Is makeup necessary?

I was in Reading today, in Caversham, and this always reminds me of Caversham's very own Kate Winslett and her dreadful marriage to another child of Reading, film director Sam Mendes. As it's been a while since we last mentioned Mrs Mendes on AngloAustria, I thought we had better right that unfortunate wrong.

It was tricky to think of a subject heading, as I sailed over Caversham bridge on my way back to Henley through the usual traffic jam at the little roundabout beside the shopping centre. However, as we never show purely gratuitous photos of Mrs Mendes on AngloAustria, I quickly wondered about that old bugbear: "Do women look more attractive to men with or without makeup"?

To test the postulate, here's a recent photo of Kate Winslett wearing lots of makeup:


And here's a recent photo of Kate Winslett without makeup:

Which is better?

In the humble opinion of your Maturin Towers correspondent (and here I may be giving away my age) the second photograph is far more attractive and far more appealing because (1) It shows the real Kate, as a real living breathing human being, rather than as a fake plastic mannequin, and (2) There's no damned pesky wedding ring in the shot, reminding us of her damned husband.

So I think we have it. I think we have quite conclusively proved that makeup is unnecessary. Especially if you are a Hollywood film actress with unbelievable bone structure, who should never act in films alongside Jack Black.

This is the kind of service we like to provide on AngloAustria.