Two women (4)

Last one on Mr. Thursday before we move onto the sublime and the beautiful (yes, that is where Mr. Thursday goes with it too). But let's have a look at this judgment of Mr. Thursday's:

Hannigan is a more beloved, in a way, because she is more attainable. Fox is like some alien creature from some other dimension.

Hannigan is "more attainable"? Not the woman herself—they are both unattainable to most any blogger—but the role she is playing. And even then only in the role she is playing in this carefully-staged photograph.

What he means is that Allyson Hannigan's role is the girl next door type. But isn't a big part of the girl-next-door type not being attainable. You might, if you are blessed, have her fall in love with her but you wouldn't attain her. Attainability is what call girls offer.

And what type is Megan Fox playing here? Seriously, do you look at that photo and think, to be a part of this woman's intimate life would be to join a small and very exclusive club. I didn't. I'm sorry to have to put this so crudely but my first thought was, "She's a skank."

Or, rather, that's the role she is playing. A quick check on Google images was all it took to ascertain that there are also photographs of Allyson Hannigan looking like a skank. (This type of photograph is a high-demand commodity; there is no shortage of men with Tiger Wood's uh, "purely aesthetic" values.)

There are no photographs of Megan Fox looking like a convincing girl-next-door type however. And here we get some sense of why some might prefer Allyson Hannigan. Both women are actors but only one is a dramatic actor. The entire range of Megan Fox's dramatic ability runs from skank to skank and not even from A to B.