A friend of ours was recently struck by lighting. No...really.
She survived because her husband was there to resuscitate her and medical staff were on the case. She's recuperating in a Colorado hospital and we can't wait to welcome her back home.
When we heard the initially spotty news, we quickly went online to see if we could find more detail. And, because she hadn't died, reporters on the story only gave her a cursory mention.
But, the headline writer at the Washington Times saw fit to pen this amazingly biased header: "Elderly Woman Struck by Lightning."
Elderly? Ummmm...she's 65. And, in amazing physical shape. And while I don't know the headline writer (though I'm sure that she is under 30 to even think that 65 is "elderly"), odds are that Kate could probably kick her ass in biking, hiking and thinking.
I'm sorry...but the lenses through which today's media (which is largely made up of people under 35 because they work cheap) sees and reports on the world is stunningly one dimensional. And discriminatory.
Elderly? What the hell is that? It surely isn't 70, because her husband races sailboats, bikes like a fiend and is also in fabulous shape. It's not 77 (have you seen the picture of Gary Player naked in the latest issue of ESPN magazine?). And, it's not 85, because my Dad can still kick my ass on a tennis court.
Elderly at 65?
Please.
Totally agree...another annoyance is the ATT commercials with the Suit guy and kids (kids aren't annoying) The reference to the grandma being slow....and the aunt with plastic covers on her cushions....
Posted by: Fran Bolson | July 24, 2013 at 11:39