I found this on a message board and I was wondering have you heard anything about this before



<<<Ok well I 1st and formost want to say I dont think this is true of Lucy but I never knew her life 100% so I would like to ask yall if you know if this is true!ok well my moms friends grandad said that when he was like in his 20's(that was a long time back) in new york that he saw Lucille Ball but not as an actress but as a hooker and I read it on one of those sites that are saying rumors about stars well I was wonderin do any of yall know if that is true I do know that while she was struggling to survive in N.Y. she posed nude because I have the book:
Lucille the Life of Lucille Ball by Kathleen Brady
I was readin that to get to know more abut Lucilles life and unfortunatley there was a pic of that pose I immediatly turned the page tho' anywho back to my question. I know that she went through alot with Desi cheating, getting drunk...etc but I just dont know if she was a hooker what do you think or even know about this? I am not trying to be rude to bring this up I just would like to know because I have known people to say when I was a kkid I saw lucy or I am realated to lucy and they actually turned out to be lying I am leaning to that the article and the grandfather are lying what do you think>>>


I dont think she was but I was wondering do you know?

I HIGHLY doubt it!

*raises eye* That picture doesn't even look like Lucy..it looks like..Anne Hathaway! LOL

You're right, the picture doesn't look like Lucy. First of all, the author said that the photo was (or may have been) taken in NYC when Lucy was a struggling model. However, the person in the topless photo obviously had thin, painted on eyebrows. This is strange because Lucy didn't get rid of her eyebrows for good until she went out to Hollywood and did her first picture, "Roman Scandals." (They made her shave them off, and they never grew back).

Another thing that struck me about the topless photo is that you can clearly see the woman's ear--and the ear is kind of unique, if you ask me. In all of the side shots of Lucy that I've seen, her ears don't seem to resemble that at all. It's a strange way of comparing things, I know. I could be wrong though. Added to this is Lucie Arnaz--she has said that she has a hard time believeing that that photo is of her mother.

I will let you guys judge for yourselves though. Follow this link: The photo on the left is the topless photo (Don't worry, I cut out the topless part) and the other is another photo of Lucy, but probably years later...

http://referringtolucy.freewebpages.org/compare.html

No way!!!!It looks nothing like Lucy! That ear really is unique isn't it?:eek:

Yeah and even the noses look different Lucys nose is more straight but the other "lucy's" curves more to the top at the tip of her nose well I really dont think that that picture is her.

I don't think Lucille Ball would have ever done that.

The person who told that person that is full of it. An old man said this to that person, i think senality is to blame;)

That picture doesn't look like Lucy too much... I doubt its her.

Just goes to show that people will do anything to sell a book or a magazine these days.

Oh my goodness! Why are people so quick to believe the worst about people?! Of course Lucille Ball was NOT a hooker!

Lolac
:mad:

Honestly, some people! Lucille Ball was no more a hooker than I am a stripper (that's a scary thought). Anyway, I wonder where Kathleen Brady got that picture and I want to see her argument on how she is just sooooo sure that it's Lucy. I don't think it's her.

I totally agree with all of you I dont beieve it is her...I just wanted to know your oppinion on this matter and well I got my answer LOL

Lucyfan4life

nice um....way to put it LOL

Originally posted by Vita_Girl

Lucyfan4life

nice um....way to put it LOL

:lol: You like that? I couldn't resist it because both possibilities (Lucy being a hooker and me being an exotic dancer) are soooooo not true.

I'm a huge Lucy fan. So… about a year ago I was in the library and looked up books about Lucy. I came to the book with the infamous topless pic. Well, at first I was shocked! I NEVER in a million years thought Lucy would do something like that! I went home sort of disillusioned and confused. LOL! But now, thanks to the link, I can really examine and compare, and I agree with ya'll.... that looks NOTHING like Lucy!

Couldn't the Arnez/Ball family take some legal action against the book and author? I mean, that pic obviously isn't Lucy. It wrongfully taints her image. I think it's just wrong. Shame on the author of that book! :mad:

Originally posted by lucyrules
That ear really is unique isn't it?:eek:

I have seen that picture before and I just noticed that. The ears look nothing alike.

