There are downsides to looking this pretty

secretambition

It is possible to be correct when attributing the negative reactions of others to you to jealousy. It is also possible to be way-off. This is why I think we need to be very careful before going down the route of "if nobody likes you, the problem must be you" because making a person believe that the situation is theirs to change when it isn't and thereby encouraging them to soul-search indefinitely for ways to improve themselves when others will never give them credit because they just don't like them must be a form of torture.

secretambition

strobe wrote: »

Well you're still not getting what I'm saying so I'll just leave it.

OK

44leto

later12 wrote: »

The point is surely that if people react adversely to you, and that makes you unhappy, well passing it off as jealousy is probably very unlikely to enlarge your happiness. You're making a false association that is ultimately un-productive.

I don't think Millicent was saying anything about intrinsic self worth.

Most us exist in delusions we are all overly optimistic and all overly estimate our abilities. That is just the way we are.

I personally think I know what the journo is up to and I think it is brilliant, for such an innocuous piece about someone's self worth it has generateted miles of comment space and debate, mostly negative, I would give it a Turner prize for artistic reaction.

xzanti

44leto wrote: »

I would give it a Turner prize for artistic reaction.

It was certainly evocative I'll give her that..

However, I think if it was for experimental purposes, then that Morning Show was her platform to reveal that it was all a mock up.. I think in this case, she was deadly serious writing it..

She really should have just came out and said "haha Gotcha"

44leto

xzanti wrote: »

It was certainly evocative I'll give her that..

However, I think if it was for experimental purposes, then that Morning Show was her platform to reveal that it was all a mock up.. I think in this case, she was deadly serious writing it..

She really should have just came out and said "haha Gotcha"

That's when I realised what it was. You can't step back from it now, you have to go with it and watch others reacting. Like a piece of art.

up for anything

Interesting read.

The Mail simply threw Samantha Brick to the wolves
Clearly Brick's piece was absurd – but what's disgusting is the Mail's history of using and abusing female writers in this way

Hadley Freeman
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 4 April 2012
Article history

How much does the Daily Mail hate women? It obviously hates female celebrities, despite featuring them so heavily. The paper and, to a larger extent, the website is pretty much built upon a foundation of "articles" – though that word does seem a stretch – about female celebrities who all fall into the dichotomy of being either thigh-rubbingly salacious ("Look at this sexy young woman in minimal clothes! Look! Look at her!") or eye-poppingly repulsed ("Look at this woman who is older than 30, and over nine stone! Ew! Look! Look at her!") Sometimes the two genres are combined.

Martin Clarke, Mail Online's editor, recently explained his editorial ideology to Lauren Collins, staff writer for the New Yorker. When Collins asked why Clarke decided to run the agenda-setting story of a young actor suffering from acne, Clarke replied: "Well, we all just looked at the picture and went 'Yuck'. Look, she's an actress in 90210, and she's spotty."

It obviously hates its female readers, too, despite women making up 53% of its readership. The general motto of the Daily Mail seems to be that a woman's role in life is to be pretty, thin, get married, quit work, have children and, ideally, disappear or die before getting embarrassingly old and fat (it is no wonder the paper loved Diana so much.) The paper is full of scare stories warning its female readers about the terrible repercussions of diverging from that course, usually written by female columnists who regret the terrible life choices that have led to them being childless and unmarried at the shockingly geriatric age of 40 plus. Few of them ever talk about the terrible life choices that have led to them selling their souls to the Daily Mail, a development many would probably see as far more tragic than not being married.

(Continued in the link.)

Samatha Brick thrown to the wolves

psychward

up for anything wrote: »

Interesting read.



(Continued in the link.)

Samatha Brick thrown to the wolves

Predictable extension of self-publicity. Shes probably going to write a book and be one of those people that some other people hand cash to in some way even though they hate her like Simon Cowell or the baddie wrestler on wwf/WWE or whatever. This whole thing is probably as real as a bitch slapping popgossip ''feud'' between boybands

Dudess

Thought it was a piss-take, but then became unsure.

While it's obvious that her inflated ego is what people dislike, not her non existent "stunning gorgeousness", saying that she's [insert completely disproportionate insults re her appearance here] gives her ammunition she's looking for - even if she's missing the point.

44leto

Dudess wrote: »

Thought it was a piss-take, but then became unsure.

While it's obvious that her inflated ego is what people dislike, not her non existent "stunning gorgeousness", saying that she's [insert completely disproportionate insults re her appearance here] gives her ammunition she's looking for - even if she's missing the point.

