WATCH: The Dirty Secret About Susan Boyle

Comments

[jmpfjoy]

If Susan Boyle is ugly.....

Then Ugly is the New Beautiful!!!!

[Lachlan Prescott]

Hahahaha love the vid!

[Allocator2008]

Guys it is just biology. Come on. We all are biased towards better looking people because better looking means healthier genes. We like healthier genes because we are programmed to like healthier genes since we are all "gene carrying robots". It is not the media's thing, it is just basic biology. Everyone prefers to see better looking, non-obese people. That is not right or wrong. It is just a fact of the matter. We are here because all life is for the purpose of the gene. Simple as that. Those who don't get that will soon be out of the gene pool, at least, hopefully.

[padre99]

"Better" looking does not mean healthier genes. If it did there would only be "better" looking people after so many generations. Whose genes are "healthier" (i.e., more valuable to the human race) -- Albert Einstein or Keanu Reeves?

[jmpfjoy]

Hmmm.....

My genes can't fit into my jeans.....­.

[jmpfjoy]

So, according to your theory, silicone boobs, Botox and liposuction give us a distinct survival advantage over each other?

I would be disappointed to learn that my DNA is in total control of my choices.

I think that's why we have brains.

[SpaceboySD]

Lee, what can I say? You hit it right on the head, as usual. You're awesome!

[jeannie35]

Very good point, Lee. You have helped me focus my thoughts on this issue. I've been offended by the coverage (and happy for her at the same time), but I just couldn't understand what was so disturbing to me. I thought this was a little like the Rick Astley phenomenon - voice not matching face, but maybe Rick, too, was stricken by the same malady. I do look forward to the day when looks do not matter, but, for now, looks do matter immensely in terms of success. I do not mean to suggest only good-looking people succeed, just that their odds are better. Shining a light on media's use of "unlikely" will, however, make some people realize (including me) what it really means. **Now the Foxettes should know that if their looks go, so will they. There are no average-looking Foxettes; they are all drop-dead gorgeous, and those tiny skirts look soooo uncomfortable. Poor girls. Sour grapes for me? Perhaps.

[tom084]

Susan Boyle may not be one of "The Beautiful People" physically but I sort of forget that when she sings. She has a marvelous voice for so little training. She did say that she had two years of training, but that does not comprise all the work most really good (opera) singers put in. I say "Hurray!" for her voice and confidence in herself.

[canobserv]

America...­..........­........th­e land of we will build you up....and then we will tear you to shreds....­..........­......

[Kremfresch]

uh... She's British.

[winkin]

Thanks Lee. Well put.

Here's my "dirty secret" about today's "talent" shows:

What would happen if the millions of viewers who, every week, are glued to these sensational, contrived, money making "star factories", were to get up and go out out more often, to watch and support live, local, upcoming talent?

There would be a lot more Susan Boyles.
And less Simon Cowells.

In other words, the very shows that claim to uncover hidden gems, are (partially) to blame for their remaining in obscurity.

[LeeCamp]

Amen, Winkin. As a stand-up comic, I say "Everyone get out of the F'in house and go see a live show!"

[stagebandman]

Gee, I've been saying that for years, ever since the very first episode of American Idol, of which I watched about 10 minutes and had enough. The show is a dream destroyer. The world is full of Susan Boyles. Look to your churches, your schools, your local clubs and bands, even your own families. There's plenty of talented people who are never going to be big stars. If you appreciate them, then you're doing your part. We have grossly bastardized what the term "successful" is.

[jjdo]

Ms. Boyle appears to have flooded the world with more tears than all the funerals processions (thankfully for different reason). I doubt the environment has anything to do with it. Even in the “best of times” she would bring tears in our eyes (well-off people also shed tears over her singing). Our natural human emotion is simply reacting to her well-tuned phenomena (claim of tears seem to have shed only during this particular song). Look in the mirror. You will see the ugliest person in the world, and the most beautiful human being in the world. Everyone else is in between.

Our present society is all about money, wealth, prestige, yada yada… . Blogs, Hollywood, media, you, me are all masturbating our explanation, reasoning, justification yada yada… . This blog would not exist without her (good, bad, or ugly). The best weapon against this is “NO COMMENT”. Good luck

[chevyval]

I wouldn't want to know a single person on these comments. None have
the ability to experience happiness for someone else. American's are
so shallow.

