You are far more tolerant than me Dave. Stupidity in any guise is simply galling and whether she is putting it on or not, she is certainly milking stupidity as something endearing. It isn't.
I'll admit to being less tolerant of stupidity where it causes me personal inconvenience eg in work colleagues. But that's just annoyance at extra work caused etc and I can be angry at myself when I make a stupid mistake too.
Thing is, if we do accept that Helen really is genuinely stupid, it does seem unfair to blame her for that if she was simply born like that.
Can you tell me what you mean by that? What is this certain type of woman? Genuine question, as it's impossible to respond not knowing what type of women you're using to illustrate your point. Some names would be useful.
As Lexi asked - what do you mean by 'certain types of women'? Would be useful to have more of an idea on this.
Appreciate the replies Lexi and Pru and a fair enough question. I hope this doesn't seem like a cop out, but it's quite hard to put an absolute definition on this, which I guess is why the topic interests me in the first place. If I were to flip it round, and was given a list of females entering the CBB house or the Jungle or Strictly for example, I reckon more often than not I could single out the women that would be on the receiving end of the kind of disproportionately negative comments on DS I've mentioned.
It's not all about looks, far from it, hence the 'jellus' argument some posters throw out is weak I agree, but IMO there are certain types of females out there that are more likely to get some of the more OTT comments on a public forum than others.
Rather that give a massive long list, it might be easier to say that demure, non bolshy/ non overtly sexual women don't seem to draw the same level of ire. 'Girls girls' types seem more accepted than those that push the boundaries. Beyonce compared to Rhianna in a way.
Caroline Flack, Fearne Cotton, Holly Willoughbooby etc have all come in for way more stick than their actions/ jobs/ talents (or perceived lack of) would get if they were male IMO.
If certain woman ever makes a mistake or do something bad they will be treated like dirt and it will be held against them for ever, unless they make a grovelling apology on national TV that meets all our exacting standards- check out some of the bile thrown at Cheryl 'Biffa' Cole for example. Yes I know Cole once had a fight/ assaulted a toilet attendant donkey's years ago, but you read some of the vitriol and you'd think she committed genocide.or something. Tulisa whatsernane also.
Abby Clancy got many OTT comments that were just downright bitchy about her first appearances on Strictly and she IS someone I would say is stunning looking. She alas happens to be married to a footballer which also doesn't go down well. WAGS are another no no, as are women who do photos shoots for mags.
No don't get me wrong, I'm not saying I respect all the above people and/or their 'career choices', far from it. I don't think they are amazing or anything like that, just commenting on how they get loads of OTT stuff thrown their way which seems wholly disproportionate to their 'crimes'. I've probably explained this badly but hope you kind of get where I'm coming from.
My point about Aniston was perhaps slightly mishandled (by me); I was more addressing your assertion that certain criticisms of Flanagan's appearance couldn't be genuine on certain FM's parts. My point was that even though Flanagan might be perhaps what you would call conventionally attractive, these FM's could well be genuine in thinking she is totally unattractive.
I take your points on board. Please don't get me wrong, I can fully accept anyone saying they don't find her attractive,My comments are more about the posters that seem to go just that extra mile and then some. It's not even always what they say, more the manner in which they say it. To say she's unattractive, unsexy or even plain wouldn't even raise an eyebrow. Saying something like-
never looks nice. So desperately unsexy, it's actually painful.
..however, just seems a bit much and as I say, can come across as not being genuine. I mean come on. Painful? Really? (OP am not picking on you BTW, just using an example to try and get across better what i mean!!)
I think it's this kind of comment that might make certain posters (not me I hasten to add;)) throw out the old 'jellus' comments. Even if it's a throwaway comment and they don't mean it, could you see how some posters might perceive it as jealous?
I reckon the vast majority of female posters here are perfectly reasoned, normal and objective women, but a minority give rise to others jumping to the conclusion on DS that 'women are jellus'. I'd say that a small, but definitely there subsection of DS give the rest of you a 'bad name' as it were.
One wonders how she will cope if she goes to the Playboy mansion, one thing she isn't known for is for going out with a lot of men and to be confronted by old Hughie boy before being accepted for Playboy centerfold may be something which sends her screaming home to Mum.
