5 ms·

Turning "pasta fazool" into a real product was a stroke of genius. Excellent essay on an undiscovered person! But would their research published into the blan

Turning "pasta fazool" into a real product was a stroke of genius. Excellent essay on an undiscovered person! But would their research published into the blank space on Wikipedia be greeted with "this article lacks sources/ link context"? It was okay to compliment women positively on their 'looks' in news articles in the 1950s who ever they were. It was even okay to use that in a teaser vignette of an article, the opening part that is to capture readers. Or a photo caption. The author claims to find this depressing, but I'll wager Betty Ossola did not. No crime was committed here, and the publicity helped her brand. Even the silliest gaffe of all, a headline that crows that she has "has a Husband", seems something the Husband would rib her about and (nevertheless) was positive in nature. What if the headline said "is yet unmarried"? Still positive. To find offense in historical things too often people have to imagine some entire upside-down world they think would have been a better world, and imagine that many things that are the result of what they perceive as 'comments of negative value' simply rather have been left unsaid. A lot of positivity in the world simply not there, and people just didn't say as much in that pretend-world. "The past is a different country, people do things differently there." ~ L. P. Hartley The present depresses me sometimes as well. There has always been a cultural contingent that follows the First Lady as a fashion icon and even an independent spirit and even awards self-praise for the idea for disconnecting their attention to her with the husband's politics. And follows her charity outreach and autonomous actions. It actually expresses respect for women with these political confines. All until Melania Trump. The first First Lady it was okay to hate and to ignore. And she received attention (and out of context misreporting) for wearing a shirt that said "I don't care, do u?" which was directly about the media phenomenon that was so sudden in our history. She felt personally stung by it and still holds her head high. And she has the 'looks' too! I would like to see if Betty Ossola can become a Wikipedia article, I'll work on it in my spare time.

vel0city 2y ago
> The first First Lady it was okay to hate and to ignore I don't know, there was lots of hate and dislike for Nancy Reagan and Hilary Clinton. Seems like a lot of people thought "Just say no" was pretty asinine and out of touch. And FWIW, I think she deserved the coverage she did wearing the "I don't care, do u?" jacket. Sure, whatever, she meant it to be pointed towards left-wing haters and wasn't supposed to be directed towards the immigrant child separation crisis. But there's a time and place to make a statement like that. Wear it at some fundraising dinner or other public event, not in some place where you're going to visit an ongoing humanitarian crisis. Not when there's such a massive chance for that statement to get misunderstood.
- borski 2y ago
  Precisely. Couldn’t have said it better myself. Wear a jacket with the message all you want. But timing and context of the message matters. Even if I were an anarchist, I wouldn’t wear a “let’s burn it all down” jacket to the site of a massive fire either. Sometimes your message is less important than paying attention to your surroundings, especially as the First Lady. So yes, she deserved all the anger headed in her direction for that stunt, but the jacket wasn’t the issue. The context, timing, and absolute tone-deafness was.
- vuln 2y ago
  > towards the immigrant child separation crisis There was no _crisis_ I’m sorry your media did that to you and the potion of the population they whipped into a frenzy. I still remember the journalists using pictures from the previous administration. Effective propaganda to say the least.
  - vel0city 2y ago
    That the policy or similar existed previously doesn't make what happened to those kids a crisis. Quite telling you think the government separating children from their families and losing track of a lot of them isn't considered a crisis. I don't care who does it, it's bad policy and losing them is unacceptable. Also, while "kids in detention facilities" happened in other administrations, the direct tactic of specifically separating families with no intention of later reunification was something unique to the Trump administration. The "kids in cages" during the Obama administration came across the border unaccompanied, the Trump policy was to separate families and then not tell the families where their kids were. I'm sorry you don't have the humanity enough to see the policy of child separation is wrong. I'm sorry your media brainwashing led you to think the cages built during the Obama administration was used for the exact same policies as the Trump administration, because they weren't.
    - vuln 2y ago
      > The "kids in cages" during the Obama administration came across the border unaccompanied, the Trump policy was to separate families and then not tell the families where their kids were. Right, under Trump the kids were being used as pawns to get unknown non family members into the US hence the DNA testing and subsequent separation. There was a large influx of children being trafficked and abused in such manner. Biden ended Trump unaccompanied minor law and stopped rapid DNA testing. https://www.newsweek.com/joe-bidens-reversal-trumps-border-ban-solo-children-increases-cartel-profits-1576278 https://www.newsweek.com/joe-bidens-reversal-trumps-border-b... https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/us-detention-child-migrants https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/us-detention-child-migrants https://www.fairus.org/legislation/executive/biden-administration-jettisons-dna-testing-families-border https://www.fairus.org/legislation/executive/biden-administr...

vel0city 2y ago

> The first First Lady it was okay to hate and to ignore I don't know, there was lots of hate and dislike for Nancy Reagan and Hilary Clinton. Seems like a lot of people thought "Just say no" was pretty asinine and out of touch. And FWIW, I think she deserved the coverage she did wearing the "I don't care, do u?" jacket. Sure, whatever, she meant it to be pointed towards left-wing haters and wasn't supposed to be directed towards the immigrant child separation crisis. But there's a time and place to make a statement like that. Wear it at some fundraising dinner or other public event, not in some place where you're going to visit an ongoing humanitarian crisis. Not when there's such a massive chance for that statement to get misunderstood.

borski 2y ago
Precisely. Couldn’t have said it better myself. Wear a jacket with the message all you want. But timing and context of the message matters. Even if I were an anarchist, I wouldn’t wear a “let’s burn it all down” jacket to the site of a massive fire either. Sometimes your message is less important than paying attention to your surroundings, especially as the First Lady. So yes, she deserved all the anger headed in her direction for that stunt, but the jacket wasn’t the issue. The context, timing, and absolute tone-deafness was.
vuln 2y ago
> towards the immigrant child separation crisis There was no _crisis_ I’m sorry your media did that to you and the potion of the population they whipped into a frenzy. I still remember the journalists using pictures from the previous administration. Effective propaganda to say the least.
- vel0city 2y ago
  That the policy or similar existed previously doesn't make what happened to those kids a crisis. Quite telling you think the government separating children from their families and losing track of a lot of them isn't considered a crisis. I don't care who does it, it's bad policy and losing them is unacceptable. Also, while "kids in detention facilities" happened in other administrations, the direct tactic of specifically separating families with no intention of later reunification was something unique to the Trump administration. The "kids in cages" during the Obama administration came across the border unaccompanied, the Trump policy was to separate families and then not tell the families where their kids were. I'm sorry you don't have the humanity enough to see the policy of child separation is wrong. I'm sorry your media brainwashing led you to think the cages built during the Obama administration was used for the exact same policies as the Trump administration, because they weren't.
  - vuln 2y ago
    > The "kids in cages" during the Obama administration came across the border unaccompanied, the Trump policy was to separate families and then not tell the families where their kids were. Right, under Trump the kids were being used as pawns to get unknown non family members into the US hence the DNA testing and subsequent separation. There was a large influx of children being trafficked and abused in such manner. Biden ended Trump unaccompanied minor law and stopped rapid DNA testing. https://www.newsweek.com/joe-bidens-reversal-trumps-border-ban-solo-children-increases-cartel-profits-1576278 https://www.newsweek.com/joe-bidens-reversal-trumps-border-b... https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/us-detention-child-migrants https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/us-detention-child-migrants https://www.fairus.org/legislation/executive/biden-administration-jettisons-dna-testing-families-border https://www.fairus.org/legislation/executive/biden-administr...