Letters to the Editor
Published Letters: 15 Editor's Choice: 3
-
What's HIS major selling point?
[Read the article: Scary screeds about Maureen Dowd, written by threatened men]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You might find a guy willing to marry you after this point, but it's probably going to be harder because one of your major selling points--your fertility--is gone.
Why in the world would I want to spend the rest of my life with someone who only chose me based on my ability to reproduce, and what sort of a life would that be?
-
This is so stupid
[Read the article: A man's right to choose, take three]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The right to abortion is, in its simplest form, the right to decide whether or not you want to be pregnant. Got that? Not whether you want to have a baby, raise a baby, or give a baby up for adoption after you have it. Those concerns may be key determinants in why you don't want to be pregnant, but they're irrelevant to the central question of a woman's personal bodily integrity, which is ultimately her right and her responsibility. So, yeah, since men have no say in the choice they should not have to support it financially. Congratulations, guys - you don't have to pay fetus support.
But this whole argument about whether a man should be allowed to disavow responsibility for a born child simply because he never wanted it in the first place is ridiculous. Of course he's responsible. So is she. The kid's there and it needs to be taken care of, whether it was wanted by both parents or not. If an unwilling father can walk away from his responsibilities when a child is one day old, what's to stop him from walking away when the kid's five? Or ten? Or fifteen? His word? Please.
What is so sad and reprehensible about this whole argument is the all-too-apparent willingness on the part of so many men to screw over a little kid - their little kid - out of spite over not being able to dictate whether or not their girlfriend should remain pregnant. Maybe she did lie. So what? These guys may indeed relish the idea of the scheming ex girlfriend struggling with single parenthood in a coldwater flat above a diner somewhere, but, in the end, it's the child who suffers.
If Dalton Conley thinks that's an okay state of affairs, then it sounds to me like his ex made a smart choice. For more reasons than she may have thought.
-
Nonsense
[Read the article: A man's right to choose, take three]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Chanting about "women's bodies" is a nice rhetorical device to silence the opposition, but the reality is that women have abortions because they don't want to become mothers, not because of some affront to their bodily integrity.
both parents are responsible for decisions that affect its life. Who raises it. Who cares for it. Who supports it. Neither party should be permitted to walk away from his or her financial responsibility without the express consent of the other.
She wants to give it up for adoption and he doesn't? Fine - he can keep it and she can pay child support. There's your equality.
-
and by the way
[Read the article: A man's right to choose, take three]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]This
Most men are so "famished" they take what they can get when they can get it, and often dont think things through, to their own detriment. And as to the phraise, