Samantha Brick: The Ugly Truth

Never thought I would link to the Daily Mail, because their idea of ‘News’ is laughable, their journalism shocking and largely not proof-read, but their celebrity gossip and sensationalised stories are amusing, and I like to read it occasionally. It’s like fast-food, zero effort and bad for you, but enjoyable at the time.

Samantha Brick became infamous after posting an article titled ‘Why Women Hate me for Being Beautiful,’ an “informative” article about why ‘there are downsides to looking this pretty.’ There was a huge backlash of negative feedback from male and female readers alike, and she recently defended her article, responding to the uproar here.

I’m not going to disagree solely on the basis of her physical appearance, which is definitely not what I would call beautiful, just an average woman of her age group. I disagree on the basis that she says there is none of this female ‘bitchyness’ and judgement of physical appearance in the US, just the UK. Female ‘bitchyness’ exists in all countries on some level including the US, hence the trouble of high school, beauty pageants, competition in the workplace, friendships and fall-outs in female friend groups, and the high rates of plastic surgery in both the UK and US. But this doesn’t apply to all females, a lot of women care much more about their careers, education and family than bitching about other women or competing, and generally everyone should have grown out of this after leaving school (that’s not to say they all do, some still give in solely to primitive instincts).

Her other points included:

She says she has been rejected by female friends because she thought they were insecure about their husbands looking at her. And ‘not one girlfriend has ever asked me to be her bridesmaid’.

News-flash, friendships can fade, particularly when your friends are married, having children, and have less time to catch up, less in common with you or the friendship just wasn’t that strong. They probably weren’t even thinking about you, but if you want to make it all about you then perhaps that is your problem not theirs?

Though admittedly there are some marriages that do exist in this state of insecurity, and single females can be seen as the odd one out at dinner party consiting of married couples, I doubt that this applies to every single one of her female friends’ marriages.

She claims ‘Insecure female bosses have barred me from promotions at work’

This one is the only vaguely valid point, I’ve seen firsthand how some female managers are much nicer to their male staff than female, but this is generally regardless of the female’s aesthetic attractiveness, treating the female gender as a whole differently to the male. Equally some female managers are nicer to their fellow gender and more willing to empathise if their female employee is having a bad day.

But these two extremes certainly don’t apply to all, or even a majority, of female managers. Either way, her “lovely looks” (her words not mine) do not warrant such reaction. I would hazard a guess that it is her inflated opinion of herself, expectation and sense of entitlement from others, that lead her to feeling rejected or unfairly treated. Unable to take responsibility she blames something tangible and out of her control like her appearance.

Lastly, she claims females should compliment each other more but never do

I laughed when I read this part, and had to wonder what kind of company she keeps. The female friends I have always had, across the country, dote compliments on each other, ask advice of each other on what looks best, does this suit me, do you think I should dye my hair this colour etc. Of course you get your bad eggs, usually in school, the chav girls who bitch about everyone because of their own insecurity, but this shouldn’t tarnish the entire female gender.

Has she never wondered that perhaps the reason she doesn’t get more compliments is because: a) she’s keeping the wrong company b) she hasn’t warranted such positive attention, or c) she expects too much from people and is very insecure, requiring compliments to top-up her pay-as-you-go ego.

“I’ve regularly had bottles of bubbly or wine sent to my table by men I don’t know” And she adds that this is not unusual or uncommon

Yes, it is proven that women who men view as attainable or viable can get things for free. Even attractive female sex offenders get out of prison earlier than their less attractive counterparts, we all judge on some primitive subconscious level (the difference is most of us can override basal human instincts with logic and experience). There are lots of men like that out there, but again it doesn’t tarnish the male gender as a whole or mean that because one man buys you some Moet that the entire male gender finds you attractive.

