commentators are really Ogged, right?
Why do people still wear big sunglasses?
Because you don't have $5000 to spend on them, Rob, and other people do.
and some exaggeration in the numbers is needed to get the point across.
Yeah, I'm always one of the ones harping on the massive variability possible in frame size, so that someone healthy at 105, 5'5" is possible, but generally this sort of exaggeration is what makes women insane. It's so weird being someone who's skinny and gawky, but has never seen an attractive woman described publicly as being within twenty pounds of her weight -- it makes you nutty on the subject.
I think it's a 'we have no idea what a person who weighs X will actually look like' thing more than a politeness thing. Hell, the other day people would have defended to the death that such a weight wasn't unusually noticeably skinny at all. Even given the norms of Internet arguing, it shows that our mental image of what normal people look like is a little messed up.
Or what 44 said.
Also, I agree that AA Dupre is very pretty. I also thought Monica was pretty, too. In general, I think we can be proud of the taste in women of the male democratic leadership.
To be 105-5'6" she'd have to be visibly wiry, whether healthy or not. A marathon runner type.
55: Totally. We should be saying this much more loudly, and comparing "our women" to, say, John McCain's praying mantis wife.
A marathon runner type.
Doesn't "marathon runner type" imply lots of muscle, which would just make you weigh more?
On a slightly more serious note, does anyone know of a blog with good, basic coverage of this financial stuff. JP Morgan is bailing out Bear Stearns, but the Fed is guaranteeing the loan. WHy doesn't the Fed just bail out Bear Stearns directly?
Isn't the deal with Cindy McCain that she had a stroke recently? I'm not sure whether she had that terrifying glassy stare before the stroke (or before the publicisation of her prescription drug problem), but I'm a little reluctant to make too many sarcastic comments about her before I understand the story there.
Long distance runners have no upper body strength or body fat at all. Some of them can't do one pushup. Their legs are strong but not terribly thick.
54: I was sad because I had one leg, but, hey! lower BMI!
Apparently according to Atrios Morgan has a fed status BS doesn't. Atrios also helpfully points out that Morgan is taking on no risk, perhaps because of their federal status allows them to dump losses on taxpayers.
59: because only commercial banks have access to the discount window. JP Morgan is one, but Bear Stearns is an investment-only bank - so JP Morgan is acting as a channel and (possibly) lining itself up for a takeover of BS.
try delong.typepad.com, economistsview.typepad.com and blog.risk.net.
64: not quite: the Fed's lending money to JP that JP will pass straight on to BS. It's not that JP can get the taxpayers to cover its losses, but that it won't make any losses anyway, because it's in the middle of a back-to-back transaction.
Hell, the other day people would have defended to the death that such a weight wasn't unusually noticeably skinny at all.
I don't think any of us were arguing that. We were just saying that we knew people at that height/weight who were still within the realm of normal looking, even if very slender and small.
I'd pretty much agree with people in this thread, however, that the girl in question does not look anything like 105 pounds. Even her chestiness alone would pretty well exclude that possibility. 47 seems right to me, in that she's probably closer to 120-130 depending on the various vagaries that cause similar looking people to have surprisingly divergent weights.
66: it's in the middle of a back-to-back transaction
So is this what it's like in the post-Spitzer world? All of our personal sex for money schemes are going to be discussed in public?
68: the Fed's all about the injections of liquidity, IYKWIM.
Doesn't "marathon runner type" imply lots of muscle, which would just make you weigh more?
No. Have you ever seen a marathon runner?
I also agree that she's very pretty, and that people should leave her alone, but I think that's about as likely as the probability that people will focus on actual substantive issues.
As I comment to 55, I sadly have to say that I disagree WRT Monica. Obviously, in neither Eliot's nor Bill's case was it worth risking their executive career for their daliances, but I personally think that FWIW, Eliot managed to display marginally more aesthetic taste in his choice of methods of self-destruction.
"Craving a Styling Top," don't get whatever hat Monica was wearing that day.
Leave the poor woman alone, unless you're a paying customer.
--You don't want notoreity? Don't fuck New York governors for money.
Feel free to print this comment and tape it to your refrigerator if that will help guide you in future.
You don't want notoreity? Don't fuck New York governors for money.
I'm guessing she didn't, in fact, want notoriety when she signed up with the anonymous escort service that sent her to have sex with the anonymous client, whose name was only revealed thanks to an FBI wiretap.
I feel the need to add that my girlfriend, who is not particularly thin is about 5'8'' and 130lbs. So I think this girl could easily be less than 115lb, but maybe 105lb is pushing it a bit.
I don't see that anyone has linked the photographic height-weight chart, so here's 5'5" and 115 pounds. That's pretty thin.
And here's 5'5", 97 pounds.
She's what they call "thick" in the hood. Sort of fleshy and voluptuous in an attractive way. Beautiful, but in just the opposite manner as implied by 105 pound weight.
76: What's missing in the image with the 115 lb girl is her legs. That's where you'll see a lot of the difference in weight.
But seriously, of course they're going to lie by 5-10 lbs. Isn't that just expected? But 120-130lbs. Hell no. This girl is almost certainly under 115. And damn hot.
I'd say she's 130, give or take. Which looks damn hot on a 5'5" frame. But when men think that the ideal weight is 120, regardless of how tall the woman is, of course she'd lie.
I'd guess 120, but everyone knows better than to trust me on this sort of thing.
61: Not at all, I was serious. In a kind of jokey way, but still.
60: Great, way to make me feel guilty.
73: Gosh, we're just beseiged with lovely comments today, aren't we?
