Greed, an American Epidemic
In my Introduction to Literature course, I teach the play Death of a Salesman. It is the story of Willy Loman’s slow decent toward suicide due to his constant pursuit of the “American Dream.” Loman measures his worth in dollars and cents and is unable to deal with his decline in the business world. He can no longer keep up with the “Jones’” and this causes him to ferry into madness. At the end of the play, after Willy’s suicide, it is made known that his wife has paid off the last of the payments on their house. She says over and over again, “We’re free. We’re free.”
The American capitalist system is making a Willy Loman out of all of us. Daily, we are surrounded by advertisements that beckon us to buy more, spend more. We are raised on the idea that to own a home is the measure of success. This pressure to be the ultimate consumer might be fine if wages and the lifestyle of the average worker could support it. We are living in the age of the diminishing middle class and, for that matter, the upperclass. The vast majority of workers make little, their raises do not keep up with the rising cost of products, and their wages cover few of luxuries we’re constantly told we need to pursue to be a good American.
The problem with the American economy is greed. The few upperclass want to maintain and keep increasing their money and power. So, they offer their workers small raises and wages and continue to increase the cost of products sold. This is good for their bottom line. Of course, that is until we bottom out. The gap between the rich and the poor is widening, and, to be honest, a large number of people who deem themselves middle class are operating under a delusion. “61 percent of American households always or usually live paycheck to paycheck” (Snyder). This is not the comfortable standard of living required for a person to title themselves middle class.
There are those that argue that the people in power, the people holding the purse strings, deserve to call all the economic shots. They are the successful ones. They are the ones that “worked hard for their money.” They have the education, the know how. They deserve to be on top. The people who argue this are America’s perfect patsies. They take food from their own mouths when they say this and perpetuate the cycle of poverty in this country. We were founded under the idea that everyone is entitled to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” As more and more people slip from any semblance of economic comfort and fewer and fewer people control the wealth in this country, perhaps we should revise that phrase to be “existence, liberty, and the pursuit of the next meal.”
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
What's in a Name?
What’s in a Name?
When I married my husband I made the shocking decision not to change my last name to his. This decision, which I did not imagine causing controversy, has caused several women to question my dedication to my partner, my femininity, and quite possibly my sanity. To be honest, I chose to keep my name for two reasons. One, I find the act of going through the rigmarole of name change completely un-appealing. (In order for a woman to change her name, she must pay for a new driver’s license, contact half a dozen people and order a new social security card.) My second reason for maintaining my name is for a sense of identity. It does not make sense in the modern world for a woman to surrender the name she has had since birth because she decided to get married. I have two degrees under my maiden name and quite a few experiences associated with it. Why must I give that up?
One of the opponents of my “crazy” decision not to take my husband’s name said, “How will people from high school know you’ve gotten married?” GASP. What if they didn’t know? Obviously, anyone who knows me closely will know my marital status. For those I don’t know well enough for them to have that knowledge, why do I care?
Another opponent told me that it is tradition to change your name to your husband’s. It is. However, lots of things have been tradition at one time. For instance, it was once tradition to pay a man for marrying your daughter. (In some ways, this still remains with the assumption that the wife’s family will pay for the marriage.) Slavery was also once a tradition in America. Does the fact we have always done something, or have been doing it for a long while make it justified? I don’t think it does.
The original reason for changing names when you got married to your husband’s was so you could be identified as his, as property. Women are no longer thought of as property so the changing of the name should be stricken as a tradition in my opinion.
I should clarify that I have no problem with women changing their name when they get married. It is an independent decision. I do, however, have a problem with being treated as socially leprous because I have decided to keep mine. When I entered into marriage, I chose to publicly pledge myself to my husband, and he chose to do the same for me. We love each other and have entered into an adventure together. Neither of us though, chose to abandon ourselves or our identities for each other. My taking his name simply for the sake of it makes as much sense as him taking mine!
When I married my husband I made the shocking decision not to change my last name to his. This decision, which I did not imagine causing controversy, has caused several women to question my dedication to my partner, my femininity, and quite possibly my sanity. To be honest, I chose to keep my name for two reasons. One, I find the act of going through the rigmarole of name change completely un-appealing. (In order for a woman to change her name, she must pay for a new driver’s license, contact half a dozen people and order a new social security card.) My second reason for maintaining my name is for a sense of identity. It does not make sense in the modern world for a woman to surrender the name she has had since birth because she decided to get married. I have two degrees under my maiden name and quite a few experiences associated with it. Why must I give that up?
