Saudi Women banned from Olympic Games

Saudi women are not allowed to compete in the Olympics? That is so stupid. There is no other way to put it. It once again is misogyny masked in the rhetoric of religion, and the entire world should be knocking on their psycho-Islamic-door-of-hate.

If the International Olympic Committee (IOC) took a stand against apartheid in 1964, then they should bloody well take a stand against this medieval fanaticism now in 2012.

What I want to know is are Saudi men SO animalistic  and controlled by their libidos that they cannot even think, never mind watch, a woman play a game of volley ball? For that matter, is their Allah SO rudimentary and incompetent that Man was created with no internal control over his sexual urges whatsoever?

Also, should women athletes outside of Saudi Arabia, who have the apparently “indecent” right to roam free, be on high alert against what must be inferred are potential rapists? How do Saudi men manage their allegedly felonious libidos when they leave their country? Perhaps this is another compelling reason to ban Saudi Arabia from the Olympics – non-Saudi female competitors may be in jeopardy, otherwise.

If the IOC is not moved to action by human rights violations against Saudi women, maybe they will consider the safety of all the other athletes who come from countries NOT guilty of blatant injustice and crimes against humanity.

The bottom line is that the IOC itself states: “The Games have always brought people together in peace to respect universal moral principles”.

Here is to hoping the International Olympic Committee shows integrity and stands by its own principles. 

Unprincipled principles are the worst kind of hypocrisy.

Real Housewives of Vancouver Episode 11

EVERYBODY KNOWS THE FIGHT WAS FIXED, THE POOR STAY POOR, THE RICH GET RICH

~ Leonard Cohen ~

Eighty thousand dollars spent on a single birthday party for a middle-aged man who needs nothing, not even admiration?

Now, I do realize us common folk watch these reality shows for our voyeuristic fix and amusement, to get a glimpse into how the finer people live. And perhaps moral indignation does not belong here.

Normally I would agree with that, but today, on June 12, 2012, World Day Against Child Labour, I cannot help but wonder how many children could have been saved, their lives altered in miraculous ways, with the same amount of money it took to throw a flashy Bollywood party for a bunch of rich people that lasted what, a few hours?

There is something terribly wrong and fundamentally unjust in this world when the discrepancy between who has the most and who has the least is so monumental. What’s worse is that we are entertained by this discrepancy via our television sets.

On one channel we can absorb ourselves with stories of affluent people whooping it up in gross excess and waste, while at the same time hoarding the lion’s share of resources, playing dress-up, acting foolish, showing off, and indulging their massive egos and addictions.

Then, with a mere click of the remote control, we are treated to images of severely impoverished, malnourished children from the developing world who are taken from their villages, abused liked animals, and forced into sweatshops.

There, they toil for long, tortuous hours with little food, water or compensation. Death is never far, always lurking in the shadows, ready to pounce on prey that is already crippled and vulnerable by the hopeless, dismal circumstances of their existence.

In some places, huge, extended families with a multitude of offspring are crammed into tiny, nearly inhabitable hovels. There is not enough of anything and hunger, not just for food but for hope, knowledge and freedom is a parasitic burden that never rests until death do they part.

By comparison, in other places, small families with few children and a staff of servants live in mansions so enormous that people in the household cannot find each other without using a telephone or intercom system.

This discrepancy when viewed in a televised light is so glaringly blatant that it is impossible for anyone with any sense of humanity to ignore the injustice of it. It taunts a sense of altruism, fairness and plain old kindness in most anyone whose conscience is fully intact.

Why does one person, such as Reiko, need 9 luxury cars worth over a million dollars? Why, too, does one non-polygamist family, such as Ronnie’s, need four separate estates side-by-side with a patch of pristine Pacific ocean a mere backswing away, close enough to collect all those wayward tennis balls? 

No one person can drive nine cars at the same time and no one person needs that much space to live or that much ocean to pollute, especially when there are so many other members of the human race who ARE in need.

And clichés that say “money can’t buy you happiness” are as useful as saying glasses can’t physiologically cure myopia so why bother wearing them? Although in large part this is true - much of happiness comes from within - money does buy the basic necessities and comforts of life. When these survival needs are not met, there is no life and without life there is no happiness. There is nothing.

Of course it would be naive to suggest the social inequities and suffering found worldwide could be remedied by simply taking all the wealth from greedy, rich Canadians and handing it over to people dying in stark poverty or to a charity such as Free The Children – it  would be naïve, but it sure would be satisfying.

Real Housewives of Vancouver Episode 10

Real Housewives of Vancouver Episode 9

Real Housewives of Vancouver Episode 8

Real Housewives of Vancouver Episode 10

Jody continues to amuse with unadulterated absurdity while Ronnie continues to surprise with a more likable side. I have said before it is sometimes true that in the Real Housewives series the housewife you start out disliking can turn into someone you do like, or at least no longer utterly despise, as the season progresses and more seasons are added. It takes time for the varied complexities of each personality to be revealed, as is the case with pretty much anyone, whether on TV or not.

Let the good times begin! Here's to Rehab!

We are all flawed, but most of us also have nuggets of perfection embedded somewhere within our being.  And even when those good bits are not immediately clear, we can be assured they are there. It is just that the good in some people is buried deeper and takes greater effort to find than in others.

In the same vein, while some flaws are more readily apparent in certain individuals than in others, we can be assured that even when faults are not obvious, they are there. The question then becomes, does the good outweigh the bad or is the good so good that the bad is tolerable?

Ronnie: "There is an elephant in this room".

