Member Since Mar 13th, 2008
Are you Plutogirl? If So, Login Here.
Mar 13th 2011 4:58PM Blame the industry for the same idiocy that says only size 0 is beautiful when very few people, even 18-year-olds, are naturally that small. One of the worst offenders is columnist "Secret Agent Man" who publishes a column on the back of the acting industry's trade newspaper "Backstage." "SAM," as he is called, is an agent who does not identify himself, but brags about how his 10 years on the job have shown him that over 35 is too old to start an acting career, especially for women. This bigot loves to harp on the age thing over and over again. When he talks about whether he as an agent ever signed anyone from a paid actors' workshop, he proudly says he signed only one person out of 19 workshops, and she was "22 and gorgeous. Get it?" Talent does not even enter his picture, and we're talking about acting! On and on, week after week, he spews his negativity about aging actresses hanging on to "a dream of stardom that can never be." How does he know? Maybe he would do better as a psychic. Right now, he is an enabler of the worst in the industry, and he is projecting his own biases onto the entire industry, which is wrong on so many levels. "Backstage" is supposed to offer positive advice and yes, hope, for performers, not this steady dose of negativity. As an actress myself, who as a character type really isn't limited by age, I hope actors who read his column take it with a whole ocean of salt and realize there are plenty of people in the industry who don't think that way. It's a few bad ones that spread their bigotry and make the whole industry look bad.
The only time it's too late to start a successful acting career and go for stardom is when you're dead.
Feb 16th 2011 11:24PM If I want to look five, I'm free to do so. And I will NEVER, EVER cut my hair, my trademark long red hair and bangs.
Feb 16th 2011 11:21PM Some of us don't have any wrinkles to hide:
http://www.facebook.com/plutosavior?sk=photos#!/photo.php?fbid=10150117040479050&set=t.587983188&theater This is what born in 1965 looks like!
Jan 19th 2011 3:10PM She just wants to adopt my look. Red is the trademark of the Plutogirl, fiery, feisty, not a cat but a lioness. Khloe, you need to add the bangs and the waves plus a Save Pluto shirt to complete the look. Learning how to act and sing wouldn't hurt either.
Dec 6th 2010 2:48PM I feel so sorry for this woman, letting others dictate who she should be and changing herself just to fit in with a crowd. Age has nothing to do with what one wears. One day, she is going to realize she paid too high a price just to conform. You couldn't pay me a million bucks to cut my hair or change my look. I am going to die with long red hair wearing whatever I want, including tank tops and form fitting jeans. This is the worst possible message to women. Women need to hear more encouragement to be yourself, not some cookie cutter image society thinks you should be.
Nov 22nd 2010 12:40PM She gave him the same love potion that Voldemort's mother Merope gave Tom Riddle, Sr.
Nov 22nd 2010 12:08PM And I am more beautiful than your stupid Kate. So there!!!
Nov 22nd 2010 12:05PM Please stop with the horrendous gross generalizations like "all eyes are glued on this woman" or that a particuar hat is something "only she can wear." This is junk journalism. Even with gossip, never make a statement saying "all" or "everyone." Some of us do not have our eyes glued on this woman though we may be annoyed that she keeps popping up on our computer screens like a bad pop up ad. My eyes never were and never will be on her; she is nothing special, and plenty of people can wear the same styles including the hats although the hats are a bit over the top on anyone.
Nov 18th 2010 12:56PM Talk about being back in the 19th century. If she had gotten married, there is a 50% chance she would have ended up divorced, possibly a single parent fighting an ex in court for child support. That happened to several of my friends, who are now jealous of my freedom as a single person. Marriage is not for everyone, and especially now, neither is having children. Earth's population is approaching an alarming 7 billion. Choosing not to have kids is not selfish; if a person knows it's not for them, and they don't want that responsibility, they're better off not having them.
Nov 18th 2010 12:51PM Who to be angry at? All of the above, plus, most importantly, the elected officials who bought into supply side economics and allowed this to happen--with a special blame on Democrats who sold out the ideals of the party to become "Republican Lite."
Most Popular Stories
No features currently available.