Oh, Samantha, I don't want to join the camp of the 4000+ people who have already hit you over the head for this bit of journalistic foolishness, because I think some of their comments to you were cruel. But I'm really struggling to figure out not only the point of this article but also how on EARTH you couldn't foresee the resulting shit storm response.
Don't get me wrong. You're a pretty gal. But I know many way more attractive women than you appear to be, a few, even, whose beauty would give Angelina Jolie a serious run for her money. And yet none of them have ever experienced anything close to the kind of off-the-charts attention—good and bad—you describe in your article.
Well, okay, so one of my gal pals does get an inordinate amount of attention from men, but none of us who count ourselves part of her wide circle of friends has ostracized her because of it. We are mature enough and secure enough to know her movie-star beauty is a combination of happy genetic accident and a whole heck of a lot of work, so more power to her. It's not the only thing that defines her, besides. She is also kind and caring, wickedly funny, a terrific cook, and a gracious hostesses. Who wouldn't want someone like that for a friend?
So I'm beginning to wonder if there isn't perhaps another reason for the gobs of antipathy slung your way by members of our fair sex.
But this, this is the worst: You can't wait for wrinkles and grey hair so you can "blend into the background?" I can't even begin to deal with the utter stupidity of that statement.