See? It can't be her....not unless she had her ears surgically altered.

I don't think it is Lucy because the noses look different...well, to me at least.

No that was not Lucy!!!! Even back when Lucy first started out and money was tight, she was too hard of a worker to just go out and sell her body like that. That IMO is what lazy and trashy people do. Lucy was raised to work instead of being a real kid. That would have been a huge cop out and I seriously doubt Lucy would have even thought about it. Just a thought here but, if that was Lucy in that picture, wouldn't we have seen it before?

no way the two look anything alike imo...

Lucy is gorgeous in that picture though!

I am reviving this thread because my husband bought me a biography of Lucille Ball entitled "Ball of Fire: The Tumultuous Life and Comic Art of Lucille Ball" by Stefan Kanfer. On page 23, which is the first page of chapter 2 is the infamous topless picture. I was stunned, because I like all of you never thought Lucille Ball would do that. But she did and he says that it was something she regretted for the rest of her life because the photo circulated for more than 60 years. I've just started chapter 3. I'm anxious to read more of her fascinating life.

Lolac
:wave:

i dont think its her either

I am reviving this thread because my husband bought me a biography of Lucille Ball entitled "Ball of Fire: The Tumultuous Life and Comic Art of Lucille Ball" by Stefan Kanfer. On page 23, which is the first page of chapter 2 is the infamous topless picture. I was stunned, because I like all of you never thought Lucille Ball would do that. But she did and he says that it was something she regretted for the rest of her life because the photo circulated for more than 60 years. I've just started chapter 3. I'm anxious to read more of her fascinating life.

Lolac
:wave:
Once again, you make the same point as in the last time this Q was asked, once again i say, anyone can make claims in a book when the person in question is no longer here to disprove their claims......Bios full of lies arent exactly uncommon, in fact , if anything, they are more common than the true stuff, just take a look at any celeb tabloid for "facts" that are complete fabrications.
As for the picture itself, the nose is much too long and thin to be Lucys AND, "earprints" are nearly as unique as fingerprints...that does not look even remotely to be the same ear on both of those pics.

A blind garden slug could tell you in 2 seconds that the woman in the picture is not Lucy. The first big clue is that the ears are COMPLETELY different in size, position, and shape. The woman in the nude pic has more of a "ski slope" type nose and the real Lucy's eyes are bigger. Not only that, the proportion of the neck to the head is nowhere near the same. The only thing that's similar at all is the pose and the fact that they're both white females. ohno: :rolleyes:

Does any1 have the link to a webpage where I could see the comparison???

Never mind, I found it....lol.

What years were those pics taken???

Never mind, I found it....lol.

What years were those pics taken???

One was taken in the early-mid 30s & the other was taken in the early-mid 50s.

In my opinion that doesn't even look like Lucy. They have differnet lips and ears. It can't be her.

I don't have to look at any pic to know that she was never a hooker. What a crazy rumor. You think with all the media in this world and those who love to dig up dirt on celebrities, this would have remained a secret????

I don't have to look at any pic to know that she was never a hooker. What a crazy rumor. You think with all the media in this world and those who love to dig up dirt on celebrities, this would have remained a secret????


No one is saying she was a hooker. There is a big probability that as a 'starving actress wannabe' in the 20's- early 30's she could've posed nude just to make money.

No one is saying she was a hooker. There is a big probability that as a 'starving actress wannabe' in the 20's- early 30's she could've posed nude just to make money.


A "big probability"....please, where did you get that from. What foundation do you have to say that?

"could've" is the tabloids favorite word, along with "possibly," "suggest," "sources say,"

A "big probability"....please, where did you get that from. What foundation do you have to say that?

"could've" is the tabloids favorite word, along with "possibly," "suggest," "sources say,"


If she was in such great shape, why she had to steal donuts at the diner and ask a man on the street for a penny to complete her train fare?Lucy wasn't going to starve to death in the middle of the Depression of '29 or any other times.On her bio it says that back then she would do basically anything to succeed in NY or anywhere. Im not judging her so there! :p