Megan sent me the link to Angelina Jolie's editorial in the Washington Post yesterday, which I sent to Gawker (the associate editor responded, "Love her bio: 'The writer is a goodwill ambassador for the United Nations High Commission for Refugees.'"). (It should say something that my Outlook inbox is filled with unanswered emails from my colleagues, yet I'm going out of my way to tip Gawker Media.) Anyway, I didn't read the article, but it reminds me that I have to admit that I have no idea what's going on in Darfur. I know it's bad, but I don't know how bad. I guess I could read the Wikipedia article or something, but wouldn't it be a lot easier if there was just a movie about it? What's George Clooney waiting for anyway? Is it going to take ten years like it did with Rwanda? There's absolutely no excuse, considering this movie exists, and that hasn't even happened yet.
I suppose I could just read Angelina Jolie's "article," but I find it somewhat degrading when a woman who five years ago wore a vial of her husband's blood around her neck tries to teach me how the world works.