Well folks, it is with a heavy heart that I must report the celebs are at it again. And by celebs I mean Sunrise host Samantha Armytage. And by 'at it again' I mean that she has been caught doing something disgraceful, inhuman, disgusting and newsworthy.
That's right, Samantha Armytage has been caught....wearing underwear. I will wait while you pick yourself up from where you have undoubtedly fainted from shock and horror.
Finally, journalism has achieved something important. For too long, women like Armytage have gotten away with wearing undies scot-free, with nobody dedicated enough around to catch them in the act.
But sorry ladies, no longer will you be allowed the freedom to get away with such disgraceful behaviour. Unfortunately for you, the Daily Mail Australia has taken it upon themselves to investigate and call out your bad behaviour.
On December 11th, an article (that I will not link to) was published with the headline:
As you can tell, the Daily Mail Australia is known not only for its excellent reporting, but also its very pithy and catchy headlines.
The article opens with:
First of all, I am so thrilled that someone is keeping me updated on the movements of the host of a morning show. Every Monday morning I am unable to start my week unless I can sit down at my computer and check in to see what they all got up to on the weekend and what they were wearing all the while. Did Karl and Lisa relax, did the cash cow spend time with family, did Kochie go to the beach, did they all 'amble through the streets of Bondi and were the streets soaked with sun'?? I have to know! In this case, reading that Sam was running errands by herself soothed my very soul and now my week will be fine. This was especially great because they also made sure to inform that she was NOT with a man. Repeat, NOT with a man. She was running errands by herself, wow. Amazing stuff. Thank you for your service, Daily Mail.
Luckily for us they didn't just leave it there, going on to publish a photo of Sam getting into her car. In the photo, Sam has the car door open, and as she is getting in you can see the partial outline of her underwear. The caption reads:
Where to start with this stellar work? First of all, is Armytage really 'daring to bare'? I would say she is more 'daring to go shopping in a summer dress wearing regular underwear and some gross person has decided to zoom in on where the underwear is under her dress and point it out', but I guess that doesn't really play into the narrative very well.
Secondly, it's not really the point but the underwear she has on is absolutely regular underwear that I would say the majority of women reading this article would be wearing. Does the author think that any underwear covering more flesh than a G-string is 'giant granny panties'? Did the author only just see the original Bridget Jones movie and wanted to get in some cool references? Surely any woman writing this article would see those underwear and know that they are just regular underwear, let me just check who wrote this article.
Oh...okay, um...well. Seems this article was at least partially written by a man. Good. That is even better. There is nothing I love to read more than an article criticising what women are wearing, especially criticising what they are wearing from paparazzi photos, and then additionally if that criticism is written by a man about their underwear it is just a perfect trifecta of wonderful things that I love and the world needs more of. Please, can more men tell me what they think of women's outfits? I am dying to know your thoughts.
Oh wait, the author of this piece actually has me covered. Here are a few pieces that his name is on in the last two weeks.
It is obvious from these headlines that the story on Armytage was not an outlier. The author who wrote it IS ON IT, ready at all times to point out exactly what mildly famous women are wearing. Besides that, the author also loves two things: the phrase 'pert derrière', and CAPITALISING random WORDS for seemingly NO reason. Who says the word 'derrière' anyway? I think my grandmother maybe? Is my grandmother secretly working for the Daily Mail under a pseudonym? That would explain a lot.
I understand that celebrity culture and stories about celebrity sells. I am not someone who leaves "who cares?" or "this is NEWS?" on a story about the Kardashians, but this is truly a bridge too far. There are probably plenty of valid things to criticise Armytage for, or Sunrise for, but LITERALLY JUST FOR WEARING UNDERWEAR is not one of them. Especially when the criticism is from photos taken of an unsuspecting Armytage as she just tries to go about her business of doing some bloody grocery shopping.
This is yet another addition to the avalanche of gross articles written about Armytage and other women in similar positions. As the headline itself points out, she has faced constant speculation about her love life, rumours that she is sleeping with every man she is in contact with, comments on her weight and looks, and a whole array of typical bullshit that women have to put up with it that their male counterparts don't.
Women can't win if they don't wear underwear, do wear underwear, wear the wrong kind of underwear, look too hot, look not hot enough, be too smart, be dumb, be single, be married, be a parent, don't be a parent, and the list goes on. They cannot win, and for a "journalist" for a "news organisation" to sink this low certainly does not help.
Here are three bits of advice to read if you have the urge to write a similar piece to this again.
1 - Change your name to Pert Derriere if you love it so much
2 - NEVER say the word 'panties' again
3 - Aim up for once in your life
For all the latest comedy articles, videos and updates at SBS Comedy like us on Facebook and Twitter
