You’ll have to forgive rachel. No one’s ever liked her enough to buy her a present. While I wouldn’t take big ticket items from strangers, drinks or bar tabs are no big deal and happen all the time. Take 'em, and next time if someone makes your day, you can buy the round or pick up the tab.
But that’s different from what this woman is advocating. She’s talking about never doing it herself. She’s mooching off others, and that is contemptible.
Men like to give things to women?
Really?
Where do these guys live?
This is so totally outside anything that happens in my universe …
Seriously? Total strangers just pay for shit? For no reason?
Oh, men still give things to women, women sometimes claim they wouldnt give up their surname for marriage, these women still expect an engagement ring though…
Jewelry stores still are around, you can guess who the gifts usually are for… newt gingrich didn’t spend a million or whatever for nothing, it doesn’t work the other way around either.
As for the main issue, while she was the wrong person to say this, it riled people up because it was too close to the truth.
The power of beauty is disproportionate, and women know this. It gives them the power to “marry well” and probably accounts for much of the supposed wage gap.
"Beauty set up distance between other people and me. It warped their behavior. "
-Candice Bergen
The Daily Mail became the most read newspaper website in the world last year. And it was precisely because they published trolling articles like this, specifically designed to get social media into a frenzy. In the UK Samantha Brick has been a trending topic on Twitter all week and talked about by everyone, and opening up a debate on whether the article was misogynistic.
By Thursday (don’t have more recent figures) the original article had accumulated 1.8 million hits. There’s advertising on the site. The rest is mathematics.
well sites like gawker not far behind in terms of trolling for views.
but yea media feeds itself lol, like fox news, daily mail feeds the haters.
Yes, they do. I live in NYC and NJ, but my experience is not unique.
http://perezhilton.com/2012-04-06-anne-curry-cuts-the-bs-with-samantha-brick#.T4EQO5n2bxo
interview with Ann Curry
Yeah, I think this is the ad he was thinking of and the two got mashed together in his mind. Although, it’s gotta be a bit of a letdown for ole Rula that Cal gets her so easily mixed up with a brunette.
True that being a mooch is a bad thing, but rachel picked the worst possible example of mooching ever. I was with her at the beginning. “She’s awful for how much she sponges off people.” Yeah! “No self=respecting person just takes, takes and takes.” Right on! “I mean, who would let someone pick up their bar tab?” What?
That was my initial thought when I read the article- a combination of “Trollolol” and “Oh dear.”
Rather a lot of people in various places have commented that she’s not especially attractive, and I’m inclined to agree with them. She’s not ugly, but she hardly strikes me as the sort of woman who gets Random Free Stuff™ all. the. time; either.
As several people have also pointed out in various places, regardless of the intentions of the writer or the publisher (and you have to wonder what the sub-editor who had it land on their desk said at the time, because I bet it would have been entertaining), it does mean a lot of people all over the world are talking about- and reading- the paper in questions’ website. And that will be making their bean-counters very happy.
Whilst I agree she’s not particularly attractive, you don’t need to be knock-out gorgeous to get the free things she claims she gets. It’s more about dressing and behaving in a flirty way.
That said, most women grow out of that in their twenties…
I’m with you - this has never happened to me (I’m quite plain) and I have never seen it happen to anyone. If it ever did happen - a random stranger offering to pay for anything - I would not feel comfortable accepting. It would make me feel like now I owe him something - even if technically I don’t. My feeling is that that is why men do this - to try and make the woman feel obligated to them in some way. It just seems creepy to me.
I may feel this way because I was raised and currently live in a rural area - seems like this behavior would make more sense in an urban setting - lots of people around that you don’t know - this behavior would be one way to make someone (that you think is pretty) notice you.
I’ve seen it happen. Amongst other things a very cute coworker I was accompanying got handed a free coffee in Starbucks a while back. Not in a predatory manner - it was more like the barista was in a trance or something. However dear Ms Brick couldn’t hold a candle to this girl.
I also can’t imagine circumstances under which I’d want to buy random stuff for Some Random Yet Attractive Woman who was clearly capable of purchasing it herself, except if I was using it as a prelude to chat her up (such as offering to buy her a drink in a bar or a cafe if I’d been talking to her and thought there was an excellent chance of the conversation continuing over said drink).
I feel a kinship with her in at least one respect: The bartenders are always waving away my credit card.
The banks also refuse my checks.
I was curious enough to read some of her older articles and she really is a very sad person in a seemingly abusive controlling relationship, where her sense of selfworth has been whittled down to her abilities as a housewife, to control her weight, to dress in outfits her husband chooses for her - it’s pretty sick making and sad.
I work with a few young attractive (smart, kind, funny, feisty) women and they do get free coffees, parking etc occasionally. I’ll admit that I do pine a little for my own days of random stranger validation, but I guess with 10 years on my colleagues and at 8.5 months pregnant it’s about setting the bar at the right height. I don’t think most women would react the way she describes.
I also wonder if there would be less outrage if she were more attractive, I really think it’s more about her overall attitude than her appearance, and that attitude diminishes anyones looks.
I think she was trolling. She wanted attention so she wrote the most arrogant thing possible to get a rise out of people.
I quite liked this article explaining it all:
“The Daily Mail uses its female writers in precisely the same way it uses its female readers and celebrities: frequently, centrally and, always, cruelly. Like an abusive husband, the Daily Mail courts women and needs women, but will always turn around and punch them in the face. Because the Daily Mail hates women.”
Ah, of course the Guardian would do a better job of explaining this! Thank you 