c'mon diane. you can inform better than that.

o come on.. give me a break.
ok. here's the dish: i watch celebrity trash tv if a few conditions all happen to coincide: that is, if i get home early, am tired, and just want to veg on the couch for a lil break.. mindlessly..
so i saw this story prolly last week and again it was told today. the show does that a lot-- always keeping us updated on the latest.. as any reliable news source does.. .. ..ha..
here's the story/'controversy': is this miss universe contestant [or winner?] too thin?? skeletal or beauti-full?



the aussie flew all the way to nyc to clear the air/defend herself to none other than the well-respected[?] diane sawyer.. ..c'mon, diane, you can do better than this.

they quote her height and weight, which i'm not too concerned about-- numbers, that's all they are.. but just look at her. look at her. if she was ok, would she be getting all or any of this attention? now, i don't follow the miss whatever pagents and couldn't care less about them but since it is being brought up, it should duly be noted that despite the idiocy of even its existence, it nevertheless does have some impact or some saying on the social standard defining what beauty is.. i mean, just think of all them young [and old] influenceable lasses out there.. sad.

so the stick figure flies halfway across the world for the televised interview. she's asked if she thinks she's too thin and/or if she has an eating disorder. she gets emotional. pauses. needs to recollect herself as a fake/non-existent tear [doesn't] appear because the allegation is so hurtful. finally she is able to respond and says she is perfectly healthy and has never had an eating disorder and was never anorexic or bulimic in her life.

i mean, it's one thing when you've got the trashy celeb shows informing the public of stories like this but it's kind of another, i think, when you've got diane sawyer doing the same. i mean i know even newscasters too are just fye [for your entertainment] but have they no shame to at least try to fake it? or did i give them too much credit and in which case they too really are that ignorant.
so like i said, the story airs her height/weight [data] and her word.. as if that were to serve as confirmation?.. ok, you're not?.. just checking.. ..if every addict/mentally disordered patient could get away with that.. hmm.. ..i wonder what the mental health industry would be like today.. or if it would even exist at all.. d'nile. it aint' just a river, as they say.. what the researchers [of the tv show] should've done is.. maybe they're job?. so the tv personality could've asked better questions, like:
--well, it seems that you fall way below 'normal' weight, granted which is sometimes subjective but in this case it's drastic.., would you be willing to gain, say, 10 lbs? [which is still considered low].
--if you'd be willing, why don't you?. OR. why aren't you willing/what's the 'fear factor'?
--[well, you're already denying the fact that you look/are skeletal, so i won't ask you again..] umm..
--do you have your period?.. i know this is prolly something one wouldn't be able to ask a guest on network tv, but it's relevent.!. [..and i rarely use exclamation points when i write..]

ummm.. aside from dsm iv, what else?..
--how much do you work out?
--how can we confirm how much you say you actually intake per day/week?
--would you be confident that if we took a blood/urine sample everything will test normal?
--how often do you weigh yourself?

ummm..
--my those are lovely locks.. how much of them are actually yours?
--my those are lovely nails.. are they just as lovely[/strong] underneath that polish?
--umm, is it cold in here or is it just me?...

the list goes on. and now while i understand the limits of airtime, i think out of all of them, if they really cared-- for her and the education of their viewers-- they could have asked/challenged her to gain ~10 lbs or so and see what would happen. ..or at least, that's what i would've liked to see.. or they could've gone risque and asked if she's menstruating and then have gone onto a followup story about the number of celeb women having twin babies--> using fertility treatment--> why so many need it--> umm.. just throwing this out there.. too low weight?.. ..yet stunningly gorgeous and praised..

ho hum..
may the world/media set the right example for all them young[and old]'-uns out there..
peace.

what the eff is that?.. [..muffle.hypocrisy.].