Or are all those women who did give the "disproportionate insults re her appearance here" miss the point.

I doubt she has any deluded self delusions, she is a journalist on the biggest circulating and most powerful paper in Britain which also pays its hacks better then the other national papers. It is a coveted position and one you would not get if you were not smart.

I salute her, for the reaction she knew she would get.

Dudess

44leto wrote: »

Or are all those women who did give the "disproportionate insults re her appearance here" miss the point.

I doubt she has any deluded self delusions, she is a journalist on the biggest circulating and most powerful paper in Britain which also pays its hacks better then the other national papers. It is a coveted position and one you would not get if you were not smart.

I salute her, for the reaction she knew she would get.

Well if she intended to prove how women hate beautiful women, she did it in a stupid, obtuse way, seeing as that's not what she proved at all. Instead, she proved people don't like narcissistic, seemingly deluded (if she genuinely thinks she's that stunning) egomaniacs. Unfortunately some of them (female and male) go out of their way to insult her and pretend she's a female Joseph Merrick, but that still doesn't prove women hate beautiful women - seeing as she's not beautiful.
I thought she was convinced all men adore her too - yet the online campaign has proven her wrong. Why isn't she honing in on that?

secretambition

How often has she called herself stunning though? I haven't read all three articles and watched the video, nor do I intend to. I just read the first one, where I think her position was that she is attractive, but she is quite happy to admit that there are many others who are far more attractive.

44leto

Dudess wrote: »

Well if she intended to prove how women hate beautiful women, she did it in a stupid, obtuse way, seeing as that's not what she proved at all. Instead, she proved people don't like narcissistic, seemingly deluded (if she genuinely thinks she's that stunning) egomaniacs. Unfortunately some of them (female and male) go out of their way to insult her and pretend she's a female Joseph Merrick, but that still doesn't prove women hate beautiful women - seeing as she's not beautiful.
I thought she was convinced all men adore her too - yet the online campaign has proven her wrong. Why isn't she honing in on that?

Why would a women react at all, I mean really, why should it bother women one iota as to how another woman MAY feel about herself. They do and that is called bitchiness. To me this article dragged all the bitches out screaming, which is quite a result.

Men can be bitchy but if you go by the stats of the comments not as much. You will also find the men's comments are less vitriol and more humerous.

But maybe like me most men would not say no and do find her attractive, I know I do.

iguana

Dudess wrote:

While it's obvious that her inflated ego is what people dislike, not her non existent "stunning gorgeousness", saying that she's [insert completely disproportionate insults re her appearance here] gives her ammunition she's looking for - even if she's missing the point.

Except that the vast majority of people insulting her looks are men. Most women are saying 'she isn't that good looking' or 'she's attractive but I've seen nicer.' The really nasty stuff is mainly from men, which actually blows her 'I know all men fancy me' apart.

44leto wrote:

I doubt she has any deluded self delusions, she is a journalist on the biggest circulating and most powerful paper in Britain which also pays its hacks better then the other national papers. It is a coveted position and one you would not get if you were not smart.

One, she's not a DM journalist, she's an occasional freelancer, she does about an article a quarter for them. Two, lots of people who are not smart write for the Mail, they specifically use people suffering from mental problems to troll the public. Not that all of their journalists fit that profile, many of them know that and just slip into the persona that people enjoy hating in order to write for them, make their money and don't let the criticism bother them, not a Mail staffer but Jeremy Clarkson is the prime example of this type. But people like Liz Jones are genuinely disturbed.

I suspect Brick falls somewhere between the two. She thought she could play the game with this article and move from occasional stringer to full time staffer, which she most likely will as from here on out her articles will draw a large readership. But she herself isn't able to let the criticism slide off her, if she was she wouldn't have come across as she did on this morning. She would have been cool and collected on the show, she'd have been prepared for the criticism and laughed it off using some pre-prepared witticisms. Yes Brick is going to make a lot of money as a result of this, but at what cost to herself?

44leto

iguana wrote: »

Except that the vast majority of people insulting her looks are men. Most women are saying 'she isn't that good looking' or 'she's attractive but I've seen nicer.' The really nasty stuff is mainly from men, which actually blows her 'I know all men fancy me' apart.



One, she's not a DM journalist, she's an occasional freelancer, she does about an article a quarter for them. Two, lots of people who are not smart write for the Mail, they specifically use people suffering from mental problems to troll the public. Not that all of their journalists fit that profile, many of them know that and just slip into the persona that people enjoy hating in order to write for them, make their money and don't let the criticism bother them, not a Mail staffer but Jeremy Clarkson is the prime example of this type. But people like Liz Jones are genuinely disturbed.

