So earlier today I was watching the BBC/Discovery Channel series "Planet Earth" because hey, who doesn't like to hear about their own planet. It's easy, especially when you live in a densely urban metropolis like New York City (or all of New Jersey for that matter), that there are vast stretches of the world that don't have buildings and electricity and highways and Fox News (oh what a wonderful place that would be). The things that are out there, and down there and way up there, are mind-blowing (much like last night's season finale of Battlestar Galactica, but let's not go there). It's impressive, and a little sad too given that many of these creatures are bound to die out because of human expansion.
To be fair, nature is harsh, and when one species expands, others tend to suffer, and I'm not suggesting that it should be us to suffer. I'm supporting the home team. But as much as possible, we should protect the natural world, if only so we can go make interesting documentaries about it. For instance, feel free to eradicate all of the viruses you want, and the giant, creepy looking fish that live in the depths of the oceans can f*ck themselves for all I care. But really, we can stretch our legs, build our cities, and still find room for Elephants and Penguins, right? With only minimal effort we can reserve some biodiversity. If you want to think of it in selfish terms, the more species there are, the more we can learn about life in general and perhaps one day we'll learn that the cure for cancer can be found in some obscure creature that we were just paving over, literally.
It should also be noted that studies have found that humans have a natural fondness for the appearance of young animals, especially mammals. Now, it doesn't take a detailed study to tell me that baby polar bears are adorable, but they've found that this adoration crosses species, meaning that even a Wolf thinks it's adorable when your kid runs around the house in his feety pajamas. Genetically, naturally, we have an inclination to be fond of the young...meaning that across the board we are less likely to kill young creatures, even though they are helpless and it would be easy, thus ensuring that more animals will survive to adulthood. So it's not just tree-hugging hippies, but all people who are, through the miracle of evolution, compelled to protect life, even when it's not our own or even our own species'.
But on that note, what is wrong with Germans? Yes, that's a phrase I've probably used often, but I'm sure you've heard of the German "environmentalists" who are demanding a baby polar bear in captivity be killed because it's mother rejected it. Their argument is that in the wild, without its mother caring for it, it would be dead, and so the natural thing to do is kill it. But really, once you're taking animals out of the wild and putting them in small cages where you feed them out of a bucket at regular intervals, haven't you thrown natural selection out the window. Yes, nature is cruel sometimes, but that doesn't mean we have to keep it going. This bear is most likely never going back out into the wild, and if it does, sure it may not be able to take care of itself, but that's no reason we have to end its life now. You know what, if a human baby was rejected by its mother and left in the wild, it would die too, but we still have orphanages. We don't leave them to fend for themselves. It's one thing to allow nature to happen and not want to interfere in natural occurences, but it's quite another to idolize nature as though anything that happens naturally should be encouraged or idolized. There's a reason people built societies, because nature has a lot of flaws.
So, to some up: Nature can be stupid, but let's try to keep a lot of it just in case. Also, feel free to kill anything with tentacles, cause those things freak the hell out of me.
Monday, March 26, 2007
Sunday, March 25, 2007
Why You Gotta Pick on the Fat Kid?
Everyone gets a label. At some point everyone latches on to a particular aspect of a person and that becomes their defining feature, even if that feature changes or completely dissappears. It's simplistic and often mean-spirited, but there's no doubt that it's the way it is.
And so it goes that Al Gore can't be mentioned in any sentence without an adjacent sentence mentioning his weight gain. I feel like the news media, in their attempts to be viewed as balanced assume that if they are going to mention something positive about Al Gore that it has to be tempered with something negative...like "Al Gore starred in an Academy Award winning documentary, but hasn't he let himself go."
That's right, fatty. I know we're supposed to be talking about global warming or whatever, but let's talk about your weight first. Every news report, every article, every mention of Al Gore now comes with a requisite mention of his Oscar win (which is always wrong because even though it was undoubtably his achievement, he himself did not win the Oscar since he didn't direct the film) and a mention of his weight gain. It's not like he's suddenly morbidly obese and can't fit through his front door, which might at least be newsworthy psychologically speaking. What does his weight or appearance have to do with anything he's saying or anything that's being reported about him?
