Shea said:

This is grotesque and utterly pointless except as yet another way to belittle and denigrate women who aren't supermodels or goddesses.

From the photo posted- the bloke would be lucky to get a peck on the cheek from the blonde in question, overly made up or not. Sorry, but the male members of the general public in Britain need a reality check and fast.

Why do they even believe it to be any of their business? To link it back to the posts on street harassment, it appears too many men feel they can comment on and disparage a woman's appearance as it is, so this sort of program is yet more fuel to that fire. It seems to represent a form of collective ownership and objectification - some men (though not exclusively) feel they have the right to trash womens' appearances.

Posted on 01 July 2008 at 9:16 AM

Flying Rodent said:

Incidentally, I'm sure one of Chris Morriss's shows once did a pisstake of dumbed down TV, featuring an up-coming show in which a man looks at pictures of women and "points out the ones he'd hump".

Cue middle aged man being shown photos, droning "...No...No...Yes...No..."

They called it satire then, of course.

Posted on 01 July 2008 at 9:58 AM

Qubit said:

I find this very hard to believe, surely they access both men and women in the same way? I know I shouldn't comment on what I haven't seen but can I can't believe something like this would just be about women. Do episodes switch between women and men?

Posted on 01 July 2008 at 10:29 AM

Anne Onne said:

Heh, no doubt there's no male equivalent where women get to discuss whether they'd 'snog marry or avoid' average looking men. Because of course, whilst men have 'standards' (ie desirable women should look something like a cross between a page 3 model and hollywood actress), women should be grateful for every grain of attention flung their way!

This reminds me of when I watched a couple of episodes of Chantelle's make-over show (yes, I really did get that bored), and when a woman was being made over (I think men got made over, too sometimes but can't remember.) the men would give their opinion on what she looked like. Dear Lord, the women all looked lovely to begin with anyway, even in the 'before' picture. They might have been wearing casual clothes, or had no make up on, or glasses or something, but they were, as all women are, perfectly normal and lovely.

But the way the men reacted! It was all 'Nah, I wouldn't go for her!' posturing. All about how they would ignore this perfectly genial woman at a bar, because she wasn't good enough. Even after they were made over, you'd often get the men going 'She looks better, now, but she's still not attractive enough for me...' and other posturing comments about how they usually only really go for absolute stunners. Heh, and they were on a dating show because they couldn't get a date, but considered dating normal women beneath them, because they have to play up this playboy image of only dating 'really attractive' women to impress other men!

I can understand not being attracted because there's no spark etc, but most of them weren't even polite enough to phrase it as such. It was simply plainly put forward that these women just didn't meet some hotness standard that men never need to live up to. I remember after one particular episode, the woman was so incensed with the rudness of the men's comments, she chose to have the date with Chantelle rather than one of the men!

But this seems to be even worse. What is so wrong with us as a society that we feel compelled to judge women publicly based on what some random bloke on the street thinks?! Why should we care what he thinks? I couldn't care less whether most men would find me attractive, because you know what? I'm not trying to date most men! It never occurs to society that regardless of what they think of us, we couldn't care less for them. I mean, any man willing to judge women that shallowly is pretty much off my scale. Do I really want a partner who will spend the rest of the relationship complaining I've let myself go by ageing when he practically doesn't even wash? Not on your life!

Posted on 01 July 2008 at 11:43 AM

Rachael said:

Reminds me of that poxy show - "Average Joe" where "stunning women" had to prove their worth by chosing a partner from ordinary-looking guys and hunks. Of course - the inference was that if she picked one of the hunks that all women really are just superficial.

And no - there was no female equivalent to that show: no "Average Jane" where men had to put their superficiality to the test and go for the ordinary looking women rather than the "stunner". Because that would insult the male ego, wouldn't it?!