A coworker today eagerly suggested we play a ‘game’ of trivia called ‘What the Eff is that?’—something she [obviously] wanted to share with the group in the few minutes remaining during our morning meeting. She whips out a leaflet from her bag and hands it to the guy sitting next to her—which wasn’t me [I’m a girl]. He looks at it closely and starts at an attempt to answer: ‘it’s uhhh….’. As he does so, I’m sitting there trying to guess what this is all about. From the tone of her voice when announcing the so-called game she sounded surprised and/or disgusted or just truly confused—an occurance not too uncommon in her case [bless her]. I was thinking on the lines of it being an abstract image, making her have that type of reaction, like an inkblot or something. The guy finishes examining the image and I motion for it to be passed on to me. I take a look and it’s a colorful takeout menu written in Spanish. On the back there are a few pictures of items they offer—I’m guessing platters they want to highlight? The point of focus is one in particular—it’s an.. an.. animal of some kind: whole and belly up on a bed of lettuce.. or rice, I forget which. It had legs like a rabbit, paws like a squirrel, and a head like a beaver or perhaps a rodent. It was a takeout menu, the picture was no more than two inches wide and you can imagine the resolution. I guess what she meant was: ‘What the Effin’ animal is that?’ And maybe to add, ‘People really order/eat that??’.
The discussion continued after the meeting was over. Someone finally figured out what it was—the name of the animal and everything, that is, in Spanish, without translation. It was confirmed to be along the lineage of rabbit. The discussion continued with the topic of eating animal, or rather, meat. I was reminded again how far removed our culture is from knowing where food comes from and what it is we actually swallow.
I was hearing people—meat lovers/eaters at that—say they would never eat what they saw in that picture—a relative of Thumper, I’m assuming. They said they would never eat what they saw in the picture next to it either—the plated head of Porky. In fact, they extended that rule to all animals—no heads, they scorned. Really?? I asked in astonishment. Even if, despite the head on, they were offered meat from the body? Apparently so. Well, what about fish?. I don’t know what I was thinking when asking that. That there’d be a difference if it lived in water vs. land? or if the animal was smaller? Dumb, I know. But anyway, no was the answer to my silly question. Fish is delish, but not if it comes with a head; note to self, buy only from those fish the headless seas when entertaining.. ..O, c’mon, let’s get real, these people are crazy. When I was a kid the cheeks of the fish were the best part and I’d only get to have one of them—my brother got the other, with a fish having only two cheeks and all. These folks have missed out on the ‘best’ part of their fish-eating lives, I thought. What a shame.
I stopped questioning at fish, but the girl who brought in the menu, who started all this, continued to say she wigs out even when she gets shrimp with the heads on. My head was about to fall off. Good thing it didn’t, though, because maybe she would’ve eaten me.
Americans don’t eat animal. They don’t eat cow or pig. They eat beef or pork or bacon or ham. They don’t eat horse. They eat hotdogs. I wonder how it is that they’ve come to eat chicken. Then again, maybe they don’t but do nuggets or buckets of KFC. And what about the breast milk of cattle?. Umm, if you’re talking about what is added to cereal or what makes lattes, that stuff comes merely in jugs or cartons from the refrigerated section of the supermarket is all, thankuverymuch. That reminds me of, I guess what I would now consider, that clever commercial for orange juice: a woman shopping in the refrigerated section of a supermarket for orange juice reaches her arm way into the shelf, and from the orange tree orchard on the other side, she pulls out a ‘fresh’ box of pasteurized orange juice—just as if picked from a tree—the box full of peel-free, pith-free, fiber-free, pulp-free juice, that is.
Great [exclamation point]. So calories aren’t the only things that make people oblivious. That is, how much people eat aside, they [or many] have no effing clue what exactly it is they’re eating—where their food comes from or what’s been done to it, from farm-to-table [pardon the trite expression] or chemical plant-to-plate. Perhaps, though, ignorance is bliss. I mean, ignorant can heartily chow down on mystery flesh [to prevent illness/deficiency, she claims] as long as it looks nothing like its real live form, with eyes, and teeth and so on and so forth. But if the ignorant are to stumble upon reality, then let’s just hope cultures are not disrespected nor baseless opinions spoken aloud—keeping everyone at bliss [and headache-free].