Also a lot of the Playboy women are hard and not acting as stupid as Helen, the twins on BB for example and won't fall for her stupid act, so I predict if she goes there might be tears before bedtime for Helen.
Yep, count me in on that seeing as though my comment seems to be the one being taken exception to. If she's the sexiest woman in the UK, then I demand a recount. And I honestly, truly, really mean that.
However, there a whole list of men I find just as unpalatable with similar terms of endearment. Maybe I should provide a list of them too in the interests of fairness....? Or is that another thread?
Fair enough Tweacle, and I'm not trying to pick on you honest, just using your words as an example. I mean you no offence!
I 100% agree on her not being the sexiest woman in the UK, not even close, but the point I'm trying to make is that these kind of polls are never truly viewed as being gospel are they. It's not a serious scientific bit of research. You don't actually think the vast majority of men or women actually believe it?
For me, it's just interesting to try and find out why this kind of thing creates such strong feelings in some. Why are people so bothered?
Anyway, peace to you, I'll try not to single your comments out again as I promise it's not directed at you per se!
I'm bothered about dimness being promoted as THE personality trait to have. People who play up to it, female AND male, are grating to no end. If Helen is naturally dim then whatever, but I mainy just think the media obsession with her is ridiculously unbalanced when it comes to her looks and how interesting she is not.
I think women should be allowed to be criticial of each other without White Knights riding in and scolding them for it. Men don't recieve that kind of grief when they're critical of other males, after all.
What else should we call it? Not every male who defends a female is a white knight, but the syndrome most certainly does exist.
I notice you ignore the part of my post that says men generally do not lecture each other for criticising people in the same way they lecture women.
I was sitting waiting for someone and nosing through the thread on my phone and that person arrived mid-post, hence the hasty reply .. I shall endeavour to reply properly when I get home ..
it's almost as if the phrase "white knights" has been adopted as a form of retort to those who might be critical of the criticism ..
*runs*
The 'white knights' charge wouldn't exist if the defence was a little more thoughtful, fact based and less prone to sweeping generalisations about other posters.
I'm bothered about dimness being promoted as THE personality trait to have. People who play up to it, female AND male, are grating to no end. If Helen is naturally dim then whatever, but I mainy just think the media obsession with her is ridiculously unbalanced when it comes to her looks and how interesting she is not.
I think women should be allowed to be criticial of each other without White Knights riding in and scolding them for it. Men don't recieve that kind of grief when they're critical of other males, after all.
I too think people should be allowed to be critical Molly. I hope I've shown from my posts in this thread that I am not this fabaled 'white knight' you talk of, more a guy who likes to have a debate.
I guess the main things I'd question (from my observations) is that it just doesn't seem to be a level playing field. If men and women were criticised in equal measure, and with the same level (and volume) of vitriol for doing the same kind of thing then fair enough, but IMO they are not. Why is this?
Secondly, I am trying to show how this internet phenomenon of the 'women are jellus' argument might come about and explore how some people could, (rightly or wrongly) be led to think this way.
I'm not here to try and cause a row, or offend any of you, but would be genuinely interested to hear other people's opinions on this and also what they think to the the other points I raised in the essay above!
Right, my horse needs water and the old amour could do with a polish. I shall be checking back later.
I was sitting waiting for someone and nosing through the thread on my phone and that person arrived mid-post, hence the hasty reply .. I shall endeavour to reply properly when I get home ..
I for one shall look forward to it JW, so please do.
Ok, I actually got back earlier on but someone rang
On "White Knight Syndrome": I actually think this is a near perfect retort really because I think it's just as condescending and insulting to me as a male as I'm quite sure "You're just jealous" is to a female.
On Flanagan herself: I've always personally felt she's got a bit of a daft sense of humour, but the problem with that is that she doesn't really have that self censorship that the majority of people have.
So I think you do get a lot of stuff from her that she personally probably thinks is hilarious but the whole point of the joke is lost on pretty much everyone else. You only have to look at a lot of my posts on various threads about her over the past year or so to see that idea in action
This, personally, is why I think she irritates so many people.
