What Hitting The Wall Looks Like For Rihanna, No AI Was Used
(media.kotakuinaction2.win)
Comments (26)
sorted by:
She was never especially attractive, but you'd think she'd have thought to develop some sort of a personality for a fallback. She's basically the black Jennifer Aniston. Except Aniston was attractive.
At least career football guys can have a job commentating after they're past their prime.
There’s some photos of “what Rihanna would have looked like if she never got famous”, and she actually looks better than she ever has IRL, in my opinion…
Apparently she was a tomboy growing up, so… There’s that.
But yeah, I agree - she was never “all that”. Even when I was in High School over a decade ago, lol.
She hit the wall and started grinding. Extra heretical for wearing what looks like pieces of a nun's habit. Disgraceful.
Holy crap, that wasn't a wall, that was the grand canyon!
Too many women think they can rely on looks ALL their lives and THIS is the result. While the ones that don't rely solely on looks actually age gracefully.
Unfortunately true, by unfortunate I mean they still push her in the media, thank god I am outside the mainstream media by large..
Men have a big advantage with getting older in that they can go from 'young bull' to 'old bull', they have confidence thanks to experience and that is what keeps them attractive. Women who focus only on looks really suffer as they can't do the same while those that can embrace a more supportive role don't suffer with age.
It's so hilariously bad.
I'd chalk it up to piss poor makeup. Not saying that she hasn't hit the wall (though I personally don't think she has - she's still very attractive), just saying that this image isn't necessarily indictive of her appearance.
The vampire nun look isn’t particularly attractive?? Who’d have thought! /s
Objection!
A couple seconds of image search indicates that the "vampire nun" thing can definitely be pulled off in an attractive way. Primarily by AliExpress costume models it seems...
Anyway, this is deliberately bad makeup/wardrobe/camera angle/post-processing because someone thought it was "art."
She has always been ugly as hell. I don't really see any difference from what she looked like 15 years ago.
Why is she glistening?
Abusing moisturiser to swell the skin so wrinkles are hidden.
Because she’s a vampire, duh! Lol.
A servant wearing a mask was forced to oil her up.
Ghetto Uma Thurman
Looks like they were intentionally doing ugly looks for this magazine. Interview link with more 'costumes' and one risqué shot at the bottom is here.
And here is a candid shot from TMZ a little over a month ago, without the clown makeup. I won't deny wall status, but I also want to be fair regarding beauty or ugliness.
She's never been particularly attractive though.
Holy shit, that “interview”/shoot is actual nightmare fuel, lol…
Gross.
Madonna looks much worse
I should hope so. :')
Tbf, Madonna is literally 30 years older, and has popped out a couple of kids, lol…
But you’re also not wrong.
In this image, she has been deliberately made up to be ugly - deliberately conflating sexuality with disgust, part of the queer agenda. That in itself is worthy of discussion, but your obsession with online gender wars forced you to declare that a woman with two children has hit "the wall". Anybody looking at this site from the outside could screenshot this post, declare it to be an incel forum and it would be impossible to argue otherwise.
I'm not seeing where you claim he's wrong, or why it has to be his "obsession with online gender wars" instead of just a plain observation or opinion anyone could make. I can't even begin to understand the psychology of people who use "incel" though, so I wouldn't worry too much about what they might think of this forum.
He's wrong because it's: not a candid photo, not intended to be appealing, and doesn't really show any severe signs of aging (if you look past the garish makeup). To pull out "the wall" in response to this image is an indicator of what's on your mind, not what's in the image.
The 'incel' predicate is obsessively used by the 'journalistic' profession. It means nothing when coming from pseudo-intellectuals, screeching harpies and male feminists.
Nothing about what they're doing conforms to the ethical standards of what 'journalism' is supposed to be. When a journalist uses the term 'racist', it automatically means they're slandering and profaning someone, same with incel, bigot, misogynist, antisemite, homophobe and the laughable 'transphobic'.