"I am a massive fan of British women. UK girls, in my opinion, are the greatest natural beauties in the world . . . when they’re 17 or 18 years old. The girls I was surrounded by when I was a teenager were sublime roses with lustrous hair, flawless skin, bright eyes and lithe, athletic bodies. They dressed as if there would be a prize at the end of the night for the girl wearing the least. I then went away to Philadelphia for university. Four years later, I came back and wondered: “What the hell happened to all the beautiful girls I knew?” My first assumption was that one half of them had eaten the other half and washed them down with a crate of lager. These girls looked phenomenal when looking good took no effort. But when British women get to the age where they have to make an effort, they appear unable, or uninterested, in rising to the challenge."
As he says himself:
"I always thought I would end up with an English girl. But I’m never getting laid in Britain ever again."
3 comments:
One supposes that this is an example of the sort of journalism I really hate, ie an apparent opinion published only to get people annoyed. You wonder whether it has occurred to anyone that getting people annoyed online doesn't sell papers, which used to be the rationale for the genre.
Totally OT - if you are bored with the Queen's Speech, you could give us the beenfit of your erudition here (see esp. 2nd comment).
More to the care American women take with their appearance, from the page you link to --
"Apparently, work on split or saggy ear lobes is all the rage among New York socialites."
Some things are worth criticizing. Some are not.
Post a Comment