On 'Being Critical': I don't really have a huge problem with being critical of stupidity being promoted as a positive character trait. I do think, and have done for many years, that kids and youngsters overall don't really have a lot of positive role models to look up to and to aspire to be. I've felt for a long time that if the media actually looked to promote people who have achieved fame and/or success through hard work then you could maybe start to see a change in attitudes.
I think the problem lies in that the criticism isn't always about the intellect though. Over the years i've seen countless threads in Showbiz about Cheryl Cole, Myleene Klass, Jade Goody, Holly Willoughby e.t.c.. that pull them apart six ways from Sunday about a lot more than just intellect.
As AOTB has said, it doesn't appear to be a level playing field because the criticism nearly always seems to be aimed at the women and, more often than not, by women.
Take Myleene for example. A multi-instrumentalist and classically trained pianist and now a successful businesswoman. Certainly far, far above Flanagan in terms of intellect, but she still got stick. And probably is still not really viewed upon favourably by many even though she should arguably be looked at by young women as someone to aspire to be.
So I think it's actually quite understable to the impartial observer or "outsider" that 'jealousy' must be behind some of the criticism because there seems to be no other logical reason why such criticism is being levelled. Especially, in Myleene's case again, if the person is talented and successful and has worked for it and also when a lot of the criticism does end up being about the person's perceived looks as well.
Maybe the answer really could just be as simple as 'male v female' though. Most men would look at someone like Joey Essex and think "tw-at" and move on. Women would look at someone like Helen Flanagan or any of the above and pick them apart more thoroughly and more often because it comes down to the fact that women are more cerebral and men are more visceral. Who knows ?
I hope that resembled an answer and not my usual stream of unintelligible consciousness
She seems to be the latest in a long line of "tabloid babes" who are celebrated for being thick. It's beyond depressing the way "nice but dim" types are championed in this country, and treated like something to aspire to.
That's something that really gets up my nose. Some seem to think education is for toffs and weirdos. It's not. It's for everyone. I'm not saying that everyone has to have a PhD but it's important to be educated at least up to A-Level and to be literate and able to work a computer. Being thick is not something to celebrate. Are we returning to the dark old days where women were called blue stockings because they were educated? :mad:
I too think people should be allowed to be critical Molly. I hope I've shown from my posts in this thread that I am not this fabaled 'white knight' you talk of, more a guy who likes to have a debate.
I guess the main things I'd question (from my observations) is that it just doesn't seem to be a level playing field. If men and women were criticised in equal measure, and with the same level (and volume) of vitriol for doing the same kind of thing then fair enough, but IMO they are not. Why is this?
Secondly, I am trying to show how this internet phenomenon of the 'women are jellus' argument might come about and explore how some people could, (rightly or wrongly) be led to think this way.
I'm not here to try and cause a row, or offend any of you, but would be genuinely interested to hear other people's opinions on this and also what they think to the the other points I raised in the essay above!
Right, my horse needs water and the old amour could do with a polish. I shall be checking back later.
Ok, I actually got back earlier on but someone rang
On "White Knight Syndrome": I actually think this is a near perfect retort really because I think it's just as condescending and insulting to me as a male as I'm quite sure "You're just jealous" is to a female.
On Flanagan herself: I've always personally felt she's got a bit of a daft sense of humour, but the problem with that is that she doesn't really have that self censorship that the majority of people have.
So I think you do get a lot of stuff from her that she personally probably thinks is hilarious but the whole point of the joke is lost on pretty much everyone else. You only have to look at a lot of my posts on various threads about her over the past year or so to see that idea in action
This, personally, is why I think she irritates so many people.
On 'Being Critical': I don't really have a huge problem with being critical of stupidity being promoted as a positive character trait. I do think, and have done for many years, that kids and youngsters overall don't really have a lot of positive role models to look up to and to aspire to be. I've felt for a long time that if the media actually looked to promote people who have achieved fame and/or success through hard work then you could maybe start to see a change in attitudes.
