Jennifer Lopez, renowned for her timeless beauty and iconic style, recently stepped out in an appearance that stirred up reactions across the internet. Some people seized the opportunity to critique and compare her to the photos she posts on her social media.
Jennifer Lopez attended Paris Fashion Week with a one of a kind outfit.

J. Lo made a dazzling entrance at Paris Fashion Week, captivating onlookers with a one-of-a-kind ensemble that epitomized haute couture innovation. Adorned in a coat crafted from an astonishing 7,000 real rose petals, meticulously kept fresh and vibrant by a delicate infusion of sugar water, she embodied the epitome of natural elegance.
The actress and singer took to her social media to share a glimpse of her ethereal attire, crediting the visionary designer Daniel Roseberry for Schiaparelli Couture 2024 with its creation. In a world where fashion often blurs the lines between art and attire, J. Lo’s floral masterpiece stood as a testament to the boundless creativity and sheer spectacle of the couture realm.
J. Lo received criticism for her looks.

It’s disheartening to witness the rapid judgment that often pervades social media platforms, even towards individuals as esteemed as Jennifer Lopez. The viral video from Paris Fashion Week, capturing a candid moment, has become a platform for unsolicited criticism, with viewers dissecting J. Lo’s appearance.
Comments such as “Finally, her real face. She looks like everyone else,” and “Oops. You can see her wrinkly forehead,” highlight the pervasive culture of unrealistic beauty standards and the relentless pressure placed on women.

Some have questioned her consistent use of filters online, stating, “I don’t think people are upset about her aging naturally, it’s just that in every post she does, she uses a filter, and looks nothing like this. I think she’s beautiful no matter what, but she talks about empowerment, and women being strong, yet she uses a filter in every photo, and every video she ever does. She has no control over this video, that’s why you get to see her real face.”
While she has long been an advocate for empowerment and self-love, this incident serves as a stark reminder of the challenges faced by individuals in the public eye, where every moment is subject to public scrutiny and judgment.
Her fans came to the rescue in the comments.
In the wake of the viral video, a wave of support emerged from fans rallying behind the iconic star. Some took it upon themselves to defend J. Lo and her right to age gracefully, countering the harsh critiques with words of encouragement. Comments such as “This is what no Botox looks like, and it’s really okay!” and “J. Lo is aging beautifully. Did y’all forget that there ARE people in Hollywood who accept their age ?!” served as poignant reminders of the beauty in embracing natural aging processes.
Others chimed in, highlighting the societal pressures faced by older women, with remarks like “Love seeing comments from some 20-30-year-olds who have no idea the pressure older women are under. The signs of aging are coming for all of us, ladies. Don’t criticize others until you’ve been in their shoes.” These supportive voices underscored the importance of empathy and understanding in a world often fixated on unrealistic standards of beauty.
Demi Moore, the ageless beauty and Hollywood icon, has too once again left fans in awe with her latest jaw-dropping appearance. At 61, Moore defies all expectations as she stuns in a sheer dress that exudes confidence and allure.
Preview photo credit jlo / Instagram, jo_squillo / Instagram
The fascinating and tragic story of Mary Ann Bevan
The story of Mary Ann Bevan, who was considered ‘The ugliest woman in the world,’ starts in the 19th century, a dark period of the American culture when ‘freak shows,’ traveling circuses showing people with certain deformities and disabilities, were at the peak of their popularity.
Today, it is highly unacceptable to treat people with disabilities with disrespect, but back in the day, no one believed it was morally wrong to dub them freaks.
Mary Ann Bevan was born on December 20, 1874, in Plaistow, East London, United Kingdom. She grew up to become a nurse and was respected by the society. On top of that, she was a very attractive woman who was offered many possibilities.

In 1902, Mary met the love of her life, a man named Thomas Bevan. The two married and welcomed four children together, but their happiness didn’t last long. After 14 years, Thomas passed away, leaving Mary heartbroken.
Her life became difficult as she was left to take care and provide for her children all by herself.
Unfortunately, around the time she turned 32, Mary started experiencing strange symptoms. Her face started changing gradually and she didn’t know what was happening or what caused that change which impacted her both psychologically and financially. Mary’s bones grew big, and her face became deformed. As a result, she lost her job and was unable to provide for her children any longer.
Back in the day, no one could diagnose her, but this poor woman suffered from acromegaly, a hormonal disorder that develops when the pituitary gland produces too much growth hormone during adulthood, when a change in height doesn’t occur. Instead, the increase in bone size is limited to the bones of the hands, feet and face.
Today, a lot more is knows about this condition and there are ways to keep it under control, which wasn’t the case during the time Mary lived.

Crushed, heartbroken, and poor, this woman saw an ad one day which read, “Wanted: Ugliest woman. Nothing repulsive, maimed or disfigured. Good pay guaranteed, and long engagement for successful applicant. Send recent photograph.”
No matter how awful she felt about this ‘job,’ she saw no way out of her situation. She simply needed to do anything in order to feed her children. Above all, she was a mother.
Mary answered the ad and she was soon contacted by the circus’ agent, a man named Claude Bartram, who later shared Mary’s story.
“She was not repulsive at all. She had the kind of face one usually finds in a giant, a powerful, masculine jaw, prominent cheek-bones, nose and forehead, but she was unblemished, healthy and strong. She told me she did not like the idea of placing herself on exhibition, she was shy and did not want to be separated from her children,” Bartram said, according to Daily Star.
“I told her she would earn £10 per week for a year, travelling expenses and all the money from the sale of picture postcards of herself, so she could provide for the education of her children.”
https://www.facebook.com/plugins/post.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fphoto.php%3Ffbid%3D637154017772048%26set%3Da.202975904523197%26type%3D3&show_text=true&width=500
In no time, magazines were filled with Mary Ann’s photos and everyone recognized her as ‘the ugliest woman on Earth.’
Her popularity brought her to the Dreamland Circus in Coney Island, New York, one of the most famous circuses there were. Mary Ann became an attraction, but then a doctor named Harvey Cushing, a leading neurosurgeon, spotted her and knew there was more behind ger huge face that he wanted to explore thoroughly.
“This unfortunate woman who sits in the sideshow of Ringling Brothers ‘between Fat Lady and Armless Wonder’ and ‘affects white lace hats, woollen mittens and high laced shoes’ has a story which is far from mirth-provoking.
“She, previously a vigorous and good-looking young woman, has become the victim of a disease known as acromegaly,” he wrote in a letter to Time magazine.

Mary Ann spent her life working at the circus and she was reported to have earned a small fortune which enabled her to send her children back to England where they attended boarding schools.
She endured a lot, but she did it all for her children.
Mary Ann died at the age of 59 of natural causes. Her final wish was to be buried in her homeland, England, and her children fulfilled her wish. She is resting at the Ladywell and Brockley Cemetery in South London.

This woman’s sad, yet fascinating life story speaks of the mother’s love for her children more than anything else.
Leave a Reply