Bahh.
I went out with a woman like that. Except she was getting older and suddenly in her eyes she was no longer the most beautiful woman in the room. Her whole self worth had been based on being beautiful, then when she was in her mid 40s, her rich husband dumped for the younger secretary and I don’t think she ever recovered.
Ten years previously, she could very well have written the article, and really believed it.
What was that line by David Foster Wallace? If you wprship your own beauty, age will kill you a thousand times before they bury you.
Here is a great follow up article by someone who also suffers from being too attractive: http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/my-unbearable-life-as-a-handsome-man/
The Guardian’s at it too: Like Samantha Brick, I have been hated for my good looks | Relationships | The Guardian
I’ve just been reading her blog and am starting to formulate another theory: she is indeed a little bit deluded, but the Mail is the entity that is trolling, possibly by selective editing to exaggerate what she’s written. In this post supposedly from a year ago, not only does she write in a similarly self-important and naive way, she also looks kinda foxy in the photo.
It’s funny that she thinks friends have turned on her because of her looks. Unless she’s befriending people who are blindfolded, they knew what she looked like from the start. If they turned on her later than I suspect it’s another, less visible trait that’s to blame.
This /
The Daily Mail showed the story on the most prominent part of its site, I can’t remember the last time they put a personal column up there, as before the Brick incident, it was usually reserved for the story of the day. It’s trolling, plain and simple… (kinda like Ms Brick herself)
To be fair, any delusions of Ms Brick pale in comparison to some of the delusions of men out in Internet Dating World. Believe me – I’ve been dating them.
In my little fantasy world, Samantha Brick will turn out to be a media-savvy genius who made an enforceable six-figure bet with the editor of that grubby little publication she writes for that she could write an article that would get a million hits.
It totally could have happened that way. Totally.
The UK version of the paper [aka the Daily Fail, or Daily Wail] is very bad for rubbish like this ‘story’, the Irish version not so much (or at least I’ve not noticed it publishing something that is clearly made up BS). Samantha’s tragic story was published in yesterday’s Irish Daily Mail.
I don’t know whether I’d be classed as beautiful or not, but a low cut top and a push up bra do wonders for the standard of service you get from male staff in places - I’ve been given things at a discounted price, and even got some free gizmos to go with a digital camera.
Many years ago at a family dinner my sister-in-law bitched like crazy all the way home because I supposedly got preferential treatment from the waiter.
Hmm, maybe the Daily Fail will pay me for my story?
I cannot imagine why anyone with an ounce of common sense would subject themselves to the torrent of mockery that surely anyone with two brain cells to rub together would know would be her lot after writing an article like this.
So my money’s on “world class delusions of adequacy”
What do I win?
Shew needs to hit the treadmill a lot harder before she writes stuff like that.
I can’t hate her for beaing beautiful. I’m still busy hating Rula Lenska for being beautiful:
1980s Pantene Commercial Don't Hate Me... - YouTube
(even if she was in the original radio version of Hitchiker’s Guide)
Reminds me of John Fitzgerald Page, aka The Atlanta Douchebag. Though to be fair to John, his self-absorption extended beyond mere beauty and into social and financial status as well.
I think the Mail were trolling the general public by publishing the article, but she seems to really believe it. She’s been all over social media and traditional media stating again that she really is so gorgeous it makes life hard for her, arguing for it and not appearing to just be playing a role.
It looks like elaborate trollery designed to evoke misogynist, beauty-based responses (“She’s an ugly b*tch”), which actually seems rather clever to me.
She strikes me as a Gwyneth Paltrow in training.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rachelellogram
The most detestable thing about her is that she lets people pay for her shit. It shows how much of a user she is. No self-respecting person would allow the bartender not to charge them for a night of drinking. What the fuck?
That’s quite absolute thinking. So I should never treat people to things? I shouldn’t accept free drinks on my birthday? I was raised that it was an insult to decline a gift as long as no one was being hurt. What if someone offered you top of the line face cream as a gift–would you say no? They have it, you need it, they want to…why not?
I thought that was Kelly LeBrock.
Of course it’s a troll.
It does?