Well, that’s a load off my mind!
There was a piece in the AB-J and there have been subsequent mentions on NPR and even online about the possibility of a new “snack sensation” to be known as “lady Doritos”. Apparently, a clueless CEO at overeating icon, Pepsico, said in a podcast that women, unlike men, don’t like to lick their fingers after eating a bag of Doritos. She went on to say that women do not like to crunch too loudly in public, nor do they pour the little broken pieces and crumbs into their mouths from the bag. Too unladylike, dontcha know. Somebody watching the podcast then came up with the proposition that the company would be developing a line of chips designed for women (Which would be what, soft ruffly edges?). When that hit the airwaves or the ether or the electron universe, or what ever it is that makes the internet work, the response was definitely not what a public relations person might have hoped for. Frito-Lay, the division of Pepsico that makes Doritos, immediately began to walk back the notion of “lady Doritos”, with a backdrop of mockery and ridicule. One of the featured possibilities of the “more ladylike” snack chip was a smaller bag that could better fit into a purse. How thoughtful! Are we going to have “lady” anything else? Lady beer cans that don’t pop open too loudly? Lady French fries that don’t crunch too much? Lady Oreos that don’t snap when bitten? Gimme a break!
Frankly, of the Doritos-eaters of my acquaintance, them being mostly considerably younger (Isn’t everyone?), I have seen no evidence that they were concerned about crunching too loudly, or about licking their fingers, or eating the last few crumbs in the bag. They just eat ‘em.
Not being a fan of Doritos myself, I’m not sure that this is necessarily a game-changer in the snack world, but it has certainly stirred up a whole lot of commentary, one way or another. Not to mention the notion that too much crunch is undesirable for the more delicate among us. I’m a Fritos fan, myself.
And another thing in the news is “emotional support animals”. Seems like every day a new, more outrageous creature is involved. I mean, really now, the latest seems to be an ESA (emotional support animal) peacock. Another that I ran across was a medium-sized ( 7 ft.) boa constrictor named Oscar.
Nearly any one can understand the role of actual support animals—specially-trained dogs for the blind or hearing-impaired, or service animals for vets which support them in many ways, even animals that can detect such things as impending diabetic episodes or other acute conditions —but the mind boggles at the sheer range of “mental or emotional disability recognized by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders—Fourth Edition”. At least one complainant argued that the airline Jet Blue was at fault for –get this—“dehumanizing” Oscar. Put aside the fact that Oscar was not human to start with, lawsuits are sure to follow, perhaps lobbying (Rights for Reptiles?) as the airlines try to comply with the law requiring that they accommodate bona fide service and support animals while still servicing the passengers that they exist to transport.
George Will, that pillar of conservative journalism, with whom I do not very frequently agree, had a great commentary on this recently in the AB-J. Most airlines now require an official service and support animal registration document; it follows, inevitably, that there is apparently a flourishing trade in forged documents. Farm poultry, hedgehogs and creatures with tusks are not welcome on Delta; this is a relief to the Association of Flight Attendants (perhaps because one of its members was asked to give oxygen to a dog whose owner said it was having a panic attack). It’s terribly sad to discover that there are so many emotionally fragile and needy individuals out there, but the transportation industry and its, presumably, better-integrated other passengers should not have to clean up after or sit next to these creatures. George does have a great line having to do with the benefits of using animals in the treatment of various psycho-social aberrations. A Washington Post report indicates that “horses are used to treat sex addictions.” His comment : ”Thank you, Post, for not elaborating.” Indeed.
The title of George’s article? “ Your seat? It’s 7A, next to the snake”
This is not over, not by a long shot. Somebody is going to show up at the terminal with a hive of bees or a herd of llamas or some such thing and be incensed by the fact that they are not welcomed with open arms. You want to bring animals? Then ride in the animals’ accommodations, back in freight. And bring your pooper-scooper.
One animal who would never be asked to changed seats(partly because the problem never existed when she did), is “Sue”, the largest and most complete T-Rex ever found. Of course, she probably would not be real emotionally supportive to a human, had these clever bipeds been within her purview, actually, she’d be more likely to look upon a human as a snack (A lady appetizer, perhaps?).
Sue is being moved to new digs in the Chicago Field Museum, and will be replaced by a titanosaur, a plant-eating dinosaur that’s three times her length and whose neck will reach to the second floor balcony level. Sue will get a new location more suitable for her size. A lady-sized gallery, as it were. Crunch.