I suspect Brick falls somewhere between the two. She thought she could play the game with this article and move from occasional stringer to full time staffer, which she most likely will as from here on out her articles will draw a large readership. But she herself isn't able to let the criticism slide off her, if she was she wouldn't have come across as she did on this morning. She would have been cool and collected on the show, she'd have been prepared for the criticism and laughed it off using some pre-prepared witticisms. Yes Brick is going to make a lot of money as a result of this, but at what cost to herself?

But its the trolls what sell news papers these days, they are usually the most famous journalists. Its a consequence of the new media, how many Troll articles do you see leading threads here for example. I don't know why we criticise, we claim we are loftier then them, but contribute non the less to the general debate. We feed the trolls.

Newspapers are no longer places of investigative journalism or intrepid lois Lane type reporters. A journalist usually sits behind a desk, go on the phone or internet and get their news off the wire. They haven't the time to go out on the road chasing a story. The money is no longer in newspapers to support that type of journalism. There is to much time in getting those stories, time is money. News Corporation solved that problem by hacking.

The only paper that can afford it is probably the mail and they do. Then the rest of the paper is entertainment and pandering the mail people. Who are the middle class who remember the so called good ould days when there was no modern complications as in, no Blacks, Muslems, gays, political correctness etc etc.

But what she done was trolling but a different class of it, in that she put herself forward for the ridicule and went with it and by watching the clip on "this morning" she is still going with it. Fair play is what I say.

mikemac1

Meh, Liz Jones has been writing these kind of articles for years now for the DM

It's nothing new

I don't know how this Samantha Brick story took off while Liz Jones is ignored

iguana

44leto wrote: »

But what she done was trolling but a different class of it, in that she put herself forward for the ridicule and went with it and by watching the clip on "this morning" she is still going with it.

No, that's absolutely nothing new for the Mail. Read Liz Jones' articles, this has nothing on Jones. And Jones isn't the only one, just the most prolific. And I strongly suspect that like Jones, Brick is not thick skinned and detached enough to be this type of writer. The Mail will chew her up and keep chewing and make a fortune off her, while her mental stability will suffer.

ibarelycare

Her husband has now had his say.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2126282/Samantha-Bricks-adoring-husband-gives-critics-barrels-Insult-wife-Ill-shoot-you.html

He's just as delusional. And pretty sexist too!

michellie

My friends and I have been laughing over this during the week.

She is totally delusional! I have many more beautiful friends than her. I know many more beautiful woman and they do not get treated like her. It is her blatant horrible attitude that she gets bad treatment for.

I can't believe the pilot champaign thing either, its either a lie or a blind pilot (im hoping its a lie as pilots should be able to see).

Fluorescence

The husband comes across as a ridiculously small-minded, possesive twat.

al28283

fluorescence wrote: »

The husband comes across as a ridiculously small-minded, possesive twat.

you'd be possesive too if you had much such a hot piece of ass

44leto

44leto wrote: »

Or are all those women who did give the "disproportionate insults re her appearance here" miss the point.

I doubt she has any deluded self delusions, she is a journalist on the biggest circulating and most powerful paper in Britain which also pays its hacks better then the other national papers. It is a coveted position and one you would not get if you were not smart.

I salute her, for the reaction she knew she would get.

She's a housewife who (badly) writes a few articles a year, usually all about herself. As others have noted, this crap was only published to troll the readers and boost the views on the DM website. It worked. This woman is not smart, you can tell from watching that interview that she's as thick as two short planks and completely self-obsessed and unworldly to boot.

iguana

Gage Millions Bather wrote: »

She's a housewife who (badly) writes a few articles a year, usually all about herself. As others have noted, this crap was only published to troll the readers and boost the views on the DM website. It worked. This woman is not smart, you can tell from watching that interview that she's as thick as two short planks and completely self-obsessed and unworldly to boot.

In the 90s she was a fairly high-powered tv producer and occasional director, responsible for high profile reality tv shows like Ibiza Uncovered. And she later ran Sky One's entertainment department. She isn't an idiot by any means. However according to her own account all through this time she was completely reliant on 'psychics' and eventually destroyed her tv career and bankrupted herself because she followed the advice of one who was taking advantage of her.

