Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Amy-Erin Blakely's chest and the dangers of being too ridiculously good-looking

By Alexandra Petri

Amy-Erin Blakely complained that her coworkers at the Devereux Foundation were fixated on her, uh, chest size, calling her "too sensual" to promote, and that after she had filed two complaints, she was fired!

I sympathize!

I was fired from my first job because everyone told me my chest was too large. This makes more sense when I tell you that my first job was as a pirate. My chest weighed two tons, was eight cubits in height and six in breadth, had metal clasps, and was hewn out of gopherwood. In other words, it was almost as large as Ms. Blakely's coworkers allegedly alleged hers was. "Yo ho, you're only supposed to be able to fit fifteen men on one of these," the guys said, as they shoved it overboard. I was disappointed. I had hoped that this would be an entry-level position. I was going to sue them for addressing me as "yo ho," but they assured me this was just "workplace jargon," so I decided to ignore it.

I brought a sizable teak chest to my current job, and people have largely failed to mention it, even though I carry it with me to meetings and dress it up in shirts that say, "My eyes are over here!" Once someone mumbled, "Nice chest," while passing down the hall. "Thank you!" I yelled back. "I made it myself!" A recording of this conversation was discovered later, and I can't comment further because it is currently the basis of a lawsuit. All I can say is that Gloria Allred is representing me.

This is being compared to the case of Debrahlee Lorenzana, who claimed that she was fired from Citigroup for being too "really, really ridiculously good-looking." (Those may not have been her exact words.) It's a shame if her coworkers truly found her beauty so distracting that they were unable to keep focused on their jobs. But I relate to this, too! Someone once said it was impossible to work with me -- I assume for the same reason. Sure, she blamed the dead fish I carry with me at all times for luck and the moderately talented accordionist who follows me around to provide ambiance, but I'm pretty sure it was my beauty and she was just saying that to avoid a lawsuit.

Gloria Allred also represented her. I am flabbergasted that Gloria Allred's career consists of representing people who are too good-looking for their jobs. How do you get a job like that? Knowing my luck, I would wind up as the lawyer who had to represent people who were fired for being so physically hideous that it was impossible for their coworkers to deal with them. "My name is John Merrick," the man with the bag over his head across the desk from me would yell. "I'm not an elephant! I am a human being!"

My point is, I can relate. Being so overwhelmingly attractive that the mere sight of you causes bystanders to flee in terror can be a burden as well as a gift. Every few weeks a new study appears finding that attractive people generally have an easier time of it -- earning more money, for instance. But there's always a caveat. For instance, with more money come more problems. And there's all the harassment, with people so distracted by your physical beauty that they fail to notice your lack of empathy, or what terrible shape your kidneys are in.

But well-endowed women do face challenges. For instance, I always get excited when I see the silhouette of a well-endowed woman, because it could just be a regular woman holding a canteloupe, and I love canteloupe.

And that's not all. They have a hard time hitting backhand shots in tennis. People frequently stare expectantly at their chests as though waiting for them to weigh in on the issue at hand. "I hear what your mouth is saying," this gesture says, "but on the off-chance that your chest starts speaking, I would hate to look up and miss it."

People keep walking up to them at random and declaring them the winners of wet t-shirt contests. ("My t-shirt was much wetter," I insist, holding it up on its hanger. "To be eligible for the contest," the judges explain, "you must be inside the t-shirt at the time.")

They keep getting bothered by people who want to put giant pictures of them on the insides of magazines or use them in movies. And even when they are filing suit for being harassed for their, er, endowment size, the newscasters involved still seem to be staring at their chests.

I wish Ms. Blakely good look on the suit. But I'm not sure this is entirely fair. After all, they say that attractiveness factors into the decisions of juries. This is going to create a vicious and unending cycle of attractive people claiming they've been wronged, then suing, then winning, then claiming they've only won because they were attractive, then suing again, then -- you see what I'm saying. The free market system could collapse!

And consider this: earlier this month, a study found people more likely to vote for a more attractive female candidate. Too sensual to promote? Maybe not!

If you need me, I'll be hiding in this chest.

By Alexandra Petri  | November 12, 2010; 3:54 PM ET
Categories:  Petri, That's awkward  | Tags:  Gloria Allred, chests, gravitas  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Better names for the Daily Beast-Newsweek merger
Next: Five Garfield strips more disastrous than the Veteran's Day strip

Comments

Wow, this was almost as good as your colonoscopy columns! But how can you mention "breasts" 50 times without saying "n-ipple" even once! It's like in the movie, "Titanic", where Kate takes her shirt off so Leonardo can paint her... and the camera starts panning slowly down..down..down.., but when it gets to her "plumber's cleavage by proxy," the scene cuts away to Leonardo scratching his Tom Vilsack. The whole audience groaned, and I walked out of the theatre in disgust. That movie should have been rated G!

The weather may have been a bit nipply on the Titanic, but there was no excuse for Ms. Blakely to wear anything more than a wet tee-shirt under the sweltering Fox News studio lights. And what were those boobs in the control room thinking when they put that red bar across the screen that said "Large Breasts Lawsuit" instead of just "Large Breasts?" Don't those jugheads know that the cover-up IS the crime?

Personally, I'm a breast man, and I really enjoy googling them. This is what I found that is suitable to be in the movie, "Titanic":

If you think it's hard not poking the queen, her son has it even harder:
http://perfectlytimedphotos.com/perfectly-timed-photo/popular/7276-by-george-your-breasts-are

You say you like canteloupes? How do you like THEM melons?
http://perfectlytimedphotos.com/perfectly-timed-photo/popular/10680-my-melons-oh-yeah-they-re

Posted by: divtune | November 12, 2010 6:42 PM | Report abuse

Corporate America has lost its collective mind! An intelligent woman that is also beautiful is an asset just like an ugly woman who is intelligent, we should be hiring people for their intelligence not how big their chest is. Does anyone ever hear of a guy being fired for being a hunk? Did anyone even mention that she has beautiful eyes in the entire article? If her breasts are a distraction then her co-workers are the ones who need therapy or dismissal for bringing sex into the picture at the work place. I am willing to bet that half the people filing complaints about her breast size were jealous women who thought she was a threat to their position or promotion status. Personally I could care less about what someone looks like as long as they care about their appearance, dress tastefully, and go after their work hammer and tong getting the job done but to base someones dismissal on other peoples inability to keep their parts in their pants and out of their brains is ludicrous! Ms. Blakely fry their butts, you have my vote, show them what a real woman is!

Signed Donald Griffin CEO Tech Wizard, Inc.

PS Yea I am a guy, choke on that Corporate America!

Posted by: cptstarz1004 | November 18, 2010 9:07 AM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company