Posted on 01 July 2008 at 12:56 PM

Soirore said:

There is a boy band on the next episode apparently so it isn't just about women but its focus on "you're too dolled up with cosmetics" is sexist whoever the participants are. According to the Radio Times this programme is about convincing people they are beautiful naturally and don't need all the products and makeup and that this is really positive. Oh really? Why is it called snog, marry, avoid then? A makeover show where people were given comfortable clothes and low maintenance appearance would be great. The presenter could say things like "by spending 20 minutes each morning styling your hair you are wasting 120 hours a year that you could use to do xxx". That would be marvellous.

Posted on 01 July 2008 at 1:29 PM

Qubit said:

What I mean to argue is shag, marry, kill is a common game played by both genders and isn't limited to men judging women. Obviously only having it one way round is slightly weird. While I disagree with judging people only on how attractive they are out of principal, if it is equal between both genders I don't think it is sexist.

Posted on 01 July 2008 at 1:44 PM

Cara said:

OH yes. Agree with all the comments so far, this is the most idiotic sexist pile of bull$hit to be on TV pretty much ever. How rude and insulting. And "snog, marry avoid" sounds like a playground game.

"Make-under", yeah ha ha, as someone has pointed out - the message wasn't "spend less time preening and slapping on, er, slap, you could be out there doing something interesting" - it was just that the particular type of hair and make-up they go for is not the kind that pleased men. So they replaced it with "subtle" hair and make-up that probably takes just as long. Grrrr.

SO many "makeover" programmes around though...all telling pretty average women they look crap...OK they feature a man/ couple occasionally just to show they are not sexist, ha, tokenism much? (And he is always AWFUL looking).

I was just thinking on the bus to work today, the women had all made an effort and the men...well I really didn't have to guess where the smell of BO was coming from, euw. Metrosexual - ha, I wish, at least they would smell nice and make my journey to work pleasant! I am sick of looking at (and smelling) guys who rolled out of bed and shoved whatever clothes were to hand on! There is only one guy who bothers in my office, and yes, he's gay.
Double standard, anyone?

And men who are average looking but think they are entitled to date a freakin supermodel, hmmm, don't get me started, the entitled sexist pigs. I don't think all men are like that by any means though. Some actually date normal looking woman and, what's more, prefer them not to wear excessive make-up, fussy hair and heels, so, you know, they can get ready in less than 2 hours and get out and do things...a show that made *that* point, I could get behind, but being insulting and sexist...no thanks.

Posted on 01 July 2008 at 2:45 PM

kate said:

It's a trivial name, but seems like a good concept. I've watched it and it does seem to be m/f mixed; they even did a married couple this week, a heavily-pierced goth pair, and it was decided that they were best as they were originally...but it gave them both a giggle to see each other dressed conventionally.

I like the message that you don't have to go out with gaffer tape covering your boobs and a thong to feel confident and happy. With *made up percentage I keep hearing about here* of girls wanting to be glamour models, it's good to see something to balance that a little.

I less like the fact that a couple of these girls have said "i thought I could only get attention (from men) by dressing like a drag queen, but now I realise I can look like me and still get attention (from men)" as it's confirming that gok wan thing; "See, it's ok...men do want to sleep with you! You must be alright!". However hateful it is to admit it though it works...for the majority of the women on these shows, and also, a little, for me. Shame.

Posted on 01 July 2008 at 3:04 PM

Clare London said:

I can't understand the above reactions, having just watched the show. I thought it was a wonderful, witty attempt to awaken women. These women are indoctrinated by consumerism into paraodies of real people. The programme is a timely reminder to these poor, igrnorant girls that they are people first, not made-up puppets.

I think the show is the opposite to a disaster for feminism. I think it is a serious attempt - serious - to present the possibility to young women that they can be 'just them' and be the more attractive for it.

I'm genuinely bafflied by this not being the consenus. I watched the programme. Did you?

