selfies

That's where I disagree, roseq. I don't agree that just anything that raises funds for charity is good by definition.

I'm happy to admit that my "preciousness" on the current makeupless campaign is a minority view, and the issue is perhaps not very important however one feels about it, though I was rather startled to hear one person on the radio saying that women without makeup are seen as vulnerable; if that's true I've been vulnerable all my life without ever noticing.

By the way, one's attitude being called precious made me think of Precious Rambotswe in The No.1 Ladies' Detective Agency. I rather like that association

Oh for goodness sake Bags! You ^ can't^ criticise this. It just doesn't make sense!

I agree, ffinn, but I don't always like the tone of the opportunity enhancement. I am not ashamed of this feeling. It is just there and I am voicing it here.

RQ I interpreted your comment
"I wish some people would stop being so precious about this - it is raising money for a good cause and that cannot be a bad thing"
as a suggestion that those on GN who had criticised the young women who claimed that going without make-up was a brave thing to do, were being 'precious', whatever that means, and that they shouldn't have expressed that opinion.
Sorry if I got it wrong.

Makes sense to me, jings.

And to a few other people, not necessarily on gransnet.

I criticise it because I have a thirteen year old daughter who doesn't feel she can go to school without make-up. That's crazy and the tone of this campaign only makes that kind of pressure on young girls and women worse than it already is.

Why bother? How can raising money for cancer research be anything but good? It is most likely just a passing idea that someone had and ran with, without giving it much thought. And it's doing very well.

Simple as that.

Agreed, Bags, but sometimes we're all so busy and wrapped up in our own lives that a gentle poke in the wallet doesn't come amiss. Thinking of children in need, comic relief, sports relief - they would never raise the funds they do without a high profile campaign. I know a lot of people make regular donations to their chosen charities anyway - this is just a chance to do a bit of profile-raising, isn't it?

There is something wrong with the school, if all the thirteen year olds are wearing makeup.

(Is she really thirteen already. Time flies)

jings, it's a mere matter of principle with me. Let's pass on my objections to this particular selfie thing; count me as downtrodden and beaten on that argument. And the wrong I perceive is not such a big wrong perhaps.

The principle remains: the end (whatever it happens to be, even a good end/goal) does not always justify the means is what I'm saying. If the means of achieving something good are wrong, then we should not use those means. It's a perfectly good principle to start from and to work with. That is all I'm doing.

mere should be in inverted commas to denote sarcasm

People are free to post their makeupless selfies if they want to. Equally, I'm free to voice my objections about the campaign.

Now I need to shove a savoury bread pudding in the oven.

I agree with you on the 'tone' of opportunistic marketing ploys, B. I don't particularly like it either. However, the rise in social media and how it is used is raising awareness. I think there can be no doubt about that. I suppose it amounts to providing more choice in how funds are raised.

Is more choice needed, I wonder?

You don't need to be "downtrodden and beaten"! Stop piling it on Lady!

I think there just needs to be more funds finn.

It was said lightheartedly, Lady Jings.

Yes, the pud's in t'oven.

I read somewhere that the selfie social media campaign was initiated by a member of the public and not by the cancer charity who were surprised by the big jump in donations.

I can see the logic in that women who wear lots of makeup normally may feel 'defenceless' without it ie vulnerable. But I think makeup should be totally banned in school, and it is sad that young girls feel pressurised into wearing it.

I am a bit concerned. On FB men have started to wrap their faces up with cellotape and then take selfies - for the same cause apparently. This could be dangerous particularly if children pick up with the same idea.

Not for any cause, according to this:

www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2585163/Sellotape-Selfies-Sellofies-viral-Now-people-wrapping-faces-clear-tape-resemble-grotesque-ogres.html

This is just so stupid, not to mention dangerous.

CRUK have announced over 2 million pounds have been raised as a result of the selfie campaign, so I say brilliant. That's 2 million quid they probably wouldn't have had otherwise.

Why on earth would you cover your face and hair in Sellotape? Stupid and painful.

Because people are stupid penguin that's why! Just think, all these stupid people are voters..... makes ya think huh?