That's especially true when you consider that this is a country where the majority of the people are overweight. Al Gore, a man who was voted for by a majority of the people, has simply become a little more like them...physically. You might also remember that this was the same treatment Bill Clinton got when he entered office. There were no scandals yet, and he was trying to talk about National Health Care and ending discrimination in the armed forces...but all people could mention was his love of fast food.
We've had Presidents who were dangerously obese, and any number of people in the Senate, the Judiciary, and every facet of average american life who are not merely overweight, but rotundly fat...but Al Gore gains a couple of pounds and suddenly that overshadows his message. I suppose we only take our threats of global destruction from people with six-pack abs. Well, maybe he's been too busy crisscrossing the country trying to warn people about the ongoing destruction of our natural environment to stay in shape. Really, if most people can't find time between their 9-5 and watching American Idol to work out, why should we expect more of Al Gore who actually has something important to say? Why do people take such joy in mocking the appearance of others? And why should it be mentioned anywhere in a discussion of news? Well, that's when journalism becomes merely gossip with a few facts thrown in.
And so it goes that Al Gore can't be mentioned in any sentence without an adjacent sentence mentioning his weight gain. I feel like the news media, in their attempts to be viewed as balanced assume that if they are going to mention something positive about Al Gore that it has to be tempered with something negative...like "Al Gore starred in an Academy Award winning documentary, but hasn't he let himself go."
That's right, fatty. I know we're supposed to be talking about global warming or whatever, but let's talk about your weight first. Every news report, every article, every mention of Al Gore now comes with a requisite mention of his Oscar win (which is always wrong because even though it was undoubtably his achievement, he himself did not win the Oscar since he didn't direct the film) and a mention of his weight gain. It's not like he's suddenly morbidly obese and can't fit through his front door, which might at least be newsworthy psychologically speaking. What does his weight or appearance have to do with anything he's saying or anything that's being reported about him?
That's especially true when you consider that this is a country where the majority of the people are overweight. Al Gore, a man who was voted for by a majority of the people, has simply become a little more like them...physically. You might also remember that this was the same treatment Bill Clinton got when he entered office. There were no scandals yet, and he was trying to talk about National Health Care and ending discrimination in the armed forces...but all people could mention was his love of fast food.
We've had Presidents who were dangerously obese, and any number of people in the Senate, the Judiciary, and every facet of average american life who are not merely overweight, but rotundly fat...but Al Gore gains a couple of pounds and suddenly that overshadows his message. I suppose we only take our threats of global destruction from people with six-pack abs. Well, maybe he's been too busy crisscrossing the country trying to warn people about the ongoing destruction of our natural environment to stay in shape. Really, if most people can't find time between their 9-5 and watching American Idol to work out, why should we expect more of Al Gore who actually has something important to say? Why do people take such joy in mocking the appearance of others? And why should it be mentioned anywhere in a discussion of news? Well, that's when journalism becomes merely gossip with a few facts thrown in.
If Only It Were So
Andrew Sullivan, the oft-wrong but always well-informed, had a link on his site to a recent Pew study detailing how, in a mere decade and change, the neo-con revolution has crashed and burned. Of course, someone like me would take tremendous joy in such a revelation, if only I could believe that this was some permenant sea change. On a person by person basis, you like to think that people are intelligent, thoughtful, good...and you tend to see that people aren't easily swayed. However, when you look at the public at large, through research, polls, or reality television, the opposite seems to be true. People, collectively, are under-informed, misguided, selfish, and change their opinions about as often as they change their clothes. For example, recent surveys find that over 60 percent of people say that the war in Iraq was unnecessary and a bad idea..which is easier to do in hindsight I suppose, but you'll notice that a mere 5 years ago roughly that many people thought the war was a great idea (I not being one of them).