I think the problem lies in that the criticism isn't always about the intellect though. Over the years i've seen countless threads in Showbiz about Cheryl Cole, Myleene Klass, Jade Goody, Holly Willoughby e.t.c.. that pull them apart six ways from Sunday about a lot more than just intellect.
As AOTB has said, it doesn't appear to be a level playing field because the criticism nearly always seems to be aimed at the women and, more often than not, by women.
Take Myleene for example. A multi-instrumentalist and classically trained pianist and now a successful businesswoman. Certainly far, far above Flanagan in terms of intellect, but she still got stick. And probably is still not really viewed upon favourably by many even though she should arguably be looked at by young women as someone to aspire to be.
So I think it's actually quite understable to the impartial observer or "outsider" that 'jealousy' must be behind some of the criticism because there seems to be no other logical reason why such criticism is being levelled. Especially, in Myleene's case again, if the person is talented and successful and has worked for it and also when a lot of the criticism does end up being about the person's perceived looks as well.
Maybe the answer really could just be as simple as 'male v female' though. Most men would look at someone like Joey Essex and think "tw-at" and move on. Women would look at someone like Helen Flanagan or any of the above and pick them apart more thoroughly and more often because it comes down to the fact that women are more cerebral and men are more visceral. Who knows ?
I hope that resembled an answer and not my usual stream of unintelligible consciousness
Interesting examples there. Jade Goody for example was a nasty, racist bully. Yes, it's tragic that a 27 year old Mother of 2 died - but my criticism of her has always been based on her unpleasant personality. Does that make me jellus?
Myleene is a talented lady but unfortunately, IMHO, has not stuck to her natural talent of music - but become another famous for being famous celeb who can be rather galling in writing books about Motherhood when this is something that women have been doing successfully for millions of years. I think she's lovely looking - but I'm not a fan of hers. Is that OK with you?
As for Flanagan having a 'daft sense of humour'; well yes, she possibly has. But it's more the fact that listening to her is like swimming through treacle. She's dense and inarticulate and comes across as being totally self absorbed. But of course because she's got big tits, the forum police automatically swoop down and assume that as women, we are so jellus of anyone with breasts (despite the fact that we have them ourselves). There are plenty of celebs I'm 'jellus' of - and they're celebrities I like with talent - Cate Blanchett, Kate Winslet, Jennifer Lawrence. All talented ladies with fantastic careers and not just gormless numpties who have a recurring appearance in the DM's sidebar of shame.
That's something that really gets up my nose. Some seem to think education is for toffs and weirdos. It's not. It's for everyone. I'm not saying that everyone has to have a PhD but it's important to be educated at least up to A-Level and to be literate and able to work a computer. Being thick is not something to celebrate. Are we returning to the dark old days where women were called blue stockings because they were educated? :mad:
Agreed. It's time we as a society stopped finding stupidity endearing.
Interesting examples there. Jade Goody for example was a nasty, racist bully. Yes, it's tragic that a 27 year old Mother of 2 died - but my criticism of her has always been based on her unpleasant personality. Does that make me jellus?
Myleene is a talented lady but unfortunately, IMHO, has not stuck to her natural talent of music - but become another famous for being famous celeb who can be rather galling in writing books about Motherhood when this is something that women have been doing successfully for millions of years. I think she's lovely looking - but I'm not a fan of hers. Is that OK with you?
As for Flanagan having a 'daft sense of humour'; well yes, she possibly has. But it's more the fact that listening to her is like swimming through treacle. She's dense and inarticulate and comes across as being totally self absorbed. But of course because she's got big tits, the forum police automatically swoop down and assume that as women, we are so jellus of anyone with breasts (despite the fact that we have them ourselves). There are plenty of celebs I'm 'jellus' of - and they're celebrities I like with talent - Cate Blanchett, Kate Winslet, Jennifer Lawrence. All talented ladies with fantastic careers and not just gormless numpties who have a recurring appearance in the DM's sidebar of shame.
I should stress that i'm not trying to get at anyone or imply anything or to demean or criticise anyone's perceived 'right' to criticise anyone for any reason. I'm just trying to offer my opinion and thoughts, so asking "is that ok with you?" suggests you've taken my post the wrong way, so if that's true then I will certainly apologise if it caused offence.