Her problem appears to be that she has no real confidence in herself. Right now she is trying to be a love to hate character for the DM because there is notoriety in it and bloody great money for a few hours work a week. But she doesn't have the right kind of mettle for that role as could be clearly seen on This Morning. She is overwhelmed and the odds are one day she'll regret this as much as she does relying on psychics.

LH Pathe

This great unsaid about pals fearing their partner might take a shine to their buds.. which is the root of this? happens w/ guys too. Particularly with those for whom 'the game' is their main, or only real, interest/motivation

dark crystal

iguana wrote: »

Her problem appears to be that she has no real confidence in herself.

I think this is bang on the money.

Reading the article with her husband where he mentions how he chooses what she wears and is very possessive of her, I think she has self-esteem issues that have manifested themselves into this faux narcissism she's outwardly projecting.

No truly confident woman would feel the need to broadcast their perceived attractiveness to such a degree.

44leto

Gage Millions Bather wrote: »

She's a housewife who (badly) writes a few articles a year, usually all about herself. As others have noted, this crap was only published to troll the readers and boost the views on the DM website. It worked. This woman is not smart, you can tell from watching that interview that she's as thick as two short planks and completely self-obsessed and unworldly to boot.

I assumed she was a staffer I never read the paper. If trolling has a quality about it she certainly is good at it. I don't think it is THAT badly written for the purpose it was meant to serve as in generate a reaction and i will add a very interesting reaction.

I don't particularly know why I am defending this journo, perhaps I like to step back from the mob. So by modern media decorum that means I am now a troll in a thread about a troll article.

Its a real race to the bottom, which seems to have been caused by the new media. How many mail articles lead the threads on AH, IMO it seems a high proportion

iguana

iguana wrote: »

In the 90s she was a fairly high-powered tv producer and occasional director, responsible for high profile reality tv shows like Ibiza Uncovered. And she later ran Sky One's entertainment department. She isn't an idiot by any means. However according all through this time she was completely reliant on 'psychics' and eventually destroyed her tv career and bankrupted herself because she followed the advice of one who was taking advantage of her.

Her problem appears to be that she has no real confidence in herself. Right now she is trying to be a love to hate character for the DM because there is notoriety in it and bloody great money for a few hours work a week. But she doesn't have the right kind of mettle for that role as could be clearly seen on This Morning. She is overwhelmed and the odds are one day she'll regret this as much as she does relying on psychics.

Having a 'powerful' job doesn't make you smart, especially if you manage to lose everything through relying on psychics. There are plenty of idiots with good jobs they got through connections, sleeping their way up or sheer good luck. She seems incapable of rational thought, incapable of reading situations, incapable of writing well and she has the personality of a wet dishcloth. I'm sure she does have some mental issues but she definitely doesn't seem like the sharpest knife in the drawer to me.

44leto

iguana wrote: »

In the 90s she was a fairly high-powered tv producer and occasional director, responsible for high profile reality tv shows like Ibiza Uncovered. And she later ran Sky One's entertainment department. She isn't an idiot by any means. However according to her own account all through this time she was completely reliant on 'psychics' and eventually destroyed her tv career and bankrupted herself because she followed the advice of one who was taking advantage of her.

Her problem appears to be that she has no real confidence in herself. Right now she is trying to be a love to hate character for the DM because there is notoriety in it and bloody great money for a few hours work a week. But she doesn't have the right kind of mettle for that role as could be clearly seen on This Morning. She is overwhelmed and the odds are one day she'll regret this as much as she does relying on psychics.

Whahhh :eek: That does kind of make her an idiot.

tatumkelly

There may be downsides to looking that "pretty" :rolleyes: but where's the upside to being that ugly on the inside

iguana

44leto wrote: »

Whahhh :eek: That does kind of make her an idiot.

It's detailed in one of her articles from 2 years ago.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1263774/How-educated-TV-executive-let-addiction-psychics-cost-25-000-ruin-marriage.html

psychward

who the fu(k cares. its all stage managed publicity and I cant believe anyone but someone on an insider payroll would even comment about it at this stage... its as real as eastenders

SChique00

Her style of writing irritates me -_- there's no integrity to her style - I feel she would be more suited to writing steamy chick-lit novellas for the cruise-loving pensioner set. Just my opine on the woman, having never met her or heard her speak :P

Chuck Stone

http://resources3.news.com.au/images/2012/04/06/1226320/382047-samantha-brick-brick.jpg

Read the first page and the last and don't understand what all the fuss is about.

LH Pathe

She should be more optimistic. Realistic..