Sure, this Pew research study finds that since 1994, fewer people have faith in the Republican party, more people support social welfare programs and proposals to alleviate poverty no matter the cost, and more people are accepting of minorities/alternate lifestyles/alternate religious beliefs. The same study found that the number of admitted atheists, though still a discriminated minority, is increasing with each generation which would seem to contradict all of the social evidence as of late. The fact is, amid the Republican scandals recently - and boy have their been a lot - people are frustrated and willing to say just about anything. But that can all change quickly. Prior to September, 2001, lots of people thought George W. was a bumbling idiot and partisan hack, but suddenly people realized that, no, he wasn't. What that terrorist attack on his watch taught most Americans was that he was a visionary and hero. None of that was true, obviously, but it became the common perception that no one was eager to question. If there were another terrorist attack tomorrow, perhaps all of the successes of the Democrats would be forgotten in favor of once again calling them weak and unpatriotic, and all of the scandals of the Republicans would be forgotten because, hey, there's no time for ethics in war.
I'd like to get my hopes up and think that 2008 will bring a great change in our nation, where new ideas and new avenues of discussion will be opened - where the level of discourse will be raised and real solutions to pressing problems will be levied. But really, what are the odds. Nothing is permenant, and things can quickly change as we all have seen.
Sure, this Pew research study finds that since 1994, fewer people have faith in the Republican party, more people support social welfare programs and proposals to alleviate poverty no matter the cost, and more people are accepting of minorities/alternate lifestyles/alternate religious beliefs. The same study found that the number of admitted atheists, though still a discriminated minority, is increasing with each generation which would seem to contradict all of the social evidence as of late. The fact is, amid the Republican scandals recently - and boy have their been a lot - people are frustrated and willing to say just about anything. But that can all change quickly. Prior to September, 2001, lots of people thought George W. was a bumbling idiot and partisan hack, but suddenly people realized that, no, he wasn't. What that terrorist attack on his watch taught most Americans was that he was a visionary and hero. None of that was true, obviously, but it became the common perception that no one was eager to question. If there were another terrorist attack tomorrow, perhaps all of the successes of the Democrats would be forgotten in favor of once again calling them weak and unpatriotic, and all of the scandals of the Republicans would be forgotten because, hey, there's no time for ethics in war.
I'd like to get my hopes up and think that 2008 will bring a great change in our nation, where new ideas and new avenues of discussion will be opened - where the level of discourse will be raised and real solutions to pressing problems will be levied. But really, what are the odds. Nothing is permenant, and things can quickly change as we all have seen.
Monday, March 12, 2007
Glenn Beck Needs a Punch to the Throat
This is what happens when I'm away from my Tivo: I'm forced to actually see what's on television in between the shows I actually want to watch. I'm on a shoot in PA and though my hotel suite is...well, sweet...there's still only so much to do when I have to be up early, so this is what I've seen tonight.
MTV has really documented exactly the kind of kids that are now raised on MTV and how it's destroying out society. They have one show where spoiled, rich girls try to top one another with overly expensive Sweet 16 parties which their parents pay for while all the while the girls are yelling at and ordering their parents around and then crying about how their lives are horrible because the dress they really really really wanted didn't fit so they could only get the one really expensive one that they only really liked. Oh, and then the parents buy them a car that costs more than most people's houses (and which the girl most certainly will wreck before she's 18), and her classmates worship her like being a spoiled, shallow shell of a girl is a good thing.
Luckily I only saw the last 3 minutes of that, which then allowed me to see the first 3 minutes of a show about teenagers who get married. Seriously. 16 years old girls who get knocked up by their 22 year old boyfriends and then decide to get married, or 17 year olds who decide they have to get married right now because they are going to spend the rest of their lives together...but it has to be RIGHT NOW! The part I saw was where the girl was having her bridal shower and playing a game where they asked her questions about her fiance who she's totally in love with, and she got all of them wrong. But really, knowing her soon-to-be husband's life aspirations and or what his first job were are probably just trivial things. I mean, my grandparents were married for 50 years, and then never even got around to finding out each other's last names or birthdates.
