Well, it seems January Jones did try to equal a Christina Hendricks cleavage shot. It took some doing but I think she may have managed to equal it…
(before anyone accuses me of soft core porn here, this photo was from the cover of GQ magazine and was publicly available in every grocery checkout line in the country…)
10 users commented in " Mad Girl "
Follow-up comment rss or Leave a TrackbackDo your eye candy posts often engender accusations of soft core porn? I sure hope not. Nudity in and of itself is not pornography – soft or hard – and a woman’s cleavage is simply beautiful in the best kind of way…imho…
BTW, your ‘Mad Girl’ here is at least 30 years old…31 I believe…
Heh, I figured you’d comment on the “Mad Girl” title. I just didn’t want to do a “Mad Woman 2″ and thought “Mad Chick” was too harsh. And to my eye there is something more girly about January and womanly about Christina…
Maybe it’s just the boobs… I dunno.
Well, I guess “soft core porn” is too harsh.
By the way, there are an AMAZING number of photos of January Jones with that fully open shirt with opposing half-boobs showing. That seems to be a pose she is particularly fond of.
I know these things are all just a matter of taste, but something about January Jones just doesn’t click with me. I find her photos when she is totally make-up free and completely natural to be far more attractive than the plasticized, heavily made up photos. I still say there’s something very Stepford-wifish about her in the majority of her posed photos…
For some reason she evokes something of Cathy Ames from “East of Eden” in me…
LOL, and she’s still got those dark roots. Again, much like visible bra straps, that used to be a fashion faux pas, but now it’s the cool thing to do.
Just one of the many reasons I find fashion to be perhaps the single most frivolous thing that human beings do.
You just can’t resist criticizing things I like, can you?
January is a naturally beautiful woman from America’s heartland (S. Dakota). She’s especially lovely when she’s not all dolled up for the frequent modeling sessions she does.
At least I think so and that’s really all that matters…
Hmmm… I criticize things I find critique worthy. If you happen to like them, that’s purely a coincidence.
I tried to find photos of other women from Mad Men, but the only other regular female cast member seems not to be in the January/Christina tier of beauty so I was left with just these two.
Not that I know since I never watched Mad Men. But that’s what my googling seemed to show.
I think the au natural January is frequently absolutely stunning and in some photos is almost terminally cute. For whatever reason, she loses that appeal for me when she gets all dolled up. Then, to me, she just looks sort of like a standard issue blonde hot body.
Christina is sort of the reverse, actually. She looks real good in most photos, but I tend to like her dolled up photos better than her casual ones. With one significant exception where she looks absolutely stunning in jeans and a casual shirt/blouse.
Christina Hendricks > January Jones, but they’re both wonderful-looking women. I’m quite fond of the “real woman” trend they’re setting in Hollywood.
I absolutely agree that Christina Hendricks is setting a “real woman tone” in Hollywood. She’s a big girl. She’s got hips, and her belly is not by any means a washboard you could play checkers on.
January Jones, on the other hand, strikes me as very much in line with the “traditional” (meaning last 20 years or so) Hollywood skinny blonde hot starlet.
decolletage is a GOOD thing!
… Heh… I’m sure Andy could come up with any number of examples that would make you wish you’d never said that….
Leave A Reply