Don’t hate me because I’m prettier than you
The way you look makes a big difference to how people perceive you and treat you.
Would Kim Kardashian be as successful if she had a face like a half-eaten pie?
Would Kate Middleton be Duchess Kate with an overbite, acne and lanky hair?
Would Amal Clooney have bagged the most famous bachelor in America if she wasn’t beautiful as well as brainy? No, no and no. And yet any woman who is brave enough to admit their good looks brings them advantages, admiration and attention is treated like a pariah.
If you are ugly and say the way you look makes a difference, you’re a hero. It doesn’t make any sense. The latest woman to come under attack for telling the truth is Felicia Czochanski, pictured, who describes herself in as a being “5-foot-5 with blonde hair, big hazel eyes, 34DDs, and toned calves”.
“Coming to terms with being perceived as ‘beautiful’ wasn’t easy. It soon became how people knew me. People seemed to forget or simply ignore my accomplishments,” she writes.
“I demand to be respected, both my body and my mind, because believe it or not, there’s more to me than just my looks,” she says. Sounds fair enough to me. Her piece has gone viral, attracting an avalanche of negative attention.
Czochanski has been called every name under the sun. Vain. A narcissist. Self-absorbed. Blind. Self-centred — and that’s just the ones I can put in print.
Given that the advantage of good looks is a wellestablished social and economic fact, why do people find it so challenging when someone talks about what it’s like to be pretty?
Czochanski seems a lot more measured than UK writer Samantha Brick who wrote a similar piece a few years ago, lamenting the fact that her “10 out of 10” looks made other women hate her.
Like Czochanski, she was lambasted in the media and attracted thousands of negative comments from around the globe.
Brick, I’d argue, went too far, blaming her looks on everything from not being asked to be a bridesmaid to not being asked to dinner parties.
As I pointed out back then, her attitude rather than her attractiveness was more likely to be the reason why people didn’t like her.
But there is no escaping the fact that the way you look does affect things. And no one seems to like it when good-looking people point this out.
Perhaps it’s because mere mortals like me don’t like to consider the difference that being spectacularly good looking would have made to our lives.
As someone who had a particularly brutal adolescence on the looks front, only to emerge as sort-of-OK in my 20s, I have experience both sides of the looks divide.
As a teen I was dorky, and still had bad skin and braces well into year 12. Luckily the lighting at Blue Light discoes was, well, blue, which was very flattering to someone with zits and metal teeth.
At that stage I was considered a “good package”, which meant I had a good enough personality to make me passably good looking after the boy had downed a sixpack of wild peach wine cooler.
Fast forward a few decades, and I now have the benefit of expensive highlights, good make-up and a decent wardrobe.
On the set of I look like Carrie Bickmore’s fatter, older, shorter sister, but at least they haven’t used the soft-focus lens on me yet.
I’m never going to be writing pieces lamenting that I am too good-looking, but I am able to acknowledge that the way I look has been a plus professionally.
I’ve particularly noticed a difference when I’ve had the benefit of TV lighting and professional photographers, which are great friends to any woman over 40.
It goes to show that with the right help just about everyone can be gorgeous, so there’s no need to feel resentful about how others look.
So would I give it all up to look like a supermodel with Czochanski’s 34DD breasts? You betcha. Of course I would. Blog with Susie at susieobrien.com.au, follow her on Twitter @susieob and Facebook.com/ NewswithSuse