I loved the character of POD, too. A less offensive, funnier, wittier and cleverer device for 'criticism' and suggestions for improvements that wouldn't offend or upset, it would be hard to imagine. Whoever thought of 'POD' has an inspired imagination and is very clever.

I think the programme is fantastic, unreseverdly. Thank goodness someone somewhere had this idea. Long may it continue. I'd like to see millions of people go through a make-under.

I'm also dead keen on getting girls (and men) to understand how deeply unattractive flashing their bum cleavage is, and bulging midriff.

Yuk, the beauty pop culture these days is hideous. Flaunting a plastic sexuality, these girls think they're cool and attractive. They're just stupid and unappealing.

Go - programme! I want this to become a hit programme that goes on and on. It's educational.

BUT a big but. The CLOTHES some of these people ended up in - dreadful. It didn't help that the piercings couple were dressed so badly. And yes, that cap the piercings bloke wore was dreadful.

Get the gear together. The girls with dodgy legs, put them in good quality linen suits, make them look really groomed and sophisticated - then they won't revert.

Posted on 01 July 2008 at 7:35 PM

Seamus MacDhai said:

I'm utterly bewildered that anyone who visits and/or participates with this website could approve of such a vacuous show.

It reminded me of `Your Face or Mine` from Channel Four from a few years ago, where male and female faces were rated by a studio audience.

Jimmy Carr presented and his catchphrase was "yes, we know this show is vapid and shallow - and that's why you love it."

I'll never forget some of the crushed expressions of those (again, both male and female) who were deemed facially unacceptable.

These shows are like something from `Brave New World`.

Posted on 01 July 2008 at 8:00 PM

George said:

"I'm utterly bewildered that anyone who visits and/or participates with this website could approve of such a vacuous show."

I don't think all feminists automatically disapprove of anything that isn't gravely serious...! It is possible for something to be vacuous but also inoffensive - it's just that plenty of people seem to think that this program is offensive.

Posted on 03 July 2008 at 4:41 PM

Seph said:

I don't like any king of "what you're wearing is *wrong* you should dress like this to be attractive!" shows but this one seemed slightly better than others, they weren't telling women to get plastic surgery or lose 3 stone.
I still found it annoying tho, and I can't for the life of me figure out why any Visual Kei fan would wanna go on a 'makeunder' show.

Posted on 03 July 2008 at 6:06 PM

Sabre said:

Why is it so important to look beautiful anyway?

I Haven't seen the show but seems to me like yet another one about trying to make women beautiful (one way or another, in this case less 'artificial'), rather than giving the message that beauty will only get you so far in life so get out there and DO something useful! Who cares if a random stranger wants to snog you? (BTW I have a feeling that 'snog' is being used a coverword for 'shag' here - am I wrong?)

Even if it applied to men as well as women this show is still ridiculously superficial. Ane one more thing; can't you snog AND marry someone? Or do we only get to be lovers or wives, not both? Classic slut/good girl dichotomy.

Posted on 04 July 2008 at 3:48 PM

Andrea Lee said:

How can Laura interpret WHAT Claire thinks without having spoken to her or watched the programme? And Seamus, can Claire not as a free thinking individual, decide what shows she's finds acceptable AND visit a feminist website? To say not seems to be incredibly judgemental, which is what you accuse the programme of being....Double standards anyone? Also I think the point is being misssed here. The programme is not aimed at exposed feminists who have been party to a revolution in attitudes. To my understanding, BBC3 aims at younger women. We fought for the right for women to NOT wear makeup and oversexualised clothing? They have not reaped the benefits, and so I think its an excellent idea to show them that they can be confident without being parodies of a Barbie Doll or a glamour model, which are the predominant image being given to them. And if they DO revert to their original style, they are not in any way castigated, which is refreshing. As for the judging, its difficult, but ultimately I think you have to bring young people to a programme to have the debate in the first place. I think its clever, if slightly questionable marketing.