[punkindmb]

and yet you lump all Americans into on shallow grave. Sheesh

[Graylynx]

All 300 million of us, eh? Man, you get around!

[Javida]

327 million to be exact.

[HopeGrenade]

More and more it seems like Susan Boyle is like the handicapped kid you were friends with in High School. You were only friends with him because he was handicapped and it made you look deep. Yeah, she can sing, but when has talent ever outweighed looks?

[Tena]

I mean jeez - this meta speculation is worse than the original "surprise" IMO. How many Isoldes have weighed close to 300 pounds? Most of them.

And the last Madame Butterfly I saw was about 56 years old and also not slim.

[Tena]

O Lee! Darlin, take a look at some of our opera stars and classical singing stars - looks were never in it with classical singers.

[Steamboater]

Opera has always been more accepting of non-traditional looking women. In fact, for a very long time, opera singes were supposed to be fat. That's not true today at all. Pop music hardly so. Very few pop singers made it who were oversized and, to be kind, not that attractive e.g., Kate Smith, Ella Fitzgerald etc. There's got to be some glamour there and Boyle misses out on that completely.

[Alan Hope]

Not only that, but Steve Buscemi is a highly successful actor, and Helen Thomas a widely respected reporter. So what's left of Lee's point?

[LeeCamp]

Maybe I should've been more clear. My grudge is with the media's use of the term "unlikely.­" In our shallow society it's rare to see unattractive stars in many types of fields. So if we're going to call Susan Boyle an UNLIKELY star, then I guess we're also saying Steve Buscemi is unlikely and Helen Thomas is unlikely. The entire reason I picked the two of them is BECAUSE they're incredibly successful and good at what they do. Whereas, the half-naked Fox News tart is not an accomplished journalist but is a LIKELY anchorwoman simply because of her looks.
This video is hoping that one day Susan Boyle-type people will not be considered so UNLIKELY.
And as for the other point that opera stars are big, I agree. But then why is everyone saying how unlikely Susan Boyle is? Shouldn't they be calling her a "likely opera singer?"

[rumblingspire]

reminds me of the movie about the elephant man. society behind a polite mask, masking their attendance at the freak show.

[knewt]

I wonder why people feel it's discriminatory to make rude comments about handicapped people but not about people who don't fit the socially acceptable format of a culture's image of "beauty"?

I remember when Barbara Streisand created a huge controversy because she refused to get a "nose job". People were insulted that she would have the audacity to accept herself as she was, even though it wasn't "socially acceptable". Eventually people accepted her as the beauty that she is.

If Susan Boyle was a man this wouldn't be an issue at all. Was there so much controversy about Paul Potts' appearance? Think in a broader perspective! Throughout history, from the "Venus of Willendorf" a famous fertility goddess to Eleanor Roosevelt and Camilla Parker-Bowles, homely women, not to mention scores of homely men, have had a powerful influence on the course of events.

May Susan continue to break down social barriers!

[rumblingspire]

agreed. but, did it have to happen on the freak stage. and that is what these talent shows are, dressed up gong shows. I'm sorry to say I watched The Gong Show as a kid. Sorry!

[LooktotheLeft]

Who didn't (watch it)? No apology necessary

[rumblingspire]

TV and the Internet are currently using her as a freak in a freak show, dressing it up as something else; philosphizing about age,beauty and talent. I can't stand these cruel talent shows.
I guess she will make some money. That is good. BUT, something is wrong here.

[wingnutslayer]

Yes something is very wrong here. For one, I doubt the complete spontaneity of her performance on this show. The reaction to her from the audience and judges seemed so, so on cue. As soon as she walked out, the very second, the camera was fanning the audience for young people making yuk faces and disapproving sounds. The judges, mainly Simon "never done nothing on his own" Cowell, were making those same faces. Then when she sang, the second she opened her mouth on the first notes, the good lord Simon raised his eyebrows in surprise and delight and saw that it was good. Uh-huh. I'm sure that this woman would not have been sent out on that stage unless someone knew how good she was and I'd be willing to bet that that someone was practically everyone. Okay, point made and it's a good one but this was a set up. No question.

[zoozey]

I absolutely agree with you. There is something very condescending and patronizing in the media's portrayal of her. She has a beautiful voice. But, make no mistake, the media circus is a freak show, disguised as being "benevolent" to the "poor, homely girl...."