Subscribe
Previous Post
The comparison of Gillian McKeith (sometimes erroneously referred to as Karan Diwan) vs. Nigella Lawson—pointing out that Lawson smokes, drinks, eats meat and desserts and looks fab, while McKeith is a health guru who, it’s implied, looks not-so-fab—first started circulating around the internet through chain mail, and now it’s resurfacing on Facebook. But wherever you happen to come across it, I implore you: Don’t share it. It’s trash. Even if you think you’re making a smart point about why certain diets and lifestyles are b.s., you’re doing so in a way that bashes females, prizing beauty and sending messed-up messages about the importance of health. (And sorry, but your point about diets and lifestyles is not that smart.)
The newest iteration I’ve seen of the McKeith and Lawson poster looks like this:
And the original email (which referred to McKeith as Karan Diwan) contained the following photo and text:
Karan Diwan is a 51 year old TV health guru advocating a holistic approach to nutrition and health, promoting exercise, a vegetarian diet of organic fruits and vegetables. She recommends detox diets, colonic irrigation and supplements, also states that yeast is harmful, that the colour of food is nutritionally significant, and the utility of lingual and faecal examination.
Nigella Lawson is a 50 year old TV cook in Great Britain , who eats nothing but meat, butter and desserts.
I rest my case..
Both are offensive.
In both cases, it’s insinuated that attractiveness is a) the most important feature of women (above health), and b) a valid marker of someone’s overall health. They also assume that we should all be measured along the same standards of beauty (god forbid anyone actually find McKeith attractive because she doesn’t have huge breasts or the facial features that have been idealized on film and tv), and they gloss over the fact that genetics play a big role in aging and attractiveness. Sound familiar? This isn’t a far cry from the ridiculous weight and beauty standards promoted by advertising; both are aimed at whittling down a woman’s worth and making her feel that her looks are more important than anything else.
And honestly, what do we really know about what either of these women eats or does with her body? As one Facebook commenter pointed out:
Hey, they are two entirely different people! Gillian didn’t rise to fame because of her famous rich parentage and good looks. And because of this and her view on health Gillian hasn’t decided to keep her career going by filling her face full of filler and botox. Good on them both but slating one because she isn’t as sexy as the other??
Indeed, every woman is different. Chalking up one woman’s good looks to her drinking, smoking, and butter-rich diet isn’t any more constructive than all the articles claiming that it’s possible to look like an actress if you only eat kale and coconut water. Everyone’s body is different, and everyone responds differently to various foods and lifestyle choices. Dairy gives some women acne; some people swear that they can’t function well on a vegan diet.
And let’s not forget mental health: When even our friends and family are sending us damning messages about beauty, aging and health, no amount of butter OR cleansing will make us feel happier with our bodies and ourselves. So, my dear Facebook friends, please stop demonizing women for their personal choices, and stop telling your friends that their beauty is more important than your health.
its not truly offensive but does point out that an unhealthy diet (vegan/vegitarianism) doesnt help your health in any way…if you dont play close attention to replacing with supplements, to replace stuff your body gets from meats and fish you’ll age and damage your body.
we as a species require a fair mix food, one or the other on its own is detrimental to your health.
I’ll share anything I want Brianna. “Me thinks the lady doth protest too much”
Gillian McKeith is an idiot and a fraud. She doesn’t even have a real doctorate and her “academic” more often than not references non peer reviewed articles in holistic magazines. She has never published in a real peer reviewed academic journal and any1 who has requested her PhD can’t get ahold of it (thats public information btw). If you want the facts on Gillian McKeith and have a little bit of time. I suggest you read this article its very accurate:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2007/feb/12/advertising.food
Sorry, but I think the point being made by the pic is not about attractiveness and beauty, but it’s about wearing your health on your face. I think for as rude and obnoxious Gillian McKeith is about her agenda, it sure isn’t keeping her skin healthy. I have no opinion on Nigella’s way of life except it will catch up to her in the end, most likely. Everything in moderation.
Nigella is lovely… both in and out. Gillian… according to this… not so much.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2007/feb/12/advertising.food
Telling people to stop posting this image on the interwebs, eh? You must be new here.
“In both cases, it’s insinuated that attractiveness is a) the most important feature of women (above health), and b) a valid marker of someone’s overall health.”
Oh please, get a life…. and a sense of humour transplant!!! You seriously need both.
I had a good laugh from this FB post. That really was what it was meant to be, a funny witty joke. Nothing serious. I’m sure we all agree that it’s what comes outside the mouth that matters and not what goes in. After all, a healthy spirit lives in a healthy body and not the other way around.
It is true that physical attractiveness is not necessarily an indicator of health. However, symmetrical features aside, it’s clear to me that healthy people do NOT look like Gillian McKeith.
McKeith is a woman who makes much of her living on television; the hypothesis that McKeith only doesn’t look as attractive as Nigella is therefore absurd — she doubtless has consultants and beauticians on call to make her look as good as she possibly can, because to sell the vegan lifestyle she advocates, she needs to present the image of vitality.
