What's important...?

Okay, I realize that the Ellen/dog adoption issue is old news, but I I'm tired of hearing people say she over-reacted. There's such a weird backlash over this, it makes me feel concerned for the sanity of the people who engage in it. I don't understand the position a lot of people are very vociferously taking.

Now, I've avoided discussing politics or social issues here, because this blog is supposed to be about my art discoveries. Besides, I tend to become... strident.

However...

for the record...

Ellen didn't over-react. Let's just agree on that so we can move on, okay? She reacted the way she reacted. There's nothing wrong with how she reacted. She had to do a show, and she got emotional. Sorry. And if you don't think that dogs are important enough to cry about, let's make a list of what's important enough to lose control and cry over:

Death
Loss
Frustration
Humiliation
Compassion
Love

Are any of those important enough? Hey, before any of us lose control and express a feeling, let's first look at it rationally, shall we?

None of those motivations for feeling are more or less important because the object is human, animal, or thing. It's still sadness and it's still a feeling. If I lost the diamond ring my brother, who is still living, gave to me, I would weep and weep. And if people happened to be around, I probably would weep in front of them. And if I had to give a speech right after I lost it, I'd probably have to cancel my speech. That doesn't mean I value a diamond ring more than a human being or even a dog.

WHAT do you want Ellen to do, huh? What? I guess she could have cancelled her show and sent her guests and audience home and leave her staff to face the sponsors because she felt like crap at that moment and didn't know if she could compose herself. Sure. But to say, as I heard both Bill Maher and Johnny Wendel say recently, that it was ridiculous to make such a theatre out of a dog adoption, is just unfeeling, and what's more, hubris. What's so bad about spouting hubris? Well, I guess it's not my problem, really. But don't put it on Ellen, just because you are uncomfortable with her feelings. If you are incensed that she would be such 'a girl' about something, then ignore her. You obviously don't watch her show anyway, or you'd know that she's not manipulative and she doesn't use her show as a soapbox. So, they don't have to show themselves as jerks by commenting on it at all, and certainly not with the verve and ridicule with which they did.

And what's this about dogs not being worth making such a fuss about? There's such a non-issue about this dog/people thing. Why do people have to analyze it at all? Of course we'd all save a drowning human over a drowning animal, that's not even the point. The POINT, and I do have one, is that Ellen felt an honest emotion and went with it. Was she attacking someone? No. Did she ask all of us to boycott something? No. Did she even say we all had to feel that way? No.

This, by the way, is not how Bill Maher or Johnny Wendel operate. They operate by cajoling, ridiculing, attacking, and otherwise attempting to let everyone know they are RIGHT about whatever dead horse they happen to be kicking at any given time.

And don't get me wrong. I listen to and enjoy both of these guys when I happen to be listening to their programs. What I'm SAYING is: Ellen didn't do anything wrong, silly, embarrassing, unreasonable, manipulative, or otherwise outside her rights as a public or private citizen.

I hope we're finally clear on that, because I don't want to have to get angry.