BILL WYMAN: TIME ISN’T ON HIS SIDE

Maybe Bill Wyman shouldn’t have left The Rolling Stones back in ’93 because he just hasn’t aged as gracefully as the rest of the Stones. Remember, Wyman was considered a womanizer back in his heyday and is said to have slept with over 1000 women. The band carried on without him, but they still look like aging rock stars and he’s lost his style…

Photo Credit: Pacific Coast News

25 Comments so far

1. By mishmash
   On February 4, 2013 at

   So does Keith Richards look any better? Cut the man some slack, he’s an old man who lived a wild life.

2. By missyco
   On February 4, 2013 at

   Is that even Bill? Wasn’t he married to the same woman for years then dumped her to marry that girl that had the mother younger than him? Bill must be 75?

3. By Georgie
   On February 4, 2013 at

   I’ve seen closeups of the others. I don’t think they look any younger, and in fact a couple of them look positively petrified.

4. By abe
   On February 4, 2013 at

   but on who’s side is?

5. By Alisa
   On February 4, 2013 at

   Please, all the “men” from the Rolling Stones look equally as bad. They ALL used girls and young women like the true woman haters they are. Mother Nature is paying them back.

6. By Jim jam
   On February 5, 2013 at

   Alisa, you’re a twat!

7. By Kait
   On February 5, 2013 at

   Janet, did you really just say that? He looks healthy to me. He was born in 1936! What do you expect? He’s got plenty of “style.”

8. By CountessLurkula
   On February 5, 2013 at

   Sounds like Janet was one of the 1000′s he slept with and is bitter. Why so mean Janet? He doesn’t look that bad and is nicely dressed/nice glasses.

9. By Christine India
   On February 5, 2013 at

   All he needs is a smile and a little hair dye (but not too much lol); he looks OK for his age, but thumbs down on their immoral lifestyle.

10. By Noblecascade
    On February 5, 2013 at

    I bet his old weiner is worn to a nub.

11. By beachy
    On February 5, 2013 at

    Really? Ummm…are you blind? They are all nasty looking.

    It makes it even worse at their age when they are trying to look like they did at 30.

12. By Jim jam
    On February 5, 2013 at

    I don’t care what he looks like. They made great music , set the tone for a time of a great generation. Who cares if he / they hot laid a lot…. I mean , who the fuck cares… It takes two to tango … the pleasure they gave is worth the relatively few slags they banged … Get over it!

13. By susieserb
    On February 5, 2013 at

    I LOVE his style, dude is rocking a fab look with flair. RUSERIOUS?

14. By Christine India
    On February 5, 2013 at

    Noblecascade: LOL mightily

15. By Hilary
    On February 5, 2013 at

    I think he looks great for his age. Mick Jagger and Keith Richards are MUCH scarier looking! Love the scarf w/ matching shades.

16. By crtb
    On February 5, 2013 at

    What is wrong with aging?
    Nothing!
    It happened to the best of us.

17. By Golfer33
    On February 5, 2013 at

    Bill doesn’t look bad at all. He was a mature man when he joined the Stones in ’62; he’d already been in the Army, married and had a kid by then. He had a wild sex life but always claimed he never did do drugs — the others thought he was way too straight — and I think he’s turned out quite nicely, post-Rolling Stones.

18. By Denise
    On February 5, 2013 at

    Love the Stones, but he’s not aging as gracefully as the others? Thanks for the laugh Janet. At least he’s not randy ole Ron Wood marrying a girl 1/4 his age.

    And what would we say if his face was as tight as a drum like Kenny Rogers or David Cassidy?

19. By Bluejay
    On February 5, 2013 at

    Honest to God, he looks about how the rest of the Stones look.

20. By Kip and Lawanda
    On February 5, 2013 at

    and all you need is a brain Christine, oh … and a heart, oh and a diet, and some of dem windows for your double wide, oh … and a little education beyond your local Christian “college” …

21. By Trey
    On February 6, 2013 at

    @ Jim jam Awww manhood problems loser? Calling women twats and slags? No wonder an old wrinkled tool like you loves these aging old creeps, they are your posterboys. Good thing all you old ugly dudes are dying off and younger men are coming up that dont have masculinity issues. BUH bye!

22. By bon
    On February 6, 2013 at

    Everyone gets old whether we like it or not, but the music lives on

23. By Jim jam
    On February 6, 2013 at

    @Trey… younger ones? Enjoy your Bieber, you idiot!

24. By Halyard
    On February 6, 2013 at

    Actually, I agree with JimJam …
    They did good stuff. To put them down because of their age is to put down the very roots of contemporary music. Yes, they may have taken/ discarded many women– the same argument could be made in favor of the women who chose to go bed with any of the Stones.
    Perhaps you should try to understand the way the world was back then instead of just being a bitter woman who regrets never having had or been part of what was evidently a very wonderful era.

25. By mama
    On February 8, 2013 at

    I don’t feel any pity for the ol’ bloke. He’s got more money than all of us put together. Does look a bit like an old lesbian though, doesn’t he?

25 Responses to “BILL WYMAN: TIME ISN’T ON HIS SIDE”