Letters posted here are associated with the following Salon Premium Member:
Published Letters: 74
Editor's Choice: 7
It isn't enough to ask for an open and honest peace? It must contain every word that a hostile listener wants to hear uttered? Must every world leader then pay lip service to every petty complaint? Would those that so staunchly decry any aspirations of peace in the middle east have something else to offer aside from thorny malcontent or utter distrust?
Saggy, were you at the camp? Were you there to witness and draw "implications"? Somehow, I strongly believe you were not, and yet you so easily seek to attack the speaker. I hope your anger is assuaged soon.
How ugly and small a life must be to take the opportunity to comment on a memorium in such a way. Elephantman would be so proud.
There are a lot of judges in the comments. I was going to post about how incensed I was at the implication that it is a male phenomena to direct the vitriol towards the non-parents. Then I started reading the comments, and I am little more upset at the reactions people have, on both sides of the argument: One side claiming the other has no idea of what being a parent is because they don't have kids, vs. the otherside saying "DON'T YOU FREAKIN DARE TELL ME HOW TO LIVE MY FREAKIN LIFE."
wow. Both sides of this coin would benefit from accepting that the other has the right to their opinion, and leave it at that.
If a person asks a doctor for their opinion, and then does not like the opinion of the doctor, how can that person become upset at the doctor for their opinion? Now if the same person goes to a doctor to ask the doctor to perform the operation, and the doctor declines to conduct the procedure, can you really get upset at the doctor for declining?
Setting aside the age and reason given by the doctor, do you really want a doctor that did not initially agree with the idea of surgery to conduct that same surgery? I wouldn't.
On the subject of the original article, I do not agree with the point made by quoting the Polly Vernon article. More specifically the where Mz. Vernon claims men "...often respond by becoming 'aggressive, sneering ... Perhaps the idea that there are women at large who are not actively pursuing their sperm is an out-and-out affront to a certain kind of man. The same men who have spent years believing that all women secretly want to trap them into commitment and fatherhood, probably.'"
Really? Men aren't allowed to not want children? Men are the ones pushing this concept of "evil, unnatural women that want to be non-parents"? Men are the sole instigators of this? This is what I object to, it is not just men, and the contention that it is detracts from the whole of the article.
Saying something where you think it was private, and then uttering an non-apology for the incident only confirms what people think about you.
The reasons why this does matter:
1) "Rusty" made the racist remark on his facebook site, tacitly agreeing that the comment described a facet of his life.
2) His apology, wasn't. He was only sorry if someone was offended by his remark, he wasn't sorry he uttered it. Or if he was, he never mentioned that, AND he furthere attempted to dissemble the apology by implying that Michelle Obama made the statement prior.
3) That he had held positions of authority in the Republican party would not have made mention were it not for position #4.
4) Michelle Obama is the President's wife. By association, that comment is directed at the office of the President. This association therfore categorizies this thoughtless comment about a gorilla as one more incomprehensibly moronic statements from Republicans that cannot handle serving under a Democratic president.
This is the sort of response that people like O'Reilly, Limbaugh, Hannity, and Beck inspire. The brash, tasteless, factless nature of these "entertainers" emboldens the less critical to utter these horrible ideas. Their "schticks" are the anecdotal evidence that people unaccustomed to thinking for themselves use to justify Rascism and Ignorance. I am not saying that the Right has a lock on damaging schticks, but since the article highlights a Republican setting the example, it makes sense to look at where they might get justification from.