80: It's hard to say. I'd say between 120 and 140, but it depends on how much muscle mass the girl has, if one takes the photo project seriously.
I'd say between 120 and 140, but it depends on how much muscle mass the girl has
Ditto.
almost certainly under 115
Not unless she's also actually shorter than 5'5" (entirely possible).
I am also rapidly coming to the conclusion that I must have bones made of lead, or that no one who has submitted photos in my weight range has my body type. I would think that I just don't know how I look, except that the same seems to hold true if I look at the weight/height for my sisters, and I know how they look.
Oh, good heavens. I'm sorry I took insufficient pity on the poor girl -- who is so eager to be away from public attention that she's giving interviews and promoting her music on her MySpace page.
They didn't use to call 'em "shameless hussies" for nothing. At least the shameless part. I'm not sure I actually know what a hussy is. Maybe it's misspelled?
The only permitted form of sexism is calling women "whores" in a derogatory way, as Anderson demonstrates. Anyway, it's interesting that Eliot married a proper Southern girl but liaised with an ethnic/white girl from NJ.
85: You could add yourself to the project, then .. isn't that sort of the point?
86: Yes, the fact that I have a blog and a facebook account and have given interviews and have taken money for sex means that I want everyone and their dog assessing my looks. Shamless hussy that I am.
88: I could, but the guy only seems to want pictures from weight/height combos he doesn't have, and mine is a popular weight, apparently.
the guy only seems to want pictures from weight/height combos he doesn't have
Does he say that? Many of the plot points have multiple photos. I've always wished there were more at each point.
Yes! I would love to add your photo (if the slot is not taken)
Right at the top.
I am also rapidly coming to the conclusion that I must have bones made of lead
Some people are kind of like that. My high school girlfriend's roommate was apparently one of those people. She was probably 5'8" to 5'10", and built like a rectangle, so no one would expect her to be featherlight, but it turned out she actually weighed around 200 lb. Just astonishing considering her size, and that even most guys about her size would only be 180 as a reasonable estimate. Some people really are bizarrely dense for their seeming volume, and others are bizarrely light for the same.
But I'd bet that he'd put it up if you said "here I am and I sure do look different from the other people at that point."
92: That seems kind of silly. Particularly with the variation of posing and amount of clothing worn in a lot of these photos, it would be good to see a few variants.
It is silly. Especially since I get the sense that a lot of the pictures are of people dieting down to a certain range, or in the process of dieting. Which looks different from someone whose natural max is that range, or who weighs that without any training at all. Or big frame vs average frame vs. male vs. female vs. small frame.
I'm not sure I actually know what a hussy is. Maybe it's misspelled?
Indeed, the proper spelling is "housewife."
98: Not in the 21st century it isn't.
means that I want everyone and their dog assessing my looks
Oh, that. I don't care about her looks.
Tho I would imagine that some expectation of inevitability would accrue there, given the "becoming famous b/c I had sex w/ the governor of NY for money" part, and the existence of ironically depraved people like Ogged, and depravedly ironic people like me.
--Riiiight, huswife! Got it! I *did* use to be an English major, once.
Just because something is inevitable doesn't mean it's excusable.
Okay, one more bite at the apple:
Prostitutes are paid to have sex. Most people find a person's appearance to be an important element of sexual attractiveness, esp. outside a relationship, and thus esp. in the case of paying for sex. Thus, a prostitute's appearance is a professional asset, just as with a model.
Hence, when people hear that a particular prostitute's services cost $1000 or $5500 an hour, they are, I think, not necessarily sexists for being curious as to her appearance, just as we might be curious as to the appearance of the America's Top Model winner.
Of course, this runs the risk of being confused with the general appearance-bias that pervades men's and women's evaluation of women, whether or not the evaluated women's appearance is relevant to anything in particular.
That's as bloody-mindedly clear as I can make it without having a drink first.
I also think she may have gained a few lbs in this video in comparison to the photo in the original New York Times story. Her arms look different. But for a slim women, the big difference is in the legs. And based on the way her jeans sit on her, I doubt she has much mass in those legs. That's the difference b/w the 115 and 95 lbs 5' 5'' girls on that website.
The thing is that you can carry more weight in your legs and be just as attractive if it's allocated well. I think a lot of women run into problems on these issues b/c they are looking at the wrong number: weight, when body fat content is probably a better indicator of whether extra body fat is detracting from your appearances. But at the end of the day, our well fed and sedentary life styles do not tend to lead to ideal, physically attractive figures. And this is true of both men and women.
But at the end of the day, our well fed and sedentary life styles do not tend to lead to ideal, physically attractive figures.
Depends. One looks better well-fed than malnourished.
runs the risk of being confused with the general appearance-bias that pervades men's and women's evaluation of women
Being as it is, in fact, *exactly that*.
Also, being curious is one thing. Indulging your curiosity, especially if such indulgence requires one to talk about whether or not said woman is "hot enough" to justify the money, "really not that hot," etc. etc., is quite another. Polite people know that not all their natural curiosity is something they should be allowed to indulge.
On a slightly more serious note, does anyone know of a blog with good, basic coverage of this financial stuff.?
That would be Calculated Risk, BG.
Goddamit I'd managed to totally ignore this whole conversation (because, hey, who cares) but this:
Polite people know that not all their natural curiosity is something they should be allowed to indulge.
rubs me absolutely the wrong way. People should damn well be curious about what they're curious about. Wanting to know something, and learning about that thing, and learning about why you want to learn about that thing, is exactly the path to understanding. I mean, really.