Wednesday, June 24, 2009

Really TIME Magazine???

Really TIME Magazine??? This is news (http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1906642,00.html?cnn=yes)??? "Is An Ugly Baby Harder to Love?" For real? I mean come on. Like you all know I try not to mince words, but how you gonna call babies ugly?? You can go to the site to read what they did, but basically they showed people pictures of healthy babies and sprinkled in babies with facial deformities like cleft palates and skin conditions and saw how long it took for them to skip the pictures of babies with facial deformities. These babies have deformities that are no fault of their own or their parents. How you gonna call the babies ugly? Now if its your friend and they get with that girl thats cock-eye and snaggle-toofed (snaggle-toof translation: has poor dental hygiene and could use an orthodontist) but she had a big ole' booty and... well you can fill in the rest, and they end up having a baby and the baby is cock-eyed and snaggle-gummed (the pre-cursor to being snaggle-toofed), then MAYBE you can call the baby ugly. Unfortunate is more appropriate. But TIME shouldn't be calling babies "ugly" because they have cleft palates and skin conditions. Now what would be a good piece is to see if its harder to HIRE somebody with a retarded name. That would be a great study so people would stop doing injustices to their children.

1 comments:

Anonymous said...

So tragic...