"There are upsides to looking this shìtty"

K-9

iguana wrote: »

But she herself isn't able to let the criticism slide off her, if she was she wouldn't have come across as she did on this morning. She would have been cool and collected on the show, she'd have been prepared for the criticism and laughed it off using some pre-prepared witticisms. Yes Brick is going to make a lot of money as a result of this, but at what cost to herself?

Yeah, I thought she was a bitch earlier but a true bitch wouldn't have cared about the Twitter comments, wrote the second piece nor appeared on the show.

I'd say deep down she knows she isn't that spectacularly beautiful, I'd say she is somebody who has put a disproportionate weight on her looks as to how she has got on in life, so looks is everything. "I look good, therefor I am".

Heckler

I just watched The Elephant Man with John Hurt and I looked up photos of Joseph Carey Merrick and it seems the film is fairly true to the mans story.

I have it on dvd and watch it maybe once a year.

Never fails to reduce me to tears and makes me want to punch a stupid bitch like Samantha Brick in the damn mouth. You ****ing odious deluded self-obsessed ****.

old_aussie

She's UGLY, nothing special at all.

old_aussie

There are downsides to looking this pretty

One major downside to her thinking she's so pretty, is the need to replace all doors with bigger ones, so she can get her big head through them.

psychward

Heckler wrote: »

I just watched The Elephant Man with John Hurt and I looked up photos of Joseph Carey Merrick and it seems the film is fairly true to the mans story.

I have it on dvd and watch it maybe once a year.

Never fails to reduce me to tears and makes me want to punch a stupid bitch like Samantha Brick in the damn mouth. You ****ing odious deluded self-obsessed ****.

You people have stood in my way long enough. I'm going to clown college!

Chuck Stone

Heckler wrote: »

Never fails to reduce me to tears and makes me want to punch a stupid bitch like Samantha Brick in the damn mouth. You ****ing odious deluded self-obsessed ****.

Why are people getting so worked up about this? Can someone help me understand?

Millicent

44leto wrote: »

So that is her worth is it, other peoples reactions to how she feels about herself.

Not usually the post I would expect from you. So a woman's inner worth depends on others reactions and that would be mainly men.

I think you've misread me. My point was to do with that old point--that if people consistently seem to have an issue with you, the common element of that equation is you. At that point, it's probably time to reflect on yourself and see if there's something in your behaviour which is drawing a negative reaction.

Ironically enough, given your misperception of what I wrote, Ms. Brick's inner worth DOES seem to be derived from how others perceive her and that's problematic for a host of other reasons.

Seomra Mushie

iguana wrote: »

I don't think they did. If anyone really wanted to give her a going over all they would have to do is read her a few examples of the posts a lot of men are making about her. There is a lot of nastiness about her looks out there (and on this thread) about her and a lot of fairer comments about how she is an average looking woman who makes the best of herself. And both of those type of comments would burst her bubble fast if she was forced to confront them. The fact that neither the presenters nor the psychologist even mentioned those comments shows that they were holding back massively.

In fact at about 4 minutes in when the psychologist mentions reading what she had read posted by men (not referring to comments on her looks) you can see that Brick gets extremely worried that she is about to be here some of those less than flattering comments.

This is a really good point. Why has Brick seemingly ignored all the comments made by menfolk? It's like she has mentally filtered and removed them. After all, men are the ones who are supposed to be fawning over her, so it must be unsettling to hear less flattering comments from this contingent!

sashafierce

This post has been deleted.

Coriolanus

That's like omg so last week.

But yeah op, bit of a deluded cúnt.

sashafierce

This post has been deleted.

Coriolanus

sashafierce wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

either way i only came across it now so like OMG[/Quote]
That's like, tragic or something?

biko

Merged with last thread.

DEFTLEFTHAND

Classic inferiority complex. The poor girl really needs to stop publicly embarrassing herself and get her self esteem issues seen to by an expert.

mackmuffin

Which is worse thinking your down right gorgeous and your not, or thinking your ugly and your actually beautiful....
They say its what inside that counts yet everyone here is judging her by her looks.

Now that said not a lot going on for her inside if she's up herself.
Her husband looks like someone they plucked off the street with no english, they look like two strangers posing tbh.

Fart

mackmuffin wrote: »

Which is worse thinking your down right gorgeous and your not, or thinking your ugly and your actually beautiful....
They say its what inside that counts yet everyone here is judging her by her looks.

You obviously haven't seen her appear on the This Morning show?

mackmuffin

Fart wrote: »

You obviously haven't seen her appear on the This Morning show?

Cant say I'd be watching that tripe, but now Im gonna have to google it