A clip from MSNBC Today about Samantha Brick’s article on Daily Mail, also an article about it1:

Curry asked her, quite simply, “Are you serious?”

When I heard that part, I couldn’t stop laughing literally. I felt Ann Curry actually was going to add ‘Have you completely gone out of your mind?’

Before this clip, I hadn’t never read Brick’s article but I was aware of the reactions to her article. In fact, I think no one would question about receiving such reception after you only read the article title:

‘There are downsides to looking this pretty’: Why women hate me for being beautiful

You can’t expect no harsh criticisms when you title like that, especially in first-person tone. All that indicate is you are saying you are beautiful and people tend to judge how you look in next step, because you sort of ask for that.

However, in that interview clip, she said she didn’t write the headline, either someone really hate her for being beautiful or just a fair title on her piece, so the headline was written as that.

I still didn’t read it, but I did skim over to see if there really were 60+ ‘I’ being used in Brick’s article after I heard this part:

Brick has come across to many as vain and arrogant. Curry pointed out that Brick had used “I” at least 60 times in the 1200-word piece, and asked Brick, “Are you aware of how narcissistic your piece sounded?”

And Curry was right. Even Brick defended with saying the piece was written in first-person view. I think what she was saying and trying to make everyone know that she used herself as an example to whatever she wants people to know. The title isn’t necessary mean she is saying she is beautiful but to allow a reader relating to the same experiences she has. But that really doesn’t cut it.

Just search for letter I throughout her article and check out the photos and their titles, you will see what I mean. Her defense is weak.

I don’t want to judge whether she is beautiful or not like anyone else. I feel judging one’s appearance is one of rudest things you can do. And her look shouldn’t be the topic, well, I am not sure what really is in this whole thing.

Being considered as beautiful isn’t a crime but a gift, but bragging your beauty is, directly or indirectly, true beautiful or not. Bragging, more or less, that’s how I feel about her article. Eventually, I did read it.

Even those unfair treatment experiences from her work can’t earn her some sympathy. I believe those stories are truth and do happen quite often, but that doesn’t matter much, because the focus in that article and all reactions has been blurred. No one would really talk about such discrimination in the workspace or socializing. Watch this follow-up clip:

They asked people what they think about Brick’s look. Apparently, Brick wrote another article to respond or to defend herself, I didn’t read that one. Funny thing is the headline was written in third-person view, but still feel like first-person view. She certainly is right, but she provokes it and that doesn’t necessarily mean she is beautiful or attractive by others’ opinion. You don’t have to be beautiful, all you need to do is to write like that, then you will be swarmed with hatreds.

One thing positive for her, not as in positive view, she is known now.

[1]http://thelook.today.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/04/06/11053570-too-beautiful-samantha-brick-im-not-overconfident?lite is gone.