I should stress that i'm not trying to get at anyone or imply anything or to demean or criticise anyone's perceived 'right' to criticise anyone for any reason. I'm just trying to offer my opinion and thoughts, so asking "is that ok with you?" suggests you've taken my post the wrong way, so if that's true then I will certainly apologise if it caused offence.
Me too.
& show that my criticisms are based on personality traits and not looks, jealousy or superficiality.
I hope that resembled an answer and not my usual stream of unintelligible consciousness
Thanks for such a thoughtful reply, Jason. I can't say I agree with you on anything when it comes to this subject but it's always good to have some insight all the same.
I still think it's wrong women get a MUCH harder time than men when it comes to being "allowed" to critcise somebody but I sense we're just going to keep goint around in circles but I think as long as people can post without feeling like they are going to get "told off" (that's not aimed specifically at you, by the way) it will be okay.
Take Myleene for example. A multi-instrumentalist and classically trained pianist and now a successful businesswoman. Certainly far, far above Flanagan in terms of intellect, but she still got stick. And probably is still not really viewed upon favourably by many even though she should arguably be looked at by young women as someone to aspire to be.
Let's face it though she isn't successful today because of her musical talents, it's because she stripped down to a bikini on that celebrity jungle programme; and that's why Flanagan was so desperate to be on it too, and surprise, surprise it worked. They know that doing a programme like that will get them blanket media coverage, because that kind of tackiness seems to appeal to the public. The only difference being in Flanagan's case, unlike Klass, her ultimate ambition is to be a glamour model and lo and behold it's happened. Her parents must be so proud.
Thanks for such a thoughtful reply, Jason. I can't say I agree with you on anything when it comes to this subject but it's always good to have some insight all the same.
I still think it's wrong women get a MUCH harder time than men when it comes to being "allowed" to critcise somebody but I sense we're just going to keep goint around in circles but I think as long as people can post without feeling like they are going to get "told off" (that's not aimed specifically at you, by the way) it will be okay.
Anything at all ? Not even a little bit ?
I'm certainly open to your thoughts, but, that said, i'm also not a fan of circular arguments so if you're happy to leave things as they stand then so am I.
Let's face it though she isn't successful today because of her musical talents, it's because she stripped down to a bikini on that celebrity jungle programme
With respect, I would offer that the success of her 'Baby K' range isn't exclusively down to her stripping down to her bikini in the jungle in 2008.
and that's why Flanagan was so desperate to be on it too, and surprise, surprise it worked. They know that doing a programme like that will get them blanket media coverage, because that kind of tackiness seems to appeal to the public. The only difference being in Flanagan's case, unlike Klass, her ultimate ambition is to be a glamour model and lo and behold it's happened. Her parents must be so proud.
Nothing wrong with being a glamour model at all. She'll likely earn very good money out of it if she adopts it as a full time career. I can't see it though because part of being a glamour model in the age of 'Nuts' and 'Zoo' is being quite open about your sex life and your sexual preferences and I honestly can't see Flanagan doing that.
I think the whole issue of "blanket media coverage" is interesting though. It's something I've always felt is actually fed by forums like DS, as well as Facebook and Twitter. I think a level of interest is established by how often someone is spoken, or posted, about, either positively or negatively and the coverage is graded accordingly.
So I think there's certainly a case to answer that the number of 'critical' posts about a celebrity are, in fact, feeding more coverage.
JW- you made some excellent points in your post from yesterday and I largely agree with what you wrote. Your last paragraph was interesting and perhaps you could be on to something- maybe part of it is just being down to 'men are from mars women are from venus' type thing!
I agree everyone has a right to their opinion (and indeed to be critical) and I also think many posters, like Prumeister says, will post purely based on their personality etc, and not on looks or anything else. That's more than fair enough. I still stand by my point from earlier than there are others who definitely don't appear to do this, and it's those IMO who give rise to others rushing in with the 'oh you must be jealous' type of line. They may well be completely wrong, but I can see 'why' they might say it, that's all.