But worst of all was Glenn Beck. It's shocking how someone can be so condescending and act so superior and yet be so completely ignorant and, to put it in the common parlance, a d-bag. He defended Roger Ailes' attempts to once again relate Osama bin Laden to Barrack Obama in the public's mind, as though his network hasn't done that 50 times a day already. He simultaneously complained about how the the conservative Democrats have sold out and are voting in lock-step with their party while at the same time saying that all the Democrats are in-fighting and in disagreement. Oh, and the war in Iraq shouldn't be politicized. A war...started by a thoroughly partisan administration...involving billions of dollars of our nation's resources...killing thousands of our soldiers...stretching our army so thin that we are in constant danger...increasing our foreign debts to be passed on to our children...the war that has served as the Republican party's entire political strategy against the Democrats...THAT shouldn't be politicized. If politics is the process by which we have a national discussion of issues, by which we elect our leaders, and by which our government is created, maintained, and made to do the will of the people, then is he saying that this War shouldn't be talked about or acted on by our government? Is this war supposed to fight itself, entirely out of our control?
Much like Glenn Beck, the war in Iraq is misguided, devastating, and brings nothing but suffering. People who say "The war in Iraq shouldn't be political" do that because they are on the losing side of that argument, and it's too late. You started this conversation, and now that people are turning on you, you should be made to answer.
I'm going to go enjoy some free toiletries and amenities, and then maybe jump on the bed for a while. Hilton knows how to make a springy bed...which is then enjoyed by the heirs to the fortune in amateur porn. Our popular culture makes me a little bit ill.
MTV has really documented exactly the kind of kids that are now raised on MTV and how it's destroying out society. They have one show where spoiled, rich girls try to top one another with overly expensive Sweet 16 parties which their parents pay for while all the while the girls are yelling at and ordering their parents around and then crying about how their lives are horrible because the dress they really really really wanted didn't fit so they could only get the one really expensive one that they only really liked. Oh, and then the parents buy them a car that costs more than most people's houses (and which the girl most certainly will wreck before she's 18), and her classmates worship her like being a spoiled, shallow shell of a girl is a good thing.
Luckily I only saw the last 3 minutes of that, which then allowed me to see the first 3 minutes of a show about teenagers who get married. Seriously. 16 years old girls who get knocked up by their 22 year old boyfriends and then decide to get married, or 17 year olds who decide they have to get married right now because they are going to spend the rest of their lives together...but it has to be RIGHT NOW! The part I saw was where the girl was having her bridal shower and playing a game where they asked her questions about her fiance who she's totally in love with, and she got all of them wrong. But really, knowing her soon-to-be husband's life aspirations and or what his first job were are probably just trivial things. I mean, my grandparents were married for 50 years, and then never even got around to finding out each other's last names or birthdates.
But worst of all was Glenn Beck. It's shocking how someone can be so condescending and act so superior and yet be so completely ignorant and, to put it in the common parlance, a d-bag. He defended Roger Ailes' attempts to once again relate Osama bin Laden to Barrack Obama in the public's mind, as though his network hasn't done that 50 times a day already. He simultaneously complained about how the the conservative Democrats have sold out and are voting in lock-step with their party while at the same time saying that all the Democrats are in-fighting and in disagreement. Oh, and the war in Iraq shouldn't be politicized. A war...started by a thoroughly partisan administration...involving billions of dollars of our nation's resources...killing thousands of our soldiers...stretching our army so thin that we are in constant danger...increasing our foreign debts to be passed on to our children...the war that has served as the Republican party's entire political strategy against the Democrats...THAT shouldn't be politicized. If politics is the process by which we have a national discussion of issues, by which we elect our leaders, and by which our government is created, maintained, and made to do the will of the people, then is he saying that this War shouldn't be talked about or acted on by our government? Is this war supposed to fight itself, entirely out of our control?
Much like Glenn Beck, the war in Iraq is misguided, devastating, and brings nothing but suffering. People who say "The war in Iraq shouldn't be political" do that because they are on the losing side of that argument, and it's too late. You started this conversation, and now that people are turning on you, you should be made to answer.
I'm going to go enjoy some free toiletries and amenities, and then maybe jump on the bed for a while. Hilton knows how to make a springy bed...which is then enjoyed by the heirs to the fortune in amateur porn. Our popular culture makes me a little bit ill.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