Posted on 09 July 2008 at 10:38 AM

Cassy said:

I am a woman and I think it is a great show. I know people can wear what they want in this free world. And to those who think it's sexist need to know a real summary. I think it's the opposite and actually supporting women because:

Many women nowadays are unfortunately believing that they are ugly and unattractive if they don't get boob-implants and makeup. This shows them that they don't need slutty clothes and makeup to be attractive, and less is more. I got alot of beauty tips and it is quite cool.

I think it's what the 21st century needs for women, especially by what some celebs are representing us by though with all the extremes.

Most of the women participating the show are willing. However, I don't like how the men give their comments though, but it's usually honest atleast.

Posted on 26 July 2008 at 7:38 PM

Abby O'Reilly said:

OO I'd not seen this post before, but I watch this programme a lot. It's repeated late at night on BBC 3 and it's brilliant - I love it. While I appreciate that the title may be a little off-putting for some, this is not a distinctly sexist programme. Firstly, this is not a show that concentrates exclusively on "making-under" women - there have been a number of men featured in the episodes I have watched. I'm sure the number of males shown are representative of the percentage who apply for the show, it's just unfortunate that women do tend to gravitate more towards applying for these sort of shows than men (for a number of reasons). And those men who participate are assessed in exactly the same way as the women.

Secondly, I agree entirely with Clare London, as the premise of the programme is to show young men and women that they are naturally attractive, and do not need to artificially enhance their appearance in order to be so. I think it's great, it's a different take on conventional make-over programmes and I hope to watch it again in the very near future!x

Posted on 26 July 2008 at 11:24 PM

Aimee said:

"Get the gear together. The girls with dodgy legs, put them in good quality linen suits, make them look really groomed and sophisticated - then they won't revert."

I'm sorry, but comments like this, in my opinion, are just hypocritical. What constitutes a 'dodgy leg'? Is it a leg which doesn't conform to the dictatorial standard of what a (woman's) leg should look like? Because that sounds to me like Mr. Patriarch talking. My suggestion would be this; instead of inserting a woman's 'dodgy leg' into a 'linen suit' so she can look 'sophisticated', how about we leave all women's legs, dodgy or otherwise the hell alone, because a women's leg has the god damn autonomy over it's own god damn legginess to look like any leg it bloody well wants to without someone telling it to cover up because it's considered unsightly. I have to agree with the majority of the comments about this programme. That someone has the pretention to think it's alright to judge a woman's value based on her aesthetic appearance, via it's appeal to MEN is ludicrous to me. If this was really about trying to show women that they're 'okay as they are', it wouldn't exist at all.

Posted on 27 July 2008 at 10:31 AM

Jane said:

I actually liked parts of it. But it was a bit spoiled by the whole "snog, marry, avoid" thing where random blokes basically judged women they'd never met.
I like seeing the more unusual dressers and yes I understand they're trying to show the Jordan wannabes that's more to life than fake tan/cleavage but isn't it just replacing one set of rules with another i.e. women should be demure and sophisticated then they'll get more respect

Posted on 28 July 2008 at 10:33 PM

Lindsay said:

I would just like to say that I was on this programme with my friends and we were not told what this programme atually was. We were told that the working title was 'Filthy Gorgeous' and that it was a celebration of a style. We did not apply for the show, we were asked to do it. Before going in to film the 'pod' bit, we did not know what to expect or that the general public would be asked questions about us. I imagine this is the case with most of the people on this show. So please dont judge the people who are actually in it because we didnt even know what it was until we watched it on the tele! Thanks xx

Posted on 29 July 2008 at 12:47 AM

Aimee said:

Lindsay, surely being lured to do something like that under what appears to be false pretenses is illegal??!

Posted on 29 July 2008 at 9:53 AM

Soirore said:

Lindsay, that's really disgusting and confirms for me that the show is exploitative and offensive. The makers think it's ok to judge the appearance and sexiness of other people but don't feel the need to be honest about what they're doing. Rather nasty really.