The men who buy things for you without asking, then say it’s because your “smile made their day”, can really be translated as saying “Well, I had hoped for another notch on my bedpost”, I mean come on, you don’t think you’re the only lady they’ve ever done that for? A woman doesn’t have to be a 10/10 to get some men’s attention, in fact some men try to woo ladies who they view as in their own ‘league’ and wouldn’t dare attempt approaching a lady who they viewed as too attractive to be attainable. Again, this doesn’t apply to the whole male gender, just as the “bitchyness”/mistreatment of females to other females does not apply to the whole gender. But really, such naivety and delusion is unhealthy.

I found her whole article quite laughable. There’s nothing wrong with being confident in how you look, every girl has ugly days of insecurity and pretty days of going out feeling good in that new dress. Like Samantha, I also hate false modesty, or the self-deprecating comments some women make when fishing for a compliment, but to exaggerate your appearance and blame it entirely for your social and work-life problems is delusional.

PLEASE NOTE: I do not condone the abuse and threats Samantha Brick has received, and as stated I do not disagree with her article on the basis of her actual physical appearance.

Religious Child Maltreatment

Religion is no excuse for beating or killing your child, for physically or emotionally hurting a child. “God told me to” won’t stand up in court for good reason, and for any other scenario when the perpetrator told them an imaginary voice told them to do it they’d be carted off to a mental ward. Why does religion sometimes get an easier ride? The parents didn’t “mean well”, it wasn’t an accident, and even without religion these people would still find a way to exact their warped intentions on an innocent being. Why do some things get chalked up to ‘culture’ and ‘belief’? Regardless of where you’re from, who you are, or what you believe, it’s fairly obvious that hurting a child is not acceptable, not in this day and age. Perhaps that’s the problem, some people are still living in the Dark Ages of superstition and punishment. We are privileged to have education, and the ability to develop emotional intelligence sufficient enough to at least co-exist if not help one another.

Join the movement to end child abuse: www.1sta...

Join the movement to end child abuse: (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

I am not having a go at religion itself or saying this applies to all religious people, but there’s no doubt some people use religion as an excuse for violence and abuse, a way to disengage from their own responsibility, ‘God’ forbid they would ever have to feel guilt or culpability. I am disgusted to still be reading things like this article here.

NHS: Let Them Eat Cake! [Latest Health News in Brief]

NHS Reform. The NHS has its flaws but if you privatise it you are essentially minimising patient care but maximising corporate competition. This belittles the principles of Medicine and healthcare, making it all about profit, money and marketing, rather than caring for people. The only people who win in a Privatised and essentially fragmented NHS are the companies that compete for a stand in Healthcare, whose products and service are not the best but cost the private sector less.

Privatising the NHS is essentially saying “Let them eat cake!” In Marie Antoinette’s world, sure, let the patients eat cake when what they really need is quality healthcare.

I agree with assisted suicide; euthanasia is the kindest gift to offer someone who is in the most extreme circumstance, without any quality of life, and with great suffering. Zürich has voted similarly: click to see news story.

Social networking has become more than just social, it is used in Medical schools, some of which in the UK give out smart-phones to students so that they can carry digital textbooks. There are many pros, but I wonder about the cons; for example, will it deter students from being intuitive or self-sufficient if they rely upon a mobile device for the answers to a correct dosage, will it bias the diagnostic process?

Twitter ‘vital’ link to patients, say doctors in Japan: Click   

Lines between plastic surgery and beauty treatments are diminished, but what by? I believe it is the easier access to cosmetic surgeries and procedures which make them less taboo, more easily attainable and therefore more likely that someone will be inclined towards them (the sheep effect; everyone else is doing it so why not you?). Click here for details.

Obese pregnant women are being given Metformin, usually for diabetics, to reduce the risk of obesity in their babies.

Casualty fan saves baby’s life with skills learned from show:

Monkey HIV vaccine ‘effective’ I really hope this can give us some insight into a way to cure human HIV victims, and yes I say victims because no one chooses to have HIV/AIDs, however they contract it. I remain dubious, because many ‘cures’, or proposed ones, have been and gone. I’m just glad the research continues, and we’ve gotten so far with extending the lives of HIV victims, delaying full AIDs.

