Sunday, November 20, 2005
Watching MTV recently and (swear thou who laughs shall be struck down from on high by natural causes) sat though a show of young women completing for an internship at 17 magazine. The host was narrating a question and answer session with the group of contestants. She would ask a question and the other contestants would hold up little cards denoting if they thought the person was giving a "real answer", a "beauty pageant answer" or a "fake answer". I admit I found this very interesting. A real answer was something that was blurted out all emotion, no screening so to speak. A beauty pageant answer was an answer where a person sat back and maybe thought about the question and how to respond using there mental faculty. The fake answer was either of the two above-mentioned responses given by somebody who none of the other contestants liked. I thought it was strange who we value being real or as I would like to say primal. This response is considered "from the heart" "genuine" "passionate" while a person who thinks is "cold", "manipulative” brown nosing" etc. Since when is thinking about a situation a bad thing? Being aware of the outcomes? Showing compassion and the ability to think about how what you say and do may affect others? even yourself? As a culture, we are spending a little too much time keeping it real. I am not saying by any means that we should turn our backs the emotional aspect of what makes us human, but should we not at least celebrate the fact that we can think and communicate without having to give into the primal urge that is a part of us? Is it not this ability to choose that makes and defines our species? If it is this choice, why do we raise up those among us who fail to use it?