Is Samantha Brick taking the mick…?

Posted by Wendy on April 4, 2012 1 comment

“Why do women hate me for being beautiful?”…asks writer Samantha Brick who then was interestingly astonished at the incredulous responses to her question – she follows this with…“my detractors have simply proved my point. Their level of anger only underlines that no one in this world is more reviled than a pretty woman”.

Self-proclaimed stunner: Samantha Brick

I am not going to pass comment on her looks – she is enarmoured with them enough herself obviously which is fine – self-love is better than self-loathing. This lady though needs to learn that what makes women ‘hate her’ – allegedly – is very possibly her high level of conceit, her disparaging remarks about other women who, in her opinion, do not measure up to her self-professed standard of beauty and – most of all – her  arrogance. We women have a great capacity for admiring and appreciating beauty in other women – we do not, however admire the old green-eye-monster excuse being employed every time your views are not shared by the sisterhood.

Frankly, my dear – you are up yourself. Nobody likes a poser, nobody likes a person who blows their own trumpet and then moans when others complain about the noise. Tone it down, keep your opinion of your ‘beauty’ to yourself and make friends using your personality, be kind; that is one aspect of yourself that really needs a makeover.

You have done yourself no favours – and your looks wont get you out of the deep hole you have dug…maybe some modesty in the future will though.

 

 

Copyright © 2007-2012 Cultured Views. All rights reserved.

C4′s The Undateables – not entirely undateable.

Posted by Wendy on April 4, 2012 No comments

Okay, so I watched the show and felt no discomfort whatsoever, despite the inference by some sections of the media that you must. It showed that people with disabilities are like everyone else, they want companionship and love – it also showed that they can be as unrealistic about what they want as anyone else too. Penny has a ‘type’ and most of us acknowledge that the ‘type’ we think we prefer is often not what we finish up with. If she is going to stipulate ‘tall men’ only she will continue to be dateless. If she is looking for a relationship that will include physical intimacy a 6ft 1″ man is going to pose ‘technical’ problems for both of them especially as she has Osteogenesis Imperfecta (her condition). Let’s be honest and realistic about it.

Richard, bless him, has the problem that makes dating difficult for many people…the inability to recognise what is appropriate behaviour and what is not. He has childish traits, clearly a short fuse (which would certainly rule out pairing him with a woman with young children) and behavioural issues. None of them his fault of course – but is he able to learn and accept that you don’t steal food from a lady’s plate on a date…? I think Richard would do well with a woman much older than himself – someone patient, who likes the idea of a younger male and who would be more likely to mother him as well. His relationship with his mother suggests older women suit him better. As for Luke and his tourettes…who cares about his tics and his language? he is good looking, kind, has a great sense of humour and is open and honest about himself -  I am keeping my fingers crossed for him.

Copyright © 2007-2012 Cultured Views. All rights reserved.

Lennox the Dog: the costly battle to save him – is it justified?

Posted by Wendy on April 2, 2012 No comments

The saga of a dog called Lennox, a pit-bull-type dog removed from it’s owners for posing a potential risk to the public, has become an ongoing battle that now stands in the office of the Lord Chief of Justice in Northern Ireland. The owners, a teenage girl and her mother, have been fighting to reclaim their dog – the authorities want him put down. Nearly two years this has been dragging out, at a cost to the tax-payer – legal aid is funding the owner’s case – that would be reaching into the tens of thousands of pounds.

This should not have come this far and it should not be tying up court time and resources, nor should the future of an allegedly dangerous dog be the subject of the courts or paid for by the tax-payer. As it stands, our hospitals are in a mess – our city and regional A&E departments are not coping with the transfer of workload resulting from other A&E departments being closed. People have died in recent weeks on trolleys in hospital corridors because funding is tight and resources are stretched to the limit.

Lennox

And one dog is costing us thousands of pounds because it cannot be decided one way or the other if it is too dangerous to be owned and kept in a residential area. If Lennox is a danger to members of the public then he should have been put down two years ago – if it is decided he is not then for gods sake return him to his owners and be it on their heads – and their hip pockets – if their dog vindicates what the authorities are concerned about. It is one hell of a risk which could end in a tragedy – if it does not then fine, but if it does…

Copyright © 2007-2012 Cultured Views. All rights reserved.