Posted on 29 July 2008 at 9:57 AM

Qubit said:

If people volunteered to go on the show knowing what would happen then I don't think it is anywhere near as bad as what Lindsay suggests is happening. If you are going to be judged by the public like that I feel you should have consented to the process in full.

Posted on 29 July 2008 at 10:30 AM

lindsay said:

no, its not illegal as you sign a consent form. we were not informed of what the show was though and when i first found out i was really annoyed and i was really worried about how it would be edited because we did alot more filiming than was shown but after watching it i was actually quite pleased. it could have been alot worse. at the end of the day, i dont find it offensive what so ever. it is showing people that you dont need to hide behind aload of makeup and fake tan to be somebody. these girls dress like this because they want people to notice them and to have a positive opinion of them but really it does the opposite. it lets them have a higher opinion of themselves and realise than they actually are pretty and they dont have to walk round with their boobs out to prove it. it is refreshing to see a program which is not telling people they need plastic surgery to be beautiful and to feel good about themselves.

Posted on 29 July 2008 at 8:07 PM

Leigh said:

I love this show. It shows that to be pretty you don't need heavy make-up. I myself used to were really heavy make-up (and still do sometimes) until I watched this show. The one where a girls boyfriend didn't like the way she dressed really made me realise why my boyfriend is always making comments about what I wear. Since watching the show I have presented myself with a more 'natural look'. I am going to continue watching and taking tips. Its hardly judging girls just giving some advice and there is not harm in that!

Posted on 01 August 2008 at 9:57 PM

Amyz said:

Is it Just me or on everyshow its exactly the same members of public who are commenting.. the sample size seems to be only 10 guys at the most!

Posted on 08 August 2008 at 11:26 AM

Jacqui said:

It does have a lot of the same guys answering the questions, but I assume that's because they did more than one show/makeunder in a day, so simply asked the guys "What about this one? And this one?". But I think (I'm not sure, but I seem to remember them saying) that they asked 100 guys in total - makes it easy to work out the percentage!

As for "making under" men - how many men do you know who wear enough make up to be made under? It can't be as many as women! Hence there being an average of 1 man to 3 women on the show. And it isn't just men or goths who get told that they're better the way they end up, everyone does - and Jenny Frost compliments them no matter how they look, whether it's the madeunder state or the original state or something in-between.

It's obvious that a lot of the comments here are from people who didn't watch the show, or haven't watched it enough to know what it's actually about. They are trying to "make everyone into natural beauties" (emphasis on "natural", returning them to how they were made), and saying that all women are naturally beautiful and that they don't need to hide it under tonnes of slap! How can this possibly be anti-feminist? Not to mention the fact that everything they say about makeup aging you and putting people off talking to you is true.

Now time to talk about the idea of "snog" being a euphemism for "shag". Let's look at how the typical fake-tanned, hair-extensioned makeunder subject dresses originally. She isn't exactly covering much - surely this attracts the "wrong" kind of attention, saying that it's all about her body and sex. Yet so many of the men say they'd avoid her, and few say snog. After the makeunder, she is modestly clothed, generally looks younger and prettier, and men say they'd snog her or marry her. I think if a number of men are saying "marry" (bearing in mind a gross generalisation of men as being scared of commitment - especially to a girl that they haven't met and whose picture they have just seen that day!) then they're probably not going for "just a quickie".

All in all, I can see no harm in this program. It's certainly an enjoyable watch (especially some of those beauty tips - I won't be trying any in a hurry!), and can teach young women today who are constantly exposed to Barbie-esque standards of "perfection", TV shows which are oversexed and the pressure to conform to both of these that they are beautiful without any "fakery" and that no matter how they decide to look in the end, those who know them will say that they are beautiful (as Jenny does at the end), because it's how they express themselves (i.e. in their looks/style, and so what they are on the inside) that counts.

Posted on 15 August 2008 at 10:39 PM