Finally I think we l can by and large all agree that the rise, and 'celebration' of the 'thick celebrity' is nothing to be admired, in either sex!
Comments
This will make the tabloids obsess over her even more, sigh.
I'll admit to being less tolerant of stupidity where it causes me personal inconvenience eg in work colleagues. But that's just annoyance at extra work caused etc and I can be angry at myself when I make a stupid mistake too.
Thing is, if we do accept that Helen really is genuinely stupid, it does seem unfair to blame her for that if she was simply born like that.
If that's true, I think the negotiations on what is or isn't shown would be rather amusing
Appreciate the replies Lexi and Pru and a fair enough question. I hope this doesn't seem like a cop out, but it's quite hard to put an absolute definition on this, which I guess is why the topic interests me in the first place. If I were to flip it round, and was given a list of females entering the CBB house or the Jungle or Strictly for example, I reckon more often than not I could single out the women that would be on the receiving end of the kind of disproportionately negative comments on DS I've mentioned.
It's not all about looks, far from it, hence the 'jellus' argument some posters throw out is weak I agree, but IMO there are certain types of females out there that are more likely to get some of the more OTT comments on a public forum than others.
Rather that give a massive long list, it might be easier to say that demure, non bolshy/ non overtly sexual women don't seem to draw the same level of ire. 'Girls girls' types seem more accepted than those that push the boundaries. Beyonce compared to Rhianna in a way.
Caroline Flack, Fearne Cotton, Holly Willoughbooby etc have all come in for way more stick than their actions/ jobs/ talents (or perceived lack of) would get if they were male IMO.
If certain woman ever makes a mistake or do something bad they will be treated like dirt and it will be held against them for ever, unless they make a grovelling apology on national TV that meets all our exacting standards- check out some of the bile thrown at Cheryl 'Biffa' Cole for example. Yes I know Cole once had a fight/ assaulted a toilet attendant donkey's years ago, but you read some of the vitriol and you'd think she committed genocide.or something. Tulisa whatsernane also.
Abby Clancy got many OTT comments that were just downright bitchy about her first appearances on Strictly and she IS someone I would say is stunning looking. She alas happens to be married to a footballer which also doesn't go down well. WAGS are another no no, as are women who do photos shoots for mags.
No don't get me wrong, I'm not saying I respect all the above people and/or their 'career choices', far from it. I don't think they are amazing or anything like that, just commenting on how they get loads of OTT stuff thrown their way which seems wholly disproportionate to their 'crimes'. I've probably explained this badly but hope you kind of get where I'm coming from.
I take your points on board. Please don't get me wrong, I can fully accept anyone saying they don't find her attractive,My comments are more about the posters that seem to go just that extra mile and then some. It's not even always what they say, more the manner in which they say it. To say she's unattractive, unsexy or even plain wouldn't even raise an eyebrow. Saying something like- ..however, just seems a bit much and as I say, can come across as not being genuine. I mean come on. Painful? Really? (OP am not picking on you BTW, just using an example to try and get across better what i mean!!)
I think it's this kind of comment that might make certain posters (not me I hasten to add;)) throw out the old 'jellus' comments. Even if it's a throwaway comment and they don't mean it, could you see how some posters might perceive it as jealous?
I reckon the vast majority of female posters here are perfectly reasoned, normal and objective women, but a minority give rise to others jumping to the conclusion on DS that 'women are jellus'. I'd say that a small, but definitely there subsection of DS give the rest of you a 'bad name' as it were.
Ha ha, phew, and thank you!
Also a lot of the Playboy women are hard and not acting as stupid as Helen, the twins on BB for example and won't fall for her stupid act, so I predict if she goes there might be tears before bedtime for Helen.
I 100% agree on her not being the sexiest woman in the UK, not even close, but the point I'm trying to make is that these kind of polls are never truly viewed as being gospel are they. It's not a serious scientific bit of research. You don't actually think the vast majority of men or women actually believe it?
For me, it's just interesting to try and find out why this kind of thing creates such strong feelings in some. Why are people so bothered?
Anyway, peace to you, I'll try not to single your comments out again as I promise it's not directed at you per se!
