An Irish woman's social, political and domestic commentary
|
|
| GUBU An Irish woman's social, political and domestic commentary |
|
|
Wednesday, April 30, 2003
Fear and lack of control
Isn't it funny, that despite our technological, scientific, philosophical and medical advances, that as a people, we're still like a medieval mob running around in a panic because that comet must mean the end of the world? Once we are not in control of a situation we turn into hysterical panickers. The SARS 'epidemic' is a classic case. A community festival in Dingle has dis-invited a harmless Chinese poetess from their upcoming event because of SARS. She's from Shanghai - no where near the SARS outbreak and as she's only one person could easily be screened. But the festival chairman...a DOCTOR...said he couldn't live with the pressure. But its just one symptom. People who use mobile phones protesting about mobile phone transmitters. People who protest against dumps and then buy all their vegetables on plastic trays wrapped in more plastic. People who panic about disease but feed their kids junk or people who panic about crime but let their children sit in the car without a seat belt. If a person has a choice in a matter, they will take incredible risks very casually. But they'll like awake a night fretting about diseases that there is absolutely no proof they will ever get, be it from pylons or Chinese people. posted by Sarah | 17:21 0 comments Thursday, April 24, 2003 Why the Americans really are the bad guys Some people like to sneer at crazy left wingers when the point out that America is nothing but an international bully with a bigger stick than anyone else. Their international credibility stems from their willingness to use brute force, even if illegal, to get their way. Queries as to the location of the WMD in Iraq which so far have failed to appear are deflected. But here is the truth. America is the only country which has ever actually used a nuclear weapon. Hiroshima might have been excusable and I buy the line about it shortening WW2 but Nagasaki was totally unnecessary. They've pulled out of the ABM Treaty and just in case you thought that was over a technicality, check out this story....they are re-starting their nuclear weapons programme after a break of 14 years. If they can do it, then what arguments are we supposed to using against North Korea, Pakistan and India? posted by Sarah | 15:31 0 comments Wednesday, April 23, 2003 Al Pacino I think Al is wonderful. Here is a great article about him from Sunday's New York Times. Apart from being accurate, I think its really well written. posted by Sarah | 15:08 0 comments Wednesday, April 16, 2003 Cool Ad This is genius. It has only 1 second of computer animation, and the rest simply involved enormous patience and 606 takes. posted by Sarah | 14:55 0 comments Tuesday, April 15, 2003 Trinny and Susannah - shallow or fabulous? Trinny Woodall and Susannah Constantine host a fashion programme called "What not to Wear". In each programme they take a member of the public, nominated by friends, and analyse and rebuild that person's wardrobe. They are posh, ascerbic and pretty brutal in their criticism and most recently have been attacked by Carol Vorderman. The most common criticism is that they are snobs who criticise ordinary members of the public about their clothes and humiliate them on television. I think this is unfair. Firstly, their style of programme is unique. Every other fashion programme concentrates on latest fashions and doing hair and make-overs. The clothes are modelled by, well, models, and its all about sourcing and prices. What not to Wear on the other hand picks a woman with serious and common body 'flaws'. The kind that most people have...short legs, no waist, big arse, no arse, big tits, no tits etc. Then they teach the person rules about what clothes make them look terrible and what clothes improve them. By the end of each programme they have transformed their target (styled 'victim' by critics) and provided invaluable advice for the thousands of women viewers who have the exact same problem. Secondly, whilst one can accuse them of being shallow, the fact is that clothes and confidence are inextricably linked. Most of the women they deal with hate their bodies, see no redeeming features in themselves, despise buying clothes (which let's face it we have to do), and have a real lack of confidence. In this week's episode where they help Jo Brand and Sophie Raworth find outfits for the BAFTAs, both women hate going to award ceremonies. Jo never goes, even if she's won an award! Sophie sneaks in the back door to avoid the photographers. Apart from pointing out the obvious flaws in the women's bodies, Trinny and Susannah also bring their attention to their good bits and usually have to persuade the targets that they do have flattering parts of their bodies which should be shown off. In all cases they dramatically improve the women and the smiles at the end tell the story. Jo Brand was ecstatic after her walk up the carpet. And Sophie managed to get through what she considered a terrifying occasion with grace and elegance. So its a positive thing. And where's the harm in that? Persuading people that clothes are important? But they are! And let's face it, there are a lot of women out there with a lot of money who are a disgrace. Maybe they should listen to the girls instead of complaining. Would you look at this? posted by Sarah | 17:04 0 comments Ironic Blog Recommended reading. The blog that says nothing and is nevertheless hilarious. posted by Sarah | 15:10 0 comments Monday, April 07, 2003 New York Times falls victim to crappy war journalism The New York Times joins the ranks of the pathetic news outlets in the US. Their treatment of the 'friendly fire' incident yesterday illustrates their poor judgement. Here's their story. Here are the flaws in this piece of reportage. 