With regards to Ronnie, her insecurities, and consequent predatory tendencies, it seems her likability factor is a matter of preference and vulnerability, i.e. if you have even an ounce of kindness in you, you are potential prey. Mind you, Ronnie is a little more subtle and selective in her attacks when compared with Jody, which makes Ronnie slightly more likable than Jody and slightly less likely than Jody to make enemies. Ronnie, as well, tends to be more two-faced than in your face, although she definitely can get in someone’s face, especially when she has been fueled up with some alcohol.

With regards to Jody, she appears so absurd, dishonest, petty, judgmental and malicious that her likability factor must be relative to person, place, time and thing. Not only does she gorge on vulnerability, she is indiscriminate about it, i.e. she will attack friend (Reiko) or foe (Mary), it doesn’t matter to her. She also has no problem feeding on her victims right in the open where everyone can see, i.e. on a television program.

Jody: "I feel very sorry for Mary. She should apologize to herself".

Jody does it all: she is two-faced AND in your face, so the probability that she is going to rub a large variety of people the wrong way is huge.

We can look at Jody as the realization of that overstated adage: “If you have something to say, say it to my face”. Unfortunately, though, the average ego, despite demanding the “truth” from others, does not actually like a straight talker and maybe even HATES them. Few enjoy being openly criticized and insulted. We rarely appreciate anything other than flattering “truths” about ourselves.

Not only that, but just because one person sees you in a certain light, does not mean everyone sees you in that same light. Most of us have multiple sides that are either emphasized or suppressed, depending on the company and situations with which we find ourselves.

So while Jody is definitely the villainess fans love to hate, beneath her phoniness there seems to be this impish side that in the right circumstances could make her a hoot to be around. The problem is the second someone, no matter who it is, does something Jody perceives as “wrong” or threatening to her self-image, she is quick to pass judgment and attack based on faulty, unsubstantiated and tampered evidence. She furthermore judges others in this lopsided, unfair manner knowingly.

For example, Jody knows perfectly well that Mary was not the only one questioning the validity of Jody’s heritage and merchandise. She also knows Mary is a decent person and that there was no malice in her inquiries – Mary was genuinely curious, as most human beings are when they receive conflicting information. It is normal (for non-idiots anyway) to question inconsistencies in the stories and outrageous claims we hear. I do not agree with blind faith, and I also do not agree with going along with something you know with near certainty is untrue, without at the very least first trying to unravel the web of lies.

And a flimsy web of bizarre lies is what we get with Jody and Mia in their Bizarro world or should I say Bizarro LAND. This is a direct quote from Jody’s own pompous mouth:   “Fortunately the vibe from the other women is something I don’t notice because I live in my own land”. Yes, yes she does.

Mia and Jody argue who loves who more.

Later, near the end of episode ten when Ronnie brings up the elephant in the room, we are treated to more “Jody Land” rhetoric: In this particular scenario, Mia defends the defamation lawsuit against Mary TO Mary herself. Mia explains that the lawsuit isn’t “personal”, it’s just “business”. Jody approves of Mia’s assessment and says of Mia’s approach: “She carefully tells Mary how the LAND is laid without putting a fork through Mary’s front head”. Not so veiled threats? 

Mia thinks everyone is a hypocrite except for herself, her mother and Ronnie. 

Jody furthermore choruses Mia’s assertion that the attacks on Mary aren’t “personal”. Nevertheless, as Ronnie points out in the limo, Jody has been attacking Mary since the beginning in Whistler, long before we were privy to any hearsay about Jody’s shop, The Glass House, being a glorified consignment store.

Indeed, Jody has gotten “personal” with every housewife, except maybe Ronnie. Mary and Christina are frequent unwitting quarry in Jody’s crosshairs, but even Reiko, the “Switzerland” of the Real Housewives of Vancouver, has been treated to a Jody Land deluge or two.

As for Ronnie, she seems to be Jody’s biggest fan, even as Ronnie tells the other ladies she has “had enough” of Jody’s foolish spitefulness. Ronnie says she realizes Jody’s attacks on Mary are ridiculous, cruel and unprovoked, yet does not disinvite Jody and Mia to the Okanagan trip. Yet again we are left wondering how Mary can call this woman her “best friend”. Ronnie is as loyal to Mary as she is to her own rehabilitation process.

Ronnie Rehab & sidekick Jody Jester

THEN just to add another inane element of disbelief to the whole “clown show” Mary apologizes to Jody when Mary did not do anything wrong! In an earlier episode Christina did the same thing and apologized to JODY when it was Jody who was being the bully. In both of these instances Jody should have been doing the apologizing, certainly not Mary and Christina. But even more absurd in episode ten is that Jody says SHE forgives MARY??? Un-Be-LIE-vable.

Again, what kind of Bizarro Land is this where the victim apologizes to the offender and the offender forgives the victim? It’s madness, I tell you. Madness!

Mia: "My mom already knows I'm naughty".

Case in point, in the “Serenity Room” at the spa, Jody pretentiously states she thinks: “Mary needs to apologize to herself and then after she has worked on herself perhaps she can apologize to the others she has hurt”.

What is she talking about? Is she even sane?

I actually laughed out loud when Jody said this because it’s such a weird, crazy-ass thing to say. She has the imagination and logic of a 4-year-old or a mental patient. De-LU-sion-AL.

Mia is also just as delusional as her mother when she says, “Everyone besides Ronnie just seems like a really big hypocrite to me”. This is what they call a “projection bias”. Mia and Jody are in fact the hypocrites because they condemn behavior in other people that they condone in themselves. But hey, hypocrisy makes for good trash TV, so bring on the madness with episode eleven!

Real Housewives of Vancouver Episode Nine

Real Housewives of Vancouver Episode Eight