I'm bothered about dimness being promoted as THE personality trait to have. People who play up to it, female AND male, are grating to no end. If Helen is naturally dim then whatever, but I mainy just think the media obsession with her is ridiculously unbalanced when it comes to her looks and how interesting she is not.
I think women should be allowed to be criticial of each other without White Knights riding in and scolding them for it. Men don't recieve that kind of grief when they're critical of other males, after all.
*runs*
What else should we call it? Not every male who defends a female is a white knight, but the syndrome most certainly does exist.
I notice you ignore the part of my post that says men generally do not lecture each other for criticising people in the same way they lecture women.
I was sitting waiting for someone and nosing through the thread on my phone and that person arrived mid-post, hence the hasty reply .. I shall endeavour to reply properly when I get home ..
The 'white knights' charge wouldn't exist if the defence was a little more thoughtful, fact based and less prone to sweeping generalisations about other posters.
I too think people should be allowed to be critical Molly. I hope I've shown from my posts in this thread that I am not this fabaled 'white knight' you talk of, more a guy who likes to have a debate.
I guess the main things I'd question (from my observations) is that it just doesn't seem to be a level playing field. If men and women were criticised in equal measure, and with the same level (and volume) of vitriol for doing the same kind of thing then fair enough, but IMO they are not. Why is this?
Secondly, I am trying to show how this internet phenomenon of the 'women are jellus' argument might come about and explore how some people could, (rightly or wrongly) be led to think this way.
I'm not here to try and cause a row, or offend any of you, but would be genuinely interested to hear other people's opinions on this and also what they think to the the other points I raised in the essay above!
Right, my horse needs water and the old amour could do with a polish. I shall be checking back later.
I for one shall look forward to it JW, so please do.
On "White Knight Syndrome": I actually think this is a near perfect retort really because I think it's just as condescending and insulting to me as a male as I'm quite sure "You're just jealous" is to a female.
On Flanagan herself: I've always personally felt she's got a bit of a daft sense of humour, but the problem with that is that she doesn't really have that self censorship that the majority of people have.
So I think you do get a lot of stuff from her that she personally probably thinks is hilarious but the whole point of the joke is lost on pretty much everyone else. You only have to look at a lot of my posts on various threads about her over the past year or so to see that idea in action
This, personally, is why I think she irritates so many people.
On 'Being Critical': I don't really have a huge problem with being critical of stupidity being promoted as a positive character trait. I do think, and have done for many years, that kids and youngsters overall don't really have a lot of positive role models to look up to and to aspire to be. I've felt for a long time that if the media actually looked to promote people who have achieved fame and/or success through hard work then you could maybe start to see a change in attitudes.
I think the problem lies in that the criticism isn't always about the intellect though. Over the years i've seen countless threads in Showbiz about Cheryl Cole, Myleene Klass, Jade Goody, Holly Willoughby e.t.c.. that pull them apart six ways from Sunday about a lot more than just intellect.
As AOTB has said, it doesn't appear to be a level playing field because the criticism nearly always seems to be aimed at the women and, more often than not, by women.
Take Myleene for example. A multi-instrumentalist and classically trained pianist and now a successful businesswoman. Certainly far, far above Flanagan in terms of intellect, but she still got stick. And probably is still not really viewed upon favourably by many even though she should arguably be looked at by young women as someone to aspire to be.
So I think it's actually quite understable to the impartial observer or "outsider" that 'jealousy' must be behind some of the criticism because there seems to be no other logical reason why such criticism is being levelled. Especially, in Myleene's case again, if the person is talented and successful and has worked for it and also when a lot of the criticism does end up being about the person's perceived looks as well.
Maybe the answer really could just be as simple as 'male v female' though. Most men would look at someone like Joey Essex and think "tw-at" and move on. Women would look at someone like Helen Flanagan or any of the above and pick them apart more thoroughly and more often because it comes down to the fact that women are more cerebral and men are more visceral. Who knows ?
