Über elitist and personification of the Daily Mail’s wet dream Katy Hopkins has done again what she does best from her artificially inflated platform; projectile vomiting bile onto anyone she considers low-class.
This time the stuck-up, equine-like creature who is completely obsessed with the outdated class system, managed to put her foot right into it again by claiming that children with certain names should automatically be discarded as undesirables.
She was invited back to the daily TV show ‘This Morning’, to have her say on the matter. Throughout her recitation she sat wild-eyed with flailing arms to add punch to the snobbish soundbites she spat out – she could have been Hitler in drag. Her behaviour reminiscing of the tyrant addressing his ‘volks’. She looked like a woman possessed.
You see, the former ‘Apprentice’ contestant is convinced that she can tell a great deal from a name as to her, a name is a shortcut for establishing class and background in an instant. Of course, she could not allow her children, – who appear to have climbed out of her golden womb – to play with kids bearing names like Tyler, Chantelle, Charmaine and Chardonnay. Such children must be the spawn of the devil. Well she didn’t use these exact words, there was no denying however that this is what she precisely meant.
Of course anyone has the right to their own opinion. If this is what she believes, she has the right to fester in her ignorant state of mind. What I nevertheless don’t condone is the cruel methods she uses to make her point.
And she was called cruel by the presenters for having such a haughty mentality and most of all for being unfair to kids who did not even choose their own name. And who was she to say that children with such names would automatically grind to a halt upon entering adulthood, and settle for a life of welfare instead of forking out a career?
Holly Willoughby got so incensed by Katie Hopkins that she told her ‘to stop right there’ and that was the end of the interview. But there were some funny moments too. For instance when she was mocked for mentioning that she didn’t like parents naming their child after geographical locations like Brooklyn and London. Philip Schofield commented in a splendidly dosed dry tone: “but did you not name your child India?”
“Yes but the name does not refer to a location.”
As always, talking right out of her rectum.
It’s not the first time and it won’t be the last that we will hear the fame-hungry businesswoman/columnist speak out the unthinkable. Controversy is what keeps this loathsome person in the papers, and on TV it seems – and she is very aware of this.
So far she has written one piece about overweight people (she would never hire a fat person, they can’t be but lazy), another piece about her nanny being pregnant (how despicable!), she also had a go at people on benefits, and then in one of her Daily Mail sponsored columns, she explained how she doesn’t allow her children to socialise with kids from a lower class. She even attacked her own family by writing a piece on how she cannot respect her husband, and in the last 48 hours she thought it was such a hoot to hit out at babies with ginger hair.’They are so much harder to love’, she tweeted.
This woman is on a quest to become the UK’s biggest villain and there is no reason why she shouldn’t get that thorny crown. She is nothing but a bigoted, nasty piece of work and a sensationalist to boot.
The thing however is, she has an audience, people are tweeting and talking about her and like The Guardian stated: she has become a ‘rent-a-gob’. In her little self-centred world this equals success. Not only does she get paid for doing this, she gets noticed as well, and if this means people hating her, that’s the price she’ll happily pay. As, so great is Katie Hopkins’ desire to be noticed that firing off these virulent social observations has become her modus operandi. The more she gives, the more she gets back. At present, she has been tweeting like a maniac, all sorts of ridiculous statements, and obviously many people reacted to these. If she could, I am sure she would throw all her tweets on a bed and roll naked in it.
Looking at the reactions of people, it is good to see that most people do not agree with her views. Of course, there will always be the ones with encapsulated minds who consider Ms Hopkins as their poster girl of classism. And, there will also be people who may tut at her insolence but will secretly agree with some of the things she’s said.
But does she have a point? Will a name make a difference in life?
I absolutely believe it should not be the case but at the same time, I am in two minds about this. A successful life should not depend on name nor class. But I have to agree somehow that certain names may not be that well received, and may as such potentially result in a child being bullied just because their parents wanted something quirky on the birth certificate. Or, later in life if they have to deal with an interviewer as bigoted as Ms Hopkins there is a chance they’ll get overlooked for a job just because their name is Desteeny Lambrini. Such is the reality of life unfortunately.
Yet we need to realise that it isn’t the child’s fault that such name was chosen and that surely living in the 21st century, it shouldn’t even matter. But of course, we may have a little chuckle when we hear someone ponder on whether to name their daughter Chandelier Or Chardonnay. Yet like Katie Hopkins we won’t ostracise that poor child and treat her and her family like the bourgeoisie used to treat the peasants in what must have been bygone times to her.
Such class-shooting is strange coming from a woman known to have little class herself. Yes, she may have been privately educated and has done pretty well for herself in life but that does not automatically grant her a certain level of class. In fact, I believe there are Kais, Kylies AND Katies living on council estates who have more class in their little finger than she will ever have. After all, this former Big Brother standby candidate is a woman who seeks her fame and fortune by digging her claws and tail into anyone she considers sub-standard – including her husband. She is a paid troll. Let’s also not forget that this is the woman who was caught on camera having sex in a field with her lover, a married man – not exactly high-class is it?
It’s a fact that this modern-day society has given birth to limelight seekers pushing as many buttons as they can, just so that the bare light bulb shining on their heads could turn into a blinding spotlight. Their hunger for attention is big.
For example, look at the former actrice Amanda Bynes, the reigning bully queen of social media. She seems to fill her day by tweeting abusive comments about others, and she even called her own sister ugly. I believe this girl has seen attention slipping away after her career faltered, and she probably tried several things before settling for this sort of life, full of instant gratification.
It is curious yet unsettling to observe that the only raison d’être for Bynes and Hopkins, is to attract as much attention as they possibly can by being cruel to others. Being nice didn’t get them anywhere after all. And, if their malignant thoughts result in mockery, anger and distress, it empowers them even more and spurs them on to continue. A cycle of biting, gorging on blood, rejuvenation and clicking refresh. Some people really are that desperate.
Katie Hopkins has now fuelled the argument further by claiming that she stands by what she said. She also believes that there are many closet Hopkins around. So that made me think: it’s my birthday next week and when I’ll blow out the candles I won’t wish for stuff that dreams are made of. What I will wish for however is that one day, her children will bring home a ginger, obese, working-class Ty or Sky – all the elements she clearly finds abhorrent.
Now, I realise that by giving my wish away, it may probably not materialise. Though, I have not too many worries as I know that come a certain age, her children will revolt against their obnoxious mother and as such, a Ty or Sky will never be far out of the picture – which is good. There is nothing wrong with them anyway.