One of the opponents of my “crazy” decision not to take my husband’s name said, “How will people from high school know you’ve gotten married?” GASP. What if they didn’t know? Obviously, anyone who knows me closely will know my marital status. For those I don’t know well enough for them to have that knowledge, why do I care?
Another opponent told me that it is tradition to change your name to your husband’s. It is. However, lots of things have been tradition at one time. For instance, it was once tradition to pay a man for marrying your daughter. (In some ways, this still remains with the assumption that the wife’s family will pay for the marriage.) Slavery was also once a tradition in America. Does the fact we have always done something, or have been doing it for a long while make it justified? I don’t think it does.
The original reason for changing names when you got married to your husband’s was so you could be identified as his, as property. Women are no longer thought of as property so the changing of the name should be stricken as a tradition in my opinion.
I should clarify that I have no problem with women changing their name when they get married. It is an independent decision. I do, however, have a problem with being treated as socially leprous because I have decided to keep mine. When I entered into marriage, I chose to publicly pledge myself to my husband, and he chose to do the same for me. We love each other and have entered into an adventure together. Neither of us though, chose to abandon ourselves or our identities for each other. My taking his name simply for the sake of it makes as much sense as him taking mine!
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
Employee Morale- The most under-rated concept in American Business
Employee Morale- The most under-rated concept in American Business
I have commented on the topic of job satisfaction in America before, but I feel it needs to be revisited. I cannot contemplate why so many American business owners treat their employees as if they are simply machines built for service. The American job force is pressured to work long hours, for little return, and with little hope. You are likely to be fired before ever reaching a decent 401K, and you are offered little over two weeks out of 52 vacation per year. Sure… Most companies will claim piousness. They will claim that they do everything in their power to ensure their workers are happy, satisfied, and free to enjoy the comforts of family. It is all a façade though. Few companies do anything to demonstrate a true concern for the well-being of the worker.
The attitude in this country is “shut your mouth, or we will find some other sucker to do it.” The sad fact is, there is another person, desperate for money, willing to take anything, waiting in the wings. We do not work together in one cohesive unit in the United States. We do not fight together. It is the plague of individualism. We don’t strike. We don’t rally. We don’t try to make a difference. We are so afraid that taking a stand would risk our own necks that we make no stand at all. Since we don’t work together, nothing is accomplished. We are all taught, from an early age, worry about yourself, not others. It is, unfortunately, the American way. So, nothing is changing.
It is my opinion that hyper-nationalism is the biggest hindrance to the advancement of this country. We are taught that we live in the best place in the world. We are taught that to disagree with this is to forgo your patriotism. People always argue, “If you don’t like it over here: Move.” I am of the opinion that to recognize the faults of this country is to love it. I recognize the problems, and I hope for us to improve, to learn, to evolve. I do not wish to see America cement itself to a road going nowhere.
We do not have the best system for workers in the world. We do not live in a country that encourages a balance between work and home life. This causes us to have high rates of depression, divorce, and general unhappiness in our population. To those who say change is impossible, that to give more vacation to workers per year, or less hours would bankrupt Wallstreet, I say, look at other businesses in European countries. Are they poverty stricken? Are they unable to pay their electric bills? No, the working world will keep on moving, even with giving people six weeks off per year. Even those few American companies that have changed their policies to be more worker friendly such as Microsoft and Google are among the most profitable here. Happiness is not a deterrent to profit.
The biggest joke in this country is that the powers that be have convinced those without power that this is as good as it gets. They have convinced the lowly worker that he/she is living in lap of luxury, the highest point in the world. What the worker does not recognize is, as Ayn Rand wrote,
“The man who speaks to you of sacrifice, talks of slaves and masters and wishes to be the master.”
I have commented on the topic of job satisfaction in America before, but I feel it needs to be revisited. I cannot contemplate why so many American business owners treat their employees as if they are simply machines built for service. The American job force is pressured to work long hours, for little return, and with little hope. You are likely to be fired before ever reaching a decent 401K, and you are offered little over two weeks out of 52 vacation per year. Sure… Most companies will claim piousness. They will claim that they do everything in their power to ensure their workers are happy, satisfied, and free to enjoy the comforts of family. It is all a façade though. Few companies do anything to demonstrate a true concern for the well-being of the worker.