I hope that resembled an answer and not my usual stream of unintelligible consciousness
Luvin you're work
That's something that really gets up my nose. Some seem to think education is for toffs and weirdos. It's not. It's for everyone. I'm not saying that everyone has to have a PhD but it's important to be educated at least up to A-Level and to be literate and able to work a computer. Being thick is not something to celebrate. Are we returning to the dark old days where women were called blue stockings because they were educated? :mad:
Hope the horse is well watered
Interesting examples there. Jade Goody for example was a nasty, racist bully. Yes, it's tragic that a 27 year old Mother of 2 died - but my criticism of her has always been based on her unpleasant personality. Does that make me jellus?
Myleene is a talented lady but unfortunately, IMHO, has not stuck to her natural talent of music - but become another famous for being famous celeb who can be rather galling in writing books about Motherhood when this is something that women have been doing successfully for millions of years. I think she's lovely looking - but I'm not a fan of hers. Is that OK with you?
As for Flanagan having a 'daft sense of humour'; well yes, she possibly has. But it's more the fact that listening to her is like swimming through treacle. She's dense and inarticulate and comes across as being totally self absorbed. But of course because she's got big tits, the forum police automatically swoop down and assume that as women, we are so jellus of anyone with breasts (despite the fact that we have them ourselves). There are plenty of celebs I'm 'jellus' of - and they're celebrities I like with talent - Cate Blanchett, Kate Winslet, Jennifer Lawrence. All talented ladies with fantastic careers and not just gormless numpties who have a recurring appearance in the DM's sidebar of shame.
Agreed. It's time we as a society stopped finding stupidity endearing.
I should stress that i'm not trying to get at anyone or imply anything or to demean or criticise anyone's perceived 'right' to criticise anyone for any reason. I'm just trying to offer my opinion and thoughts, so asking "is that ok with you?" suggests you've taken my post the wrong way, so if that's true then I will certainly apologise if it caused offence.
Me too.
& show that my criticisms are based on personality traits and not looks, jealousy or superficiality.
But ta for the apology.
Thanks for such a thoughtful reply, Jason.
I still think it's wrong women get a MUCH harder time than men when it comes to being "allowed" to critcise somebody but I sense we're just going to keep goint around in circles but I think as long as people can post without feeling like they are going to get "told off" (that's not aimed specifically at you, by the way) it will be okay.
Let's face it though she isn't successful today because of her musical talents, it's because she stripped down to a bikini on that celebrity jungle programme; and that's why Flanagan was so desperate to be on it too, and surprise, surprise it worked. They know that doing a programme like that will get them blanket media coverage, because that kind of tackiness seems to appeal to the public. The only difference being in Flanagan's case, unlike Klass, her ultimate ambition is to be a glamour model and lo and behold it's happened. Her parents must be so proud.
Anything at all ? Not even a little bit ?
I'm certainly open to your thoughts, but, that said, i'm also not a fan of circular arguments so if you're happy to leave things as they stand then so am I.
With respect, I would offer that the success of her 'Baby K' range isn't exclusively down to her stripping down to her bikini in the jungle in 2008.
Nothing wrong with being a glamour model at all. She'll likely earn very good money out of it if she adopts it as a full time career. I can't see it though because part of being a glamour model in the age of 'Nuts' and 'Zoo' is being quite open about your sex life and your sexual preferences and I honestly can't see Flanagan doing that.
I think the whole issue of "blanket media coverage" is interesting though. It's something I've always felt is actually fed by forums like DS, as well as Facebook and Twitter. I think a level of interest is established by how often someone is spoken, or posted, about, either positively or negatively and the coverage is graded accordingly.
So I think there's certainly a case to answer that the number of 'critical' posts about a celebrity are, in fact, feeding more coverage.
I agree everyone has a right to their opinion (and indeed to be critical) and I also think many posters, like Prumeister says, will post purely based on their personality etc, and not on looks or anything else. That's more than fair enough. I still stand by my point from earlier than there are others who definitely don't appear to do this, and it's those IMO who give rise to others rushing in with the 'oh you must be jealous' type of line. They may well be completely wrong, but I can see 'why' they might say it, that's all.
Finally I think we l can by and large all agree that the rise, and 'celebration' of the 'thick celebrity' is nothing to be admired, in either sex!