Letters to the Editor
J.C. Miller
Published Letters: 322 Editor's Choice: 34
-
unwittingly
[Read the article: Quote of the day]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I would like to suggest that not only does Ms. C-F’s point hold up quite well, but that the letters in this thread have, if anything, unwittingly tended to strengthen it.
The antics of the male stars alluded to are treated as such – antics - by the media, with some apparent mixture of disapproval, amusement, and admiration. The drug use that often drives those behaviors is at most met with concern or alarm and is generally to some extent normalized.
Owen Wilson apparently attempted to seriously harm or kill himself, which typically indicates a significantly disturbed mood. Rather than being labeled and denigrated, he was treated with respect and sympathy. Ms. Spears, as far as we know, has not placed herself or others at risk of serious harm.
The point melthough made and that was glossed over in the thread is that Michael Jackson seems to be the exception to prove the rule – he’s effeminate, and when he’s humiliated and pathologized, as Ms. Spears is, often his effeminate qualities are the reason he’s targeted.
The point that seems to be raised in the excerpt from Jezebel, and missed in most of the posts here, is that unlike public males who engage in deviant behavior, Ms. Spears has been persistently pathologized, not in a sympathetic way, not because her behaviors are harmful to others, but in ways that appear aggressive and gratuitous, as in some of the letters here.
Her deviance is particularly intolerable for patriarchy and its maintenance of accepted gender roles: freeing her sexual behavior from what is prescribed; eliciting homophobia by shearing her head; showing ambivalence about the level of care expected that her gender provide to the offspring produced by matings; and in each case eliciting fears of autonomy.
-
Dear Heather,
[Read the article: I Like to Watch]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Speaking of bosses, I do wish you would write something on that new reality/game show, “Top Crime Boss!” that’s been ALL OVER the rest of the media.
Like, where do they find contestants with names like “Mitt” and “Barack”?
-
Here’s a piece
[Read the article: Of Valentine's jinxes and packaged gnocchi ]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]that will stand the test of time, artfully written to work on a number of levels, and RT should feel nothing but strong, brave and accomplished about taking the risk to share it.
She finally found someone with whom she could feel naturally and effortlessly “good enough”, unconditionally appreciated for who she is, without fear of disapproval, and this guy, this nurturing male, allowed her to rework in his kitchen the needs that went unmet in her childhood. Happy ending.
Now, RT, just don’t forget to stop at some point experiencing him as your mother.
-
Sex
[Read the article: Holy hot marital sex!]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]is what is real, something known directly from experience. The rest is largely a bad dream, projected onto the mind of that 15 year old girl, a dream that won’t be over until we choose to wake up. Potentially, free of constructed and functional constraints, shame, control, contracts, and fears, sex moves us toward relatedness, integration, and safety. The “forced” trend that Ms. Lloyd observes is tacit recognition that the transcendent power of sex is fundamentally blocked by marriage, religion and other expressions of patriarchy.
-
Powerful and damning roundup,
[Read the article: Various items]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]but really, ultimately, is Mr. Obama’s reaction – on the order of “I DO SO worship U.S. General Jesus and His Flag!” - much less confirmatory of prospects for real change than the original smear?
-
“ . . . like the beautiful black mommy I never had.”
[Read the article: I Like to Watch]
[Read more letters about this article: Here];-)
-
In further praise of cowardice
[Read the article: Obama shows that dismissing slimy right-wing attacks is not difficult]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]What Mr. Obama actually said in response to the accusations of lack of patriotism, was this, referring to republicans: “A party that presided over a war in which our troops did not get the body armor they needed, or were sending troops over who were untrained because of poor planning, or are not fulfilling the veterans' benefits that these troops need when they come home, or are undermining our Constitution with warrantless wiretaps that are unnecessary?” In a correctional treatment setting, this type of evasive defense, regardless of its truth, might accurately be termed “shifting blame and focus” and treated as a criminal thinking error. In other contexts, it might be termed “finger pointing” or simply “juvenile”. Regardless of how it is termed, it expresses an inability or unwillingness to directly confront the issue, namely, whether Mr. Obama will allow a superficial and jingoistic “patriotism” to be a legitimate issue. All that seems missing here is an image of Mr. Obama, arm outstretched and finger pointed at his bullies, with his trauma-bonded supporters behind him mutually assuring each other that “He sure showed them didn’t he?”
Then this: "The way I will respond to it [the charge of being unpatriotic] is with the truth: [followed by the monumentally self-degrading and venal lie] that I owe everything I am to this country," he said. Everything I am to this country.
And finally this: "Whenever I'm in the United States Senate, I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America," Obama frequently tells voters. "I've been going to the same church for 20 years, praising Jesus," he adds. Apparently he does not also add, “Now vote for me.” or as Daniel Plainview approximately put it after humiliating and selling himself to pastor Eli, “Now give me my pipeline.”