The attitude in this country is “shut your mouth, or we will find some other sucker to do it.” The sad fact is, there is another person, desperate for money, willing to take anything, waiting in the wings. We do not work together in one cohesive unit in the United States. We do not fight together. It is the plague of individualism. We don’t strike. We don’t rally. We don’t try to make a difference. We are so afraid that taking a stand would risk our own necks that we make no stand at all. Since we don’t work together, nothing is accomplished. We are all taught, from an early age, worry about yourself, not others. It is, unfortunately, the American way. So, nothing is changing.
It is my opinion that hyper-nationalism is the biggest hindrance to the advancement of this country. We are taught that we live in the best place in the world. We are taught that to disagree with this is to forgo your patriotism. People always argue, “If you don’t like it over here: Move.” I am of the opinion that to recognize the faults of this country is to love it. I recognize the problems, and I hope for us to improve, to learn, to evolve. I do not wish to see America cement itself to a road going nowhere.
We do not have the best system for workers in the world. We do not live in a country that encourages a balance between work and home life. This causes us to have high rates of depression, divorce, and general unhappiness in our population. To those who say change is impossible, that to give more vacation to workers per year, or less hours would bankrupt Wallstreet, I say, look at other businesses in European countries. Are they poverty stricken? Are they unable to pay their electric bills? No, the working world will keep on moving, even with giving people six weeks off per year. Even those few American companies that have changed their policies to be more worker friendly such as Microsoft and Google are among the most profitable here. Happiness is not a deterrent to profit.
The biggest joke in this country is that the powers that be have convinced those without power that this is as good as it gets. They have convinced the lowly worker that he/she is living in lap of luxury, the highest point in the world. What the worker does not recognize is, as Ayn Rand wrote,
“The man who speaks to you of sacrifice, talks of slaves and masters and wishes to be the master.”
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
From the Exciting World of Teaching. . .
Currently, I am teaching a Composition I class for Freshmen level college students. Traditionally, it is one of my least favorite classes to teach. I prefer to teach Literature above all but Composition II is also nice because the basic foundations of writing have already been taught.
When I teach Comp I, I always struggle with a way to get students excited about writing. Most of them have learned to hate writing through bad experiences in high school. They have had teachers who made the subject boring or didn't allow them to explore subjects they were really interested in. To counteract this, I try and come up with fun and inventive ways to illustrate my lessons.
On Monday, we were learning about how to incorporate good details in writing. The students are going to be turning in a personal narrative soon and I told them it was important for them to paint a picture not write a list of things that happened to them. (This is what I normally get. Students write a long list of activities they participated in but the stories lack all sensory details and interest.) The students normally try to turn in a 3-4 page narrative that covers several years of their life. I try to explain that you cannot properly detail several years of a person's life in a few pages. I instruct them that it is better to pick a small moment, for instance, a few hours of their life.
To get them thinking creatively, I had the students write a character sketch. They were to create a character and give me the who, what, when, where, why, and how of that person. They weren't supposed to simply list traits but illustrate them through a short narrative. The students really seemed to have fun with this and came up with better ideas than they probably could have imagined.
I did the project along with them... Here is what my idea of what the project looked like.
Talio Stewart was a rotund, squat man in his early fifties. He had smooth hands though, from never doing a hard days work in his life, and they reminded him of his youth when he looked at them. He rarely smiled and his mouth had been turned down so long there were permanent lines on either side. His friends liked him, but only in the way you might like a mystery you can never figure out. They asked him often, "Have you ever been happy?" He would always sigh, force a chuckle, and say, "Sure. . . You know."
The truth was he had been happy at one time. He remembered being a kid and dreaming of everything adventurous. Then, it was all possible. What had happened though? He could not remember when the lines formed or when he took the first step on the easy route. When he took the safe job, the safe wife, the safe LIFE for that matter. . .
Now, it was all gone, and where did it go, his youth? It clung to his damned hands, a bitter reminder and he often though that reminder of something better, and not a true happiness for what was kept those lines on either side of his mouth, ad kept his friends wondering. It was a vicious circle of remembrance.
All in all, I think the assignment worked to at least show the students that creating a character can be fun, which in turn, might coax them into believing that writing is not the worst possible class for them to be in.
As a teacher, it is very important to keep students engaged in an active process of learning. Lecturing about writing does not help students improve. It is vital that they actually practice it and participate in writing as much as possible. Even with this, writing is a difficult lesson for students to grasp.
When I teach Comp I, I always struggle with a way to get students excited about writing. Most of them have learned to hate writing through bad experiences in high school. They have had teachers who made the subject boring or didn't allow them to explore subjects they were really interested in. To counteract this, I try and come up with fun and inventive ways to illustrate my lessons.
