- Susan Doyle… is this for real?
Contemplative article from yesterday’s paper:Posted 8 years ago
We cannot all have a glitzy outer appearance, she is probably more normal than the majority of the ‘talented’ glitzy people on this planet, just look at Britney! I wouldnt kick her out of bed, but I wouldnt be seen out with her either…Posted 8 years ago
Just buy the CD not the DVD…foxylaydeeMember
agree with trailmonkey. Why does the audience have to laugh at her just because she doesn’t look attractive by their standards? I felt uncomfortable when they were all screwing up their faces etc until she started to sing, its just nasty i think. Well done to her, she has alot of courage to stand up there and show off her talent. 🙂Posted 8 years agodangerousbeansMember
Well I for one hope she makes shedloads of money, has everything she ever wanted in life and lives happily ever after.
She deserves it for standing up and showing her talent in front of an audience of (it seems) appearance and celebrity absorbed nobodies who collectively don’t have either her abilities or her bravery.
**** sick of the country and its ‘got to conform’attitude.
I applaud those who are different, geeks and freaks if you will.
Without them the whole bloody world will be beige, with Corrie and reality TV the only acceptable pastimes and all disposible income spent on increasing the value of your property (not home)and botox.Posted 8 years agodeadlydarcyMember
Same here…fair dues to the girl. I really liked the article from the Guardian too saying how we allow ugly men to be talented and successful but ugly women should stay at home weeping and wishing they were someone else.
Men are allowed to be ugly and talented. Alan Sugar looks like a burst bag of flour. Gordon Ramsay has a dried-up riverbed for a face. Justin Lee Collins looks like Cousin It from The Addams Family. Graham Norton is a baboon in mascara.
😆 😆 😆
Worth thinking about the next time someone posts a picture of Fatima Whitbread on the A&A thread.Posted 8 years agocoffeekingMember
A few points…
1) Programs are edited to death – you dont know if they were turning their nose up at her looks, her comments about wanting to be a famous singer or indeed why they were screwing their nose up – personally I screwed my nose up and chuckled due to the fact that so many that come on and say “I want to be X” are generally useless and I think I have pretty good reason to chuckle based on the many previous acts that were utter tripe, good looking or not. Ultimately no-one respects people based on looks in these things, they either are talented or not – whether she is your taste in looks or not is entirely unimportant.
2) I dont think they patronised her, I think they were genuinely shocked by how good she was and how she’d turned the crowd around, and were just saying so. Seems fair to me – better than “ding ding..you’re through, g’bye”.
Dont get me wrong, I think its stupid how people are famous just for being attractive and talentless, just as much as the next person but regardless of how everyone wants to seem PC – we all judge people on looks to some extent, its a natural human reaction when you dont know what’s behind the outward appearance, we then change our opinions as more info is learned. There really isnt any other way around it, unless you assume everyone is talented and godly every time, which is utterly unrealistic?
Ah well, she’s good (didnt think she was amazing) so I’m glad she got to sing.Posted 8 years agosharkiMember
I think that THAT link is against the rules, it’s not friday and neither is she athletic or aesthetic.
STW is not the place to drool lustly over pics or videos of normal people let alone sports stars….one rule for one, etc….
I find it offensive and inappropiate, so MARK could you do your thing and block this thread?
Take this as an offical complaint, i’ll not do in private.
Pfft, perverts!Posted 8 years ago
The topic ‘Susan Doyle… is this for real?’ is closed to new replies.