Bad Hair

There’s something I find rather annoying about certain British women, an example of which is below:

Look at the state of her hair: it looks as though she’s just got out of bed, yet she’s happy to have this picture at the masthead of her opinion pieces in a national newspaper.

You see this a lot with British women. Watch the evening news and stick around until they interview a council spokeswoman, or a university lecturer, or some other “modern” woman of leftist bent and you’ll see the same thing: hair all over the place.

They do this deliberately, believing it displays casual indifference to their appearance which implies they instead express themselves with intellect, compassion, and other non-physical traits. Only to me it makes them seem slovenly.

This isn’t about looks – I don’t care whether the women are young or pretty – it is about effort. If I were asked to come on TV, or to provide a photo for a column, I would make damned sure I had shaved that morning and I’d probably be in a suit and tie. Anything else and I’d not be taken seriously, and rightly so.

British women, alas, have somewhat of a reputation among foreigners. One phrase I hear often is “they don’t know how to take care of themselves”. Is it true? I don’t know. But one thing is for sure: you’d not see a French, Italian, or Russian woman appearing in a national newspaper with hair like that.

Share

16 thoughts on “Bad Hair

  1. Eastern European women care about their appearance, most British women don’t. This results in the British woman getting out of the door in about 15 minutes and the Russian woman in just under an hour.

  2. Through-a-hedge-backwards it used to be called. The thing is, really young women can carry it off: undergraduate age, not much older.

  3. Hmmmm…

    Wouldn’t it be tempting to send her off to face down IS armed with love and resistance.

    No, no Armalite for you, duck. Love and resistance are much better weapons. Go get ’em! You go guuurrrrrrllll!

  4. Back OT, my missus noticed that about some of her mates when they’d been over long enough in the artsy-fartsy leftard scene. They’ve gone from understatedly attractive to looking like they’ve been through a hedge backwards.

    One of my almost-guilty pleasures is reading RoK. They run quite a few articles about how going leftard ruins women’s looks, though I’m sure the examples they choose are very selective.

  5. Back OT, my missus noticed that about some of her mates when they’d been over long enough in the artsy-fartsy leftard scene. They’ve gone from understatedly attractive to looking like they’ve been through a hedge backwards.

    Yeah, my ex-artsy friend was a pretty enough thing (being Russian) and the dyed hair, weird clothes, and piercings had a certain charm I suppose. But she was in her thirties, and in hindsight I realise she just looked like somebody who’d never grown up. As dearieme says, the young, pretty things can pull it off, but past a certain age…nah.

  6. ‘If I were asked to come on TV, or to provide a photo for a column, I would make damned sure I had shaved that morning and I’d probably be in a suit and tie. ‘

    You are not the BBC’s Robert Peston, and I do not claim my £5.

  7. And if we’re picking ‘Guardian’ byline pics, the one that most irks me is Frances Ryan, with that half-leaning-forward pose, with the sympathetic face.

    Makes me want to drop-kick an orphan.

  8. And if we’re picking ‘Guardian’ byline pics, the one that most irks me is Frances Ryan, with that half-leaning-forward pose, with the sympathetic face.

    Bleedin’ ‘eck! I’ve just looked it up, that’s an awful, awful photo!

  9. And if we’re picking ‘Guardian’ byline pics, the one that most irks me is Frances Ryan, with that half-leaning-forward pose, with the sympathetic face.

    Bleedin’ ‘eck! I’ve just looked it up, that’s an awful, awful photo!

    You should read her articles (actually, no you shouldn’t).

    Suzanne Moore is an interesting one. Its hard to see how she has got where she is, considering she lacks looks (as you note), logic or the ability to express herself.

    She’s at the Groan though, so I guess I just answered my own question.

  10. “This isn’t about looks – I don’t care whether the women are young or pretty – it is about effort.”

    Years ago I had a girlfriend who I thought (natch) was attractive but some other people assured me she wasn’t so much. Yet this young woman was careful to always maintain her appearance and her hair — average colour and style that it was — never looked out of place. She once said to me that every woman should try to look her best, and she was right. She never came across as anything but capable at work and, er, really quite something else in private. Okay, we will leave that there…

  11. Well to be honest I doubt she’d launch a thousand ships even if she did her heir…

  12. I, for one, admire this level of indifference to one’s own appearance.

    I’d actually prefer it if we didn’t see photos in bylines. Why the heck should I judge people on how they look? The answer is that it’s ingrained, biological apparently. Inevitable. So I will judge people on how they look, like it or not, until the day I die (or go blind, I suppose).

    In some ways I’d rather I didn’t even see the name on the byline until after reading the piece. I know there are some people I don’t subject to proper scrutiny because I know I generally agree with them, and other people who I assume I am going to disagree with so don’t read through in a fair-minded way. Even just the name is enough to bias the reading of a piece. Parenthetically: there has been a lot of research on academic marking, that finds that even if a marker does not know the student personally, their grade given is affected quite substantially by gender/ethnic information encoded in the name. Marking work anonymously (using candidate number) is far fairer. I can only assume that reading and judging an article on its merits is affected by the same factors. Cognitive biases run deep and pernicious. My favourite is the one where judges issue quite different sentences depending on whether they have recently eaten or not.

    Of course, it is useful to know who wrote a piece so you can avoid crashing bores or fantasists or people play fast-and-loose with facts. (Few things irritate me more about the internet than the way I have to carry around in my head distinctions between “information” that I read somewhere reputable, versus “information” which I know needs more verification before I should believe it … obviously this has always been an issue, but the internet has accentuated the problem massively. Alternatively, perhaps I was far too credulous about things I read in dead-tree books and newspapers before!)

  13. I get your point and agree completely. I just can’t get past that quote next to her picture. Good god.

  14. There’s a level of self-delusion about every aspect of these people’s lives, weird appearances are just a symptom.

    If you truly believe that we should hug a jihadist, then isn’t going to be much of a stretch to also come to the conclusion that “menopausal alcoholic harridan with a back-combed birds nest and loud lippy” is an attractive or credible look.

Comments are closed.