 |
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 4,262
|
|
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 4,262
|
Quote:
Oh! Watch out! There's sassy gals about! They're fun... but they mean business! Oh! Oh! OH! ARGH! Any woman who watched Cook Yourself Thin (Channel 4, Tuesday, 8.30pm) and didn't feel patronised should take a long hard look at themselves. Cook Yourself Thin is one of the most backward programmes ever aired. From the title alone, you should be angry. It should be called Cook Yourself Happy or something... just don't include the word thinner!!!
What's the problem with the word 'thinner' then? Well, to understand, you need to look at the show as a whole. We need to scratch the surface, look at what this show is promising, what it is saying from the outset and most importantly, what it should be doing.
From the off, this show was filled with knowing winks. It wouldn't have surprised me if the original script read 'Girls! Eh? Eh? Aaay? Chocolate? Eh? We girls? Eh? Can't resist a bit of chocolate eh? Eh? We just can't resist it eh? Know what I mean girls? Eh? Choccie-choc-choc? Eh?' as that's exactly what they were getting at. Featured in this horrendous show was a woman who simply couldn't refuse chocolate. To paraphrase, the lady in question said that her relationship with chocolate was a unhealthy one. We all know what that's like eh girls? Eh? Eh? *wink*
My problem with this, is that no-one can really refuse chocolate. Chocolate makes people happy. However, most people with a brain know that chocolate can also make you grotesquely lardy. The advice that should have been given to the participant of this show goes something like this; Don't buy as much chocolate. End. However, implied but not stated was that you women are so weak, feeble and needy, that you couldn't possibly escape the allure of chocolate. Women, according to this show, are the more pathetic sex. Of course, this simply isn't true.
We, the viewer, are then shown how to make a chocolate dessert which is full of the good things (high cocoa content choc', sugar, butter etc) but miraculously helps you become thinner. Cue 'only as a part of a calorie controlled diet'. ALARM BELLS! ALARM BELLS! Sorry? What was that? Eat healthier and you can have a blow out every so often? Who would have guessed that? If this show is to be believed, a woman could never grasp such a notion.
After showing us all various tasty treats (they were probably referred to as 'naughty'), the small print at the foot of the screen consistently told us of the real secret to slimming. Essentially, the presenters showed us how to cook stuff whilst the screen encouraged us to take regular exercise and to have a balanced diet. These messages were in the small-print at the foot of the screen. Also, making a mockery of the show, a tiny message was inserted saying 'does not constitute a clinical trial'. In essence, the whistle-blowers won out. They may as well have written 'THIS SHOW IS A LOAD OF CODSWALLOP - EAT HEALTHILY AND GET OFF YOUR FAT ARSE IF YOU WANT TO LOSE WEIGHT'.
The four presenters, Harry Eastwood, Gizzi Erskine, Sal Henley and Sophie Michell, all want to convince the world that crash dieting isn't the way forward... but sass is. Well, sass only gets you so far... and that is winning the minds of morons. Of all the girls, the one who drove me to confused and angry tears was Harry Eastwood. Dressed like a rectangular Nikki Grahame (the 'who is she?' one from Big Brother), Harry looked like she'd just come back from a party. I could smell the white wine, gin and stale fag-ends on her... and I don't even own Smell-O-Vision yet.
The whole show, because of its partonising nature, felt like it had been written by a man. A man who lived in the seventies. A man who likes women... women who know their place. What makes this show so frustrating is that is could have been great. It makes me want to shout. If the girls had just dropped the knowing winks and faux-sass, they would've got a lot further with their message.
There is a stupefying amount of pressure put on women to look a certain way in the current climate. These ladies are obviously trying to kick against the trend of waif-like aspirations and clearly want to let people know that it's alright to be a size 14 or whatever. However, the girls go for the lowest common denominator and wink their way through cliché after cliché, and instead of looking like the friendly girls they want to be, they resemble the harridans from Sex And The City (without doubt THE most patronising show ever made).
Instead of showing women to be learned, cultured and strong, they go straight for the weaknesses. I wouldn't be surprised if one of them isn't on next week because they're crying about some bloke, or they're gorging themselves on cake due to period pains. See? Look! This is what happens! You dip your toe into this programme and the next thing you know, you're wheeling out all the clichés about womenfolk. This show is no doubt aimed at real women... however, it completely misses the mark, and as a result, makes women look like a rather silly breed indeed. Drop the pretense, wise-up and let's actually make a decent cookery show aimed at women who want to eat well and be merry... eh girls?
|
I found the bit which mentions Nikki. 
I love the way the article reminds you who Nikki is just incase you've forgotten (which most probably have).
If this sentence warrants an entire thread you really are scraping the bottom of the barrel.
|
14-08-2007, 12:24 AM
.
Linear Mode