On Monday, we were learning about how to incorporate good details in writing. The students are going to be turning in a personal narrative soon and I told them it was important for them to paint a picture not write a list of things that happened to them. (This is what I normally get. Students write a long list of activities they participated in but the stories lack all sensory details and interest.) The students normally try to turn in a 3-4 page narrative that covers several years of their life. I try to explain that you cannot properly detail several years of a person's life in a few pages. I instruct them that it is better to pick a small moment, for instance, a few hours of their life.
To get them thinking creatively, I had the students write a character sketch. They were to create a character and give me the who, what, when, where, why, and how of that person. They weren't supposed to simply list traits but illustrate them through a short narrative. The students really seemed to have fun with this and came up with better ideas than they probably could have imagined.
I did the project along with them... Here is what my idea of what the project looked like.
Talio Stewart was a rotund, squat man in his early fifties. He had smooth hands though, from never doing a hard days work in his life, and they reminded him of his youth when he looked at them. He rarely smiled and his mouth had been turned down so long there were permanent lines on either side. His friends liked him, but only in the way you might like a mystery you can never figure out. They asked him often, "Have you ever been happy?" He would always sigh, force a chuckle, and say, "Sure. . . You know."
The truth was he had been happy at one time. He remembered being a kid and dreaming of everything adventurous. Then, it was all possible. What had happened though? He could not remember when the lines formed or when he took the first step on the easy route. When he took the safe job, the safe wife, the safe LIFE for that matter. . .
Now, it was all gone, and where did it go, his youth? It clung to his damned hands, a bitter reminder and he often though that reminder of something better, and not a true happiness for what was kept those lines on either side of his mouth, ad kept his friends wondering. It was a vicious circle of remembrance.
All in all, I think the assignment worked to at least show the students that creating a character can be fun, which in turn, might coax them into believing that writing is not the worst possible class for them to be in.
As a teacher, it is very important to keep students engaged in an active process of learning. Lecturing about writing does not help students improve. It is vital that they actually practice it and participate in writing as much as possible. Even with this, writing is a difficult lesson for students to grasp.
Saturday, January 16, 2010
A lack of understanding...
In light of some recent comments about the earthquake in Haiti, I have to say I am really disgusted with certain Americans. A certain faction of this country believes that since we are in our so called economic crisis right now, we have no right or reason to donate to the efforts in Haiti. I would like to believe that pure ignorance is not driving these words but rather learned selfishness and a lack of realism.
Yes, we are in economic dire straights. However, it is nothing like what countries such as Haiti experience on a daily basis. We do not understand the total poverty that grips that country. Therefore, we equate our situation with theirs. They are not the same.
Furthermore, we have never experienced the level of natural disaster that Haiti is now experiencing. If we ever did, there would be an outcry to every country in the world to help us.
I do believe it is our moral obligation to help those in need in all countries of the world. It is on these principles that our country was supposedly built. However, people have forgotten this. In the land of plenty, it appears we have had too much and no longer can sympathize with the poor and beaten down. (This applies to even people in our own country. That is why so many oppose universal healthcare...)
I dare not even address the idiots that claim the earthquake was God's punishment for Haiti's lack of belief. It seems so hypocritical for those that proclaim to be Christian to spew such hatred and intolerance. These people no nothing of the meaning of religion. They corrupt their so-called word of God to convince themselves of their own in born self-righteousness. Pure ignorance.
If our country falters in the future, I think it will falter not from offering economic aid to those in trouble but rather from REFUSING to acknowledge the inter-connectedness of all human beings on this planet. If we refuse to lend a hand to those in need, inevitably, when we fall, no one will be there for us.
Yes, we are in economic dire straights. However, it is nothing like what countries such as Haiti experience on a daily basis. We do not understand the total poverty that grips that country. Therefore, we equate our situation with theirs. They are not the same.
Furthermore, we have never experienced the level of natural disaster that Haiti is now experiencing. If we ever did, there would be an outcry to every country in the world to help us.
I do believe it is our moral obligation to help those in need in all countries of the world. It is on these principles that our country was supposedly built. However, people have forgotten this. In the land of plenty, it appears we have had too much and no longer can sympathize with the poor and beaten down. (This applies to even people in our own country. That is why so many oppose universal healthcare...)
I dare not even address the idiots that claim the earthquake was God's punishment for Haiti's lack of belief. It seems so hypocritical for those that proclaim to be Christian to spew such hatred and intolerance. These people no nothing of the meaning of religion. They corrupt their so-called word of God to convince themselves of their own in born self-righteousness. Pure ignorance.
