Thursday, July 18, 2013

In Which I Defend Jim Carrey's Ex

Carrey Sunning with Satan

I’ve been seeing articles and Facebook posts that trash Jenny McCarthy and I’m wondering why people think the behavior of a former Playboy playmate, MTV dating show host and paramour of Jim Carrey is newsworthy.

One commenter even described her impending addition to the View gaggle as replacing a right-wing wench – Elizabeth Hasselbeck, who departed, thankfully, on July 10 – with a left-wing wench. I don’t recall her playing a major role in politics at any point in the more than three decades that I’ve been an observer. The reason she’s getting heat, apparently, is because she’s had the courage to publicly question the wisdom of vaccination regimens.

(Although I’m in no way related to McCarthy or affiliated with this country’s anti-vaccine movement, I did write negatively about vaccines before. See “A Shot in the Dark,” December 10, 2012.)

It’s unfortunate that the Powers That Be – in this case Big Pharma, traditional medicine and the whorish media – find it necessary to discredit and marginalize individuals rather than responding to the claims and questions posed by said individuals. There is a connection between vaccines and certain diseases and conditions like mental retardation, dyslexia, Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS), arthritis and others. Certain vaccines that contain foreign tissues and chemicals do suppress our immune systems and affect some of our organs and body parts. And some studies have found a link between vaccines and autism. So why not counter these studies and assertions with facts and science rather than throwing stones at Hollywood actresses?

I ran across an article in Salon, a publication that I used to respect, entitled, “Dear ABC: Putting Jenny McCarthy on The View Will Kill Children.” If that’s not an excessively provocative and irresponsible title for an opinion piece, I don’t know what is. The New Yorker, another publication that doesn’t usually embrace juvenile hyperbole, claimed that McCarthy’s views are downright dangerous and hiring her to appear on television represents “a strike against reason and progress and hope.”

Oh, for Pete’s sake. Seriously? I can think of 50 examples of strikes against reason, progress and hope more deserving of national hand-wringing than putting an opinionated, middle-aged, yellow-haired celebrity on a vapid TV show that’s tied with a 50-year-old soap opera as most popular among 18- to 49-year-old housewives.

Sources:, Salon, New Yorker.

No comments:

Post a Comment