1. This article is placed 27th on their full listing of international headlines. The top headlines are all concerned with the victories in Baghdad and Basra and the likely format of post-Saddam government. The only reason I found the article was because I deliberately went looking for it. 2. Note how many quotes are from wounded Kurds insisting that they do not blame the Americans. 3. They say that one American was wounded when the live BBC reports conclusively stated that American soldiers were killed. 4. They neglect to mention that the BBC translator was one of those killed. 5. Finally, and most insultingly, they give one short quote from John Simpson, the BBC World Affairs Editor, pointing out how US soldiers treated the wounded. It neglects to mention the following quotes he also provided in his report: "So there are Americans dead. It was an American plane that dropped the bomb right beside us - I saw it land about 10 feet, 12 feet away I think. "This is just a scene from hell here. All the vehicles on fire. There are bodies burning around me, there are bodies lying around, there are bits of bodies on the ground. This is a really bad own goal by the Americans. "We don't really know how many Americans are dead. There is ammunition exploding in fact from some of these cars. A very senior member of the Kurdish Republic's government who also may have been injured." If you want the full report, here it is. posted by Sarah | 13:20 0 comments Fox News can't contain its bias Here's a good story illustrating why so many Americans support the war. They are getting their information from allegedly unbiased media outlets like Fox. posted by Sarah | 12:46 0 comments Thursday, April 03, 2003 Israel's Influence on American Foreign Policy From today's New York Times. A military researcher in the Israeli army brags about the best way to invade cities and trash them. Sick. posted by Sarah | 15:42 0 comments The brother points out Moore's flaw The brother, Kevin, has a letter in today's Times. Makes a good point. Madam, - In his appropriately dated tribute to himself, Michael Moore (April 1st) carefully omits any mention of his own part in the election of George W. Bush. On the one hand, he notes the role of 3,000 apparently erroneous votes for Pat Buchanan in Florida in swinging that state for Bush, but is silent about the pivotal role of votes for Ralph Nader in that and other states in achieving the same outcome. And amongst the most prominent campaigners for Ralph Nader? Step forward, Michael Moore. Moore thinks that he followed "my conscience and my heart" with his Oscarspeech. But in November 2000, he followed nothing but his ego. He might want to consider a few more Masses. - Yours, etc., Kevin Carey Explanation of mass reference here. posted by Sarah | 15:00 0 comments Wednesday, April 02, 2003 Is Buffy a feminist? There's a thesis in this. Some argue, no; because while she is a superhero, she has to be presented in the guise of a skinny, attractive, blonde with nice clothes. Others argue, yes; because she is a skinny, attractive, blonde who instead of being helpless or accompanied by suits of armour and gimmicks, is still a superhero. I'm with the latter. Furthermore, the way men are presented in the programme is very important. Xander has no special powers but his caring, feminine side helps him (e.g. persuading Willow to stop being evil). Giles, whilst assuming the role of the teacher, has on more than one occasion admitted that Buffy doesn't really need him. He is a supporter rather than a teacher. Furthermore, sex is presented in a negative way. Usually sex is presented in the media as being the saviour of women. e.g. "Well, they can be as successful as they want, but at the end of the day, all a woman really wants is the love of a good man." See previous posting on Sex and the City. However, Angel turned nasty as soon as he had sex with Buffy due to an ancient curse. Riley left her because he couldn't stand the fact that she was stronger than him. This is presented as his weakness rather than her loss. And poor Spike. He confesses his love for Buffy but altho' she does use him for sex, ultimately, he tries to rape her. Instead of presenting her as some victim, he is rather dispatched to undergo a tortuous penance in his attempt to redeem himself and acquire a soul. In other words, sex is presented as a complex act in which men's motives are suspect. A far cry from Ally McBeal hanging around waiting to be rescued by love. In addition, Buffy works in a typical womanly way...with the help of her supporters rather unlike the traditional male superhero who works alone (Batman, Superman etc). Even the best evil characters are women. New favourite programme. (Even if did take 6 series to get me involved). posted by Sarah | 17:03 0 comments Tuesday, April 01, 2003 Naomi Wolf and Ali G Naomi Wolf is taking herself far too seriously these days and in so doing displays a certain lack of intelligence and an absence of a sense of humour. Ali G got her good in a spoof interview for his new TV show in the US. Her reaction was to go to the lawyers and demand that the programme not be aired. She won. Details here. Ali G is funny on many levels but the two fundamentals of this whole act are: - Mocking young white suburban males who have crassly adopted urban black culture - Ferociously exposing the hypocrisy and patronising attitude of the politically correct establishment. The whole point is that when Ali comes out with these clearly offensive remarks, none of the interviewees, including Wolf gets angry with him. Instead they very politely and delicately try to correct him because they think he's from the ghetto. If the same remarks were made by anyone vaguely middle class the interviewees would attack him immediately. The TV critics who slate the programme are even worse because they know what's happening. The interviewee has no clue what is happening at the time. Personally I can't wait to see the new series. posted by Sarah | 15:48 0 comments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
||||
|
|||||
