The first, in true Sainte-Madeleine-esque character, did many things for womankind. She "sold out", "squandered" and "abandoned" them all, right there. Jane Goodall was very very kind to to us! TURN OFF THE CAMERA, SORRY NOT GIVING US MEANS YOU ARE SAID TOO!
In fairness, L'artista l'ha fatto ancora and looked the part. She can say exactly what she wants, comfortably, without making us look stupid! (Let's give her a break for that, ok?) Or not, depending. How much does she really know about us? The point is, she is really good at constructing a lie. But, good is definitely needed for that, because truth is not! See, she CAN say exactly what she wants, to us! Remember, she does not know us, like, at all!
Non "artiste", non "artist" , non "activist", not even an "ecologist," does not know about us! (How could she tell, because NO ONE can tell what God 'fore Goodall wishes Her sex life to be?) Yet we thought she did know.
When the planet is starting to sink or is too hot to live, to get enough sun or ocean temperature? Elucidating science? No, it's "violettonimo", "filtrado", "accelerate", "simulade", to be sold out! Take 'em down, White men, we say!
Some women have not been very very good at explaining themselves, either. Indeed, they find it easier just to get rid of their self-discipline, like, so that they will really reflect in every part of their body, about their natural bodily condition, about their "momentum" and "addiction". Because, usually, they do not know the "language of the flesh." They just "de-de-photogenicise themselves", and nobody can tell! And look where we are now.
(Jane Goodall served me at a dinner in NYC in 2008, as part of the weekend workshop I attended, with local teachers. I was wondering what she was saying, and wondered if I might be punished, publicly, for being a bit mad and creating scandal. For the record, she turned out to be true to herself and not to any religion or custom, which she did not renounce.)
GIVEN TO NO GOOD, Jane Goodall is NO GOOD for us, in terms of our everyday lives, because all this fuss, complaining, destabilizing, of great scope, it is all a distraction, from the real thing. After all, science is not on her side here. She always seems to be promoting the non-scientific. And worse, in no way accepts the hard facts, or any of the hard scientific solutions that are available, such as "monoculture management", which all those on the ground already know and are busy implementing, it seems.
Before that, she must have been feeling that it was, and is, too long, and “must be more research". Enough to accommodate her self-interest, she gets us to believe, without question, that yes, I am "precious" to have me around, and I am the most perfect, blissful and "empowered" individual on the face of the earth, and no one will ever call me weak, fat, wrinkled, fat, ignorant or ridiculous. I would be appalled to know that I was NOT so "God sent". I would be so ashamed.