In that first picture, she’s clearly made up to the pinnacle of the cosmetician’s art — and that’s the best that that cosmetician could achieve?? Good makeup artists can achieve miracles, so if this is the result, one can only imagine how bad McKeith looked sans help.
It’s not that her features are unattractive — of COURSE not everyone is born beautiful or handsome. It’s her dull eyes, lack of skin tone, and limp, dull hair. A look at the photo of her without makup shows dry patches, brittle hair and spots. A healthy 51-year-old simply does NOT look like that, and without even knowing who she was, the first thing I’d think upon meeting this woman would be, “This woman needs to seriously change her diet to something healthier.” To find out she’s looked upon as a dietary/health expert is extremely alarming.
I have to say, it’s hilarious how many people have told the author she’s “taking it too seriously” and then proceeded to write long, angry paragraphs about how wrong they think she is.
Just saw the latest pictures of Nigella..she has lost some weight and looks stunning..so those who are dissing her pics as photoshops need to do some research and see her in all her avatars on print..and on TV..well, if looks were not important, it wouldn’t have been a $250 billion + industry..I follow a balanced diet and it works for me…but thankfully a lot of us like a healthy looking woman instead of a wrinkly piece of flesh on a cloth-hanger that has become a fad these days..
Briana Rognlin you seem like one of those idiots trying to be vegetarian & still are fat & fatigue.
Nigella Lawson is sexy, hot, smoking & even know to cook. Men dream of such heavenly woman.
Gillian McKeith looks like a full ashtray. You are what you eat. So live with it.
wow you’re taking this way too seriously. It’s not bashing women at all. It’s just pointing out an ironic fact that nigella looks MUCH younger and has a bad diet compared to gillian. Does this mean we should eat like nigella? Not at all. You’re drawing conclusions and seeing things that aren’t even there. However the photos don’t reveal the bodies of the women. If they would we would see that nigella is overweight.
I don’t think it bashes women… it bashes GUILT!
Never mind all the feminist issues – I just think it’s funny ‘cos G Mckeith is bossy, mean and self important, I followed her dietry advice once and was suicidal with hunger…. where as Nigella is lovely, friendly, down to earth and what’s more stuffs her face! Who makes people happier?
Dear Facebook Friends,
Please DON’T STOP sharing this message. It’s indeed NOT offensive, but actually very INFORMATIVE!
all I will say is this: if you find it offensive, don’t read it. we have this little piece of paper here in the U.S. called the BILL OF RIGHTS, which makes very clear provisions for Freedom of Speech & Freedom of Press. perhaps if Ms. McKieth weren’t so busy trying to convince everyone that their basic human instincts are wrong, she would be so broadly criticized. honestly, she’s a self-important egocentric busybody HAG. & she needs to stop telling ANYONE else how to live their lives.
Have you looked at the ads on this site? If so, why are you using them? You’d rather profit from your rantings than stick to your principles? These ads clearly insinuate that attractiveness is the most important feature of women. Get off of your high horse. Women are the worst critics of other women, which drives a lot of this crap.
Have you seen the ads that appear on this site? Most of them are targeted to the idea that “attractiveness is the most important feature of women.” However, it’s women who do this to themselves, they are the biggest critics of their “sisters.”
A little education would go a long way… the survival of the species depends on the attractiveness of women… whether you like to recognize it or not. The issue lies on what different cultures regards as attractive.
I just saw this on Facebook and I liked it only because I think people shouldn’t worry so much and should eat a balanced diet rather than an extreme diet. I didn’t think of it as sexist, but I guess in a way it is mean and somewhat of a mistake to engage in these “older woman” comparisons that reinforce attitudes of superiority and me vs. you. I don’t think it’s the end of the world but generally we could all be nicer to each other.
It’s true that the differences in the women could be largely down to genetics but I wanted to make a point that another lifestyle choice that isn’t being mentioned perhaps should be. That is sun damage. I moved from up north do a place further south recently and noticed immediately that everyone looked about ten years older than my same-aged friends up north. That said, find friends and lovers who love you just the way you are and don’t flipping worry about it unless you want to be miserable your whole short life.
Briana, your analysis is on the mark but your audience is unfamiliar with feminism. Please don’t take it hard; their ignorance and meanness of course does not reflect on you, and is mostly about, well, ignorance and meanness, but also it’s clearly a backlash to the moralizing of the asceticists that we’ve all been pounded over the head with for so long only to find that they’ve been wrong about a lot of it. But that’s a point that can and should be made without objectifying women and making it all about how closely they fit the current beauty ideal. Although even if a person has no interest in being a human being or else has no clue as to the machinations and effects of the kyriarchy, the argument is still stupid, given that Nigella clearly has genetics on her side as to the current beauty ideal, as well as plenty of makeup and clever photoshopping. The fact that the pictures chosen aren’t balanced fairly as to the latter means that the point never was, even stupidly, about comparing the effects of two different diets. It always was about tearing one woman down and building another up, according to the standard of what makes men get woodies.