Remaking Images (and letting the dumbass shine through)
June 9, 2010
This was in my email inbox:
Since when has Generation Rescue been that? I have an image of a movement in my mind in relation to this.
And this nugget: “With some of the top scientists in the world, Generation Rescue’s research mission is dedicated to finding more of the causative factors and treatment approaches for children with autism.”
Generation Rescue makes over its image more than McCarthy remakes her own.
The second arrow is to a CNN report stupidly titled “5 toxics that are everywhere: Protect yourself” by the senior medical producer for CNN. I get that language evolves, but toxic is an adjective. Toxins is the noun. Maybe the article is chock-full of good information, but you’d never know it from the title alone, which screams dumbass to me.
Speaking of that, I had the tremendous misfortune to read AoA’s Katie Wright’s piece yesterday.
Maybe she’s the queen of hyperbole, but no one, and I mean no one, feels the need to go “really?” to this line: “Anyone who has seen his or her child’s diarrhea burn a hole through a rug or a car seat knows what I am talking about”?
Yeah, let’s say you’re being serious. Let’s give you that. Let’s say you literally mean that the poop burned a hole through a rug. Your kid’s colon, rectum, the skin on his tiny little buttcheeks, how are they? They good? No problems there? Because if the poop was truly, truly acidic enough to burn through carpet, it did significantly more damage to your child.
Wright doesn’t write this once. No. She does it twice: “His bowel movements were so much less acidic and lost their power to burn through rugs.”
And, again, no one questions it. No one. She writes right after the burning diarrhea: “This isn’t about regular constipation either- ASD kids have been known to go weeks without a bowel movement. It’s incredibly painful and disabling.” Which is it? Well? I’m trying to figure out what parent lets a child go weeks without a bowel movement without giving them prunes, adding fiber to their drink, doing something. I don’t get it. I really don’t. I don’t get exaggeration to make a point (and I don’t have any sense that this is what she’s doing here, either).
I just don’t get it. How GR can make the claim of top scientists without wetting themselves. How anyone can read top five toxics and not think, really? How anyone can read claims of carpet burning bowel movements and not question the claim.
*and yes, yes, I do feel better having let a little bit of snark out. 🙂