Watching Oprah: My Venture to Hell (Part I)

By Bernard ChapinJust a short while ago it seemed that Michael Moore was all the rage as many leftists spontaneously interjected a great “truth” from his films into normal conversation. Whenever one responded by bringing up Moore’s penchant for lies, the response of, “Well, you probably didn’t even bother to see the movie,” was made. To get around this endless argument stopper, I broke down and rented two of his scandalographies. Despite my suffering, those wasted hours proved an excellent means for combating, and infuriating, the pontificating leftists I encountered.

I have found that I am often subjected to the same “you have to watch it first” argument regarding Oprah Winfrey. That she has a near cult following among American women is beyond dispute. It seems that nearly every woman I know, regardless of their learning capacity, values the program. As a heterosexual, I have found that the best way of dealing with the issue is to avoid it because invariably a new flame may have copies of O Magazine laying around the coffee table. My current girlfriend even corrected me regarding the subject. She said, “I don’t like Oprah; I love Oprah.” Upon hearing that, I longed to get the subject back to potpourri.

The point is, Oprah is so adored one has to just accept this negative trait among individual women, but that doesn’t mean that we can’t skewer the show in print. That being said, let’s hook up the OxyContin I.V. and enter the over-emotional big top. We will boldly go where New Age men go everyday. The program will be discussed first and then be evaluated via four measures, which are as follows:

1. The Castration Index—how much male bashing is evident over its

forty-some minutes.

1. Irresponsibility Index—how much the forces outside a person are to

blame for the situation they find themselves in.

1. “It’s all about me” Scale—what percent of the show is devoted to

narcissism and self-focus.

1. Pity Promenade—how much the guests plead for the audience to

embrace them and feel sympathy for how bad these women have it

living in our luxurious land of due process, strip malls, and doggy

therapists.

Cross to Bear I: The Williams Sisters.

The Directv Guide noted that Venus and Serena Williams would be the focus for day one. I felt like skipping it because I figured it would be more objective than the norm. Then I realized that this would further skew my, already-too-small, sample. The screen lit up and there was Oprah with a face a decade younger than when I last saw her a decade ago. What could have caused such age resistance? Perhaps she has found the fountain of youth. Then she began to speak, and within seconds she made a dig towards men. She claimed that young women were getting plastic surgery and had body identification problems due to their need to please boys. I’ve heard this stuff for many years now and it’s bunkum. Analyzing girls in a vacuum is merely intellectual cowardice. Adolescence, regardless of sex, is a time of uncertainty and striving marked by rampant insecurity. Well, there it is; the non-sexist truth. So, do I get to take over her highchair upon the stage? Oh, I guess not. Meritocracy is something we only fantasize about at present.

Oprah then introduced her guests. The two Williams sisters emerged and were sincere, beautiful and unassuming throughout. They were perhaps the only mature people in the building. Jada Pinkett Smith rounded out the celebrity panel, and wholeheartedly competed for attention with the host for the remainder of the program.

What was the rationale for bringing these performers out? Well, it was to save American girls [I’m not making it up. That’s what the show was ostensibly about]. Mrs. Smith brought with her a new book entitled, Girls Hold Up the World. I have not read the book but assume that it does not refer to a “woman’s place” being in the building trades. The Williams sisters also had a book which was displayed. Oprah then declared that they were having “a girl party.” Smith added that it would last “all day long.” From this particular celebrity, who is the wife of Will Smith, we find that the secret to finding love is to love your self. The audience cheered ecstatically. Is such an assumption true? Absolutely not, why would anyone love another based on self-love? I have no idea. It’s a non-starter and is probably more an indicator of self-absorption than of confidence or any other endearing quality. Self-love is an affront to God and leads to vanity, narcissism, and the shallowness of mind wherein a person prefers television to reading or thinking.

A psychologist was introduced and said the problem many young girls have is that boys (she added men later) come along and “drop trash” into women’s bodies. Girls are not “receptacles for sperm,” their bodies are temples and not a dumping zone for male insecurities. Oprah agreed heartily and even said that “there needs to be a revolution.” There sure does and it’s going to start with her being forced to read my critique in a non-ritzy location.

The assault on men never got underway, however. It was undermined by the statements of her adolescent guests. A hurt girl, upon being prodded as to why she felt insecure, chose not to blame boys but instead cited her sisters’ excellence as the main factor. Then another, as she attempted to blame boys for her situation, accidentally alerted the audience that she was a source not to be trusted. It seems that the boys taunting her did so because her breasts were too big. As a result, she got breast reduction surgery. She pointed out that boys don’t like girls with large chests [and we don’t like pizza either].

Next came a 16-year-old who has already “known” 8 boys. She confessed that the sex never felt good to her. Smith’s message was enabling. She said, first off, that the girl was “not a slut.” This was an attempt to instill her with free self-esteem which, everyone outside of education and television, is aware of being a bogus concept. I hearken back to Roger Scruton and long for a return to stigma. Labeling her what she is may sound harsh but it offers a better chance to alter future behavior. It also would foreshadow how she’ll be viewed as an adult which would be of great service.

That irrationality can become a permanent lifestyle choice was evident after Oprah turned to a girl whose mother encouraged her to lose weight and exercise. It appears that mom’s sound advice ravaged the young lady’s self-esteem. The in-house psychologist criticized mom. She said not to “love her so much that way,” meaning, I suppose, try to encourage her to make positive lifestyle adjustments. Why did the psychologist say that? Because she’s a quack, that’s why. There’s nothing demeaning about informing the ignorant. Yet, it is rather humorous to consider what this young girl’s performance in a future work place might be like:

Boss: “Hey, can you take on this project?”

Young Lady: “When you ask me to do things [torrent of tears] you make me feel like a slave.”

Boss: “I’m sorry, ah, ah, isn’t your job to complete this stuff?”

Young Lady: “I’m not here for you to boss around.”

Boss: “You’re not?”

Under the pretense of helping others, Oprah was able to get a little bragging in. She announced that the thing she liked best about herself was that she had a big heart. Later, she mentioned that as a child she knew she was smart and could “read anybody under the table.” Personally, I doubt the veracity of any of such qualities. An intelligent person does not exude such an arrogant air in regards to every subject brought up.

Honestly though, this installment was most auspicious. I had no idea that so much negativity could be conveyed through a program purportedly about the Williams sisters. “The Oprah Winfrey Show” is far more virulent than I originally believed. It’s beyond satire as a break even featured a commercial for, get ready for this, www.depressionhurts.com.

Well, let’s take a look at the numbers:

Castration Index: 5—They tried to team the horses up to trample men but couldn’t find their spurs.

Irresponsibilty Index: 8—Sure, most of these girls face unbelievable threats from society and their families. That they’re not evident to the rest of us is due to our lack of sensitivity.

“It’s all about me” Scale: 10—Has to be a 10 when the old lie, “you have to love yourself before you can love anybody else,” is trotted out like a dying Soviet general for a May Day Parade.

Pity Promenade: 10—Another perfect score, oh how sad we feel for you going through adolescence. Can you imagine what it would be like if it happened to everyone? And without an audience to commiserate with?

OVERALL RATING=33.

Tune in tomorrow, I’ll be back in hell.

Bernard Chapin is a writer living in Chicago. Contact him at veritaseducation@gmail.com. His new book, Escape from Gangsta Island, is available.