Doctors want a decision on the NHS, but the wrong choice could cause further disarray. Personally I am opposed to the NHS reform, but I wanted to hear the other side of the argument so I went to the Royal Society of Medicine debate; arguments for the reform revolved around increased efficiency, quality of products and care, as well as time management. However, I’m doubtful of that, increased corporate competition will commodify health, and prioritise profit over care.

How Superbugs attack; The research carried out at BMC Systems Biology discovered genes responsible for MRSA‘s grown resistance to the Methicillin antibiotic. As a type of Staphylococcus aureus, it is of interest to my upcoming lab project, where I will measure the rate of growth in bacterial resistance. A toxin taken from the skin of a bullfrog has proven effective in destroying MRSA.

Crazy riot happening!

Essex police helicopter

Image via Wikipedia

Thought I was going mad when I heard a voices “POLICE POLICE”, turns out there’s a police chopper above, riot down the street, and police cars blocking off the zone, and officers walking around with bleeding noses after trying to regain control. What a peaceful Sunday evening… apparently The Only Way is Essex.

Also I didn’t know that Essex police helicopters were black and yellow in my area until I saw it above my house, but Wiz Khalifa would be pleased.

Censoring the Internet? Now?

The eye for the final series of Celebrity Big ...

Image via Wikipedia

China have been slated internationally for their harsh censorship of the Internet; blocking sites for hours at a time, and some completely, when it suits their political or “ethical” agendas. Google has been at the epicenter of these disputes, with the US company defending against China’s over zealous censorship. But this time the US are responsible. The Senate proposes a law which forces Internet service providers to block certain websites. “Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act (COICA)”

Due to the vague nature of the law, pertaining copyrighted material, and insinuating that the list can be added to at authorities’ discretion, even sites such as Youtube could be targeted. This stinks of bad karma, seeing as Youtube recently won a court case against Viacom. This means that Youtube can operate, under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), providing they remove any copyrighted material they are informed of, and regulate accordingly. Fair is fair.

Copyright isn’t the real issue here though, I am not arguing the ethics of crediting owners, or intellectual property theft. My point is that blocking whole sites, just because a few people misuse them, is complete censorship, Internet Tyranny, as oppose to appropriate regulation.

Are we all going to be subject to Green Dam censorship software? Is Big Brother watching our every move? Is censorship going too far, and will it spread like an epidemic?

All these questions are things we will eventually need to consider, literally or not. I remain cynical about the motives of complete censorship, and doubt that ethics are the main factor, rather political reasons. I agree more with justifiable regulation that does not breach our personal freedoms. Read more and help out using the link below.

Sign the online petition please, it only takes a few seconds:

“Paris Hilton mauled to death” [Terrible Thursdays]

Mug shot of Paris Hilton.

Image via Wikipedia

“I’d punch Paris Hilton in the face, she’s so far up her own arse, and her voice is the most annoying I’ve ever heard.” – Gill, at lunch today.

Many people share Gill’s view, because Hilton is famous for being famous, which equals infamous. This means we have to hear about her new love interests; her most recent being Cy Waits. And we have to see her smug smile all over the magazines as she laughs off the recent Las Vegas cocaine bust. And don’t even mention her attempts in the film industry.

Just by writing this blog I am hypocritically perpetuating her infamy. And these little facts I’ve included are things I know but simply never wanted to know. Because I absorb media, and she’s all over it, I am forced to hear about her.

I really don’t care about whether she’s a nice or deep person inwardly; her vapid media presence is what bugs me. I can’t hate someone whom I do not know, but I can see why Gill and many others can.

So, on this Terrible Thursday, my evil thought is about the funniest ways in which Paris Hilton could die. Note: I do not wish anyone’s death, I’m just thinking about the funniest titles that could crop up in the media announcements of her death.

Example: ‘Paris Hilton mauled to death by pet piglet’

So, if you dare, what do you think is the best way she could die, or funniest news headline?