Or you won’t catch a prize like me, writes Ted Safran , in the (UK) Times.
There are many, many differences between the British and the Americans, but none more glaring than UK women’s approach to their own upkeep. 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.
And what’s required to rise to the challenge?
An informal poll of my US female friends revealed that they spend roughly $700 (£350) a month on what they consider standard obligatory beauty maintenance. That covers haircut, highlights, manicure, pedicure, waxing, tanning, make-up, facials, teeth whitening etc. They will spend a further $1,000 (£500) a month on physical conditioning such as military fitness, spinning sessions, vikram yoga, Pilates, deep-tissue sports massage, personal training etc. On top of that, add the occasional spa day, a week-long “bikini boot camp” in Mexico at the start of every summer and seasonal splurges on personal shoppers and clothing. I’m not sure any of my British female friends spends £700 during an entire year on her appearance. American women see these costs as a simple and sensible investment in their future.
The fools. If only they spent a fortune on their appearance they could snag the likes of Ted. (And where does he get his ideas about American women? One suspects he has never actually conversed with any, but instead learned about them via “Sex and the City”. Sort of like black-and-white Mary, for the philosophers amongst you. Only without all the facts.) (Thanks, Kitchen-Chick, for this astounding read.)A note: I wondered if this was parody, as I’ve been told that my American origins may prevent me from properly perceiving certain instances of British humour. But extensive consultation with native informants confirms that it’s not. Still, it’s quite enjoyable to read if you pretend that it’s in The Onion.