If our country falters in the future, I think it will falter not from offering economic aid to those in trouble but rather from REFUSING to acknowledge the inter-connectedness of all human beings on this planet. If we refuse to lend a hand to those in need, inevitably, when we fall, no one will be there for us.
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
A diet plan that works...
I have noticed recently on my journeys through facebook, twitter, and myspace, that most people have made New Year's resolutions that revolve around losing weight. Of the many people who make such resolutions, few will actually accomplish their goals. For the most part, people set out on un-realistic diet and exercise plans. This is the biggest mistake they can make. As someone who has successfully lost weight in the past and maintained it for 6 years, I would like to share some tips on how to beat the odds.
1. Do not follow the Atkins, Weight Watchers, South Beach, Master Cleanse, or any other diet regimens. They simply cannot be realistically maintained over a long period of time. The best way to lose weight is by making smarter choices about the food you already eat. Do not exclude any one food group. It is the recipe for disaster.
2. Eat what you normally eat but be conscious of portion. This is the biggest thing I learned. The portion size on cookies is two or one for the most part. You CAN eat cookies and lose weight. You simply have to keep it in control.
3. Make smarter choices at restaurants. DO NOT AVOID THEM. A lot of people avoid restaurants when they are trying to lose weight. That is impractical. You cannot avoid restaurants for the rest of your life. Just make smarter decisions. Where you used to get fries, get a baked potato. Where you used to have a burger, get a grilled chicken sandwich. A lot of restaurants even have tasty "lighter" meals. Use them to your advantage.
4. If you drink soda, switch to diet. The best option is to limit your intake of any soda period, but you can't move mountains...
5. Aim for 30 mins of ANY exercise per day. A lot of people set un-realistic exercise goals. They try for an hour or more per day. Most people cannot fit this amount of exercise in and therefore do not do any. Walking IS exercise. If nothing else, go for a walk. If you can't make your exercise date, try for even 5 minutes of jumping jacks or stair climbing. (You can even climb the stairs at work for 5 mins.) It keeps you motivated and feeling positive.
6. Invest in exercise DVDs. It is wonderful to join a gym, but the gym is not inside your home and a lot of people say to themselves, "I'm too tired to make the drive, or... the t.v. is right there." A few exercise DVDs in your own home will give you less excuses. You don't have to go anywhere to get in a good workout.
7. Do not weigh yourself constantly. You are not going to lose a tremendous amount of weight over a week unless you are exercising the wrong way. Weighing yourself daily or even weekly will be discouraging.
8. Do not stop the whole plan just because you've had a set back. There will be times when you eat one two many slices of pizza. Don't use it as an excuse not to exercise or not to eat healthy later.
Those are my top suggestions for how to lose weight successfully. It is a complete lifestyle change. You have to permanently change the way in which you eat in order to maintain weight loss. I am proof that it works!
1. Do not follow the Atkins, Weight Watchers, South Beach, Master Cleanse, or any other diet regimens. They simply cannot be realistically maintained over a long period of time. The best way to lose weight is by making smarter choices about the food you already eat. Do not exclude any one food group. It is the recipe for disaster.
2. Eat what you normally eat but be conscious of portion. This is the biggest thing I learned. The portion size on cookies is two or one for the most part. You CAN eat cookies and lose weight. You simply have to keep it in control.
3. Make smarter choices at restaurants. DO NOT AVOID THEM. A lot of people avoid restaurants when they are trying to lose weight. That is impractical. You cannot avoid restaurants for the rest of your life. Just make smarter decisions. Where you used to get fries, get a baked potato. Where you used to have a burger, get a grilled chicken sandwich. A lot of restaurants even have tasty "lighter" meals. Use them to your advantage.
4. If you drink soda, switch to diet. The best option is to limit your intake of any soda period, but you can't move mountains...
5. Aim for 30 mins of ANY exercise per day. A lot of people set un-realistic exercise goals. They try for an hour or more per day. Most people cannot fit this amount of exercise in and therefore do not do any. Walking IS exercise. If nothing else, go for a walk. If you can't make your exercise date, try for even 5 minutes of jumping jacks or stair climbing. (You can even climb the stairs at work for 5 mins.) It keeps you motivated and feeling positive.
6. Invest in exercise DVDs. It is wonderful to join a gym, but the gym is not inside your home and a lot of people say to themselves, "I'm too tired to make the drive, or... the t.v. is right there." A few exercise DVDs in your own home will give you less excuses. You don't have to go anywhere to get in a good workout.
7. Do not weigh yourself constantly. You are not going to lose a tremendous amount of weight over a week unless you are exercising the wrong way. Weighing yourself daily or even weekly will be discouraging.
8. Do not stop the whole plan just because you've had a set back. There will be times when you eat one two many slices of pizza. Don't use it as an excuse not to exercise or not to eat healthy later.
Those are my top suggestions for how to lose weight successfully. It is a complete lifestyle change. You have to permanently change the way in which you eat in order to maintain weight loss. I am proof that it works!
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
"Have Your Cake. . . and don't eat it."
“Have your cake. . . and don’t eat it.”
In light of actress Brittany Murphy’s death, I am forced to take a hard look at the culture of Hollywood. The actress, at the time of her death, looked emaciated. The tabloids and gossip magazines are lamenting her figure saying that she looked terrible. Many of them are alluding to the fact that anorexia could have played a part in her death. Their abrupt change of tune is hypocritical to me. These are the same magazines that carefully watch each morsel of food eaten by celebrities and each pound gained. Many times, I will walk through the grocery store and see blown up pictures of stars’ cellulite gracing the covers of “Ok” and publications like it.
Pictures of an overly thin Murphy were even taken and published in the same magazines that are now accusing her of starving herself. One magazine even said she looked glam and fabulous at the time. Hollywood and the paparazzi cannot have it both ways. They seem to want stars to be thin, never gain weight, but never become too thin. They like stars to walk the delicate balance between waif and anorexic.
I first noticed this problem back in 1997 when Titanic first hit the screens. During the filming, director James Cameron referred to the appropriately sized, and I think, beautiful Kate Winslet, as “Kate Weighs-a lot.” Kate Winslet, if seen walking down the street, would probably be considered thinner than the average American woman. (Isn’t the average woman a size 12?) Why then, in Hollywood, is she considered morbidly obese?
Many people reading this would assume that since I am so up in arms about this issue, I must be an overweight person, bitter about seeing lovely, thin starlets. I, myself, am a thin person. Being thin, exercising, and eating healthy are wonderful things to strive for. I am not saying otherwise. I am just saying that Hollywood pushes many actors and actresses to the brink and than scoffs when they go over.
I distinctly remember magazines and reporters referring to Brittany Murphy in Clueless as the chubby, awkward girl. Do they think this had no effect? If Brittany Murphy did die of something related to anorexia, than perhaps the media should share a little in the guilt.
The attitude in Hollywood is “Have your cake… and don’t eat it.”
In light of actress Brittany Murphy’s death, I am forced to take a hard look at the culture of Hollywood. The actress, at the time of her death, looked emaciated. The tabloids and gossip magazines are lamenting her figure saying that she looked terrible. Many of them are alluding to the fact that anorexia could have played a part in her death. Their abrupt change of tune is hypocritical to me. These are the same magazines that carefully watch each morsel of food eaten by celebrities and each pound gained. Many times, I will walk through the grocery store and see blown up pictures of stars’ cellulite gracing the covers of “Ok” and publications like it.
Pictures of an overly thin Murphy were even taken and published in the same magazines that are now accusing her of starving herself. One magazine even said she looked glam and fabulous at the time. Hollywood and the paparazzi cannot have it both ways. They seem to want stars to be thin, never gain weight, but never become too thin. They like stars to walk the delicate balance between waif and anorexic.
I first noticed this problem back in 1997 when Titanic first hit the screens. During the filming, director James Cameron referred to the appropriately sized, and I think, beautiful Kate Winslet, as “Kate Weighs-a lot.” Kate Winslet, if seen walking down the street, would probably be considered thinner than the average American woman. (Isn’t the average woman a size 12?) Why then, in Hollywood, is she considered morbidly obese?
Many people reading this would assume that since I am so up in arms about this issue, I must be an overweight person, bitter about seeing lovely, thin starlets. I, myself, am a thin person. Being thin, exercising, and eating healthy are wonderful things to strive for. I am not saying otherwise. I am just saying that Hollywood pushes many actors and actresses to the brink and than scoffs when they go over.
I distinctly remember magazines and reporters referring to Brittany Murphy in Clueless as the chubby, awkward girl. Do they think this had no effect? If Brittany Murphy did die of something related to anorexia, than perhaps the media should share a little in the guilt.
The attitude in Hollywood is “Have your cake… and don’t eat it.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)