There's a huge difference between a ********* looking atrocious without makeup and a bad/unflattering picture, which everyone has. Gwen is still an angel
I think part of the shock in seeing ***** females without makeup is that we've grown to think that what they look like with makeup is really how they look. And the ones who really pack on the war paint (like Kim K@rdashian) provide the highest shock value when they get caught without it. What I find interesting are the girls who actually look better (to my eyes) without all the foolish war paint (Jessica S!mpson, for one - who I don't even care for otherwise). And much like Lindsay Loh@n, Gwyneth P@ltrow is a woman who I've never found the least bit attractive... she just looks worse without makeup.
Also, the ones who wear tons of makeup, keep an eye on them over time. By the time they hit 50, they're going to look down right scary. Why women put stuff on their faces that eats them up over time, I'll never really understand. The ones who do that are the ones who are the most vain, and they'll be the ones who'll be most devastated by the effects. Irony is cruel, huh?
I think Megyn looks a LOT hotter makeup free. She shows she has true beauty and for someone in her 40s she looks younger this way. If I was her hubby I'd want her like this most of the time. Looking at the link many look nice. Kim K looks nice that way but the pic did her no favors - looks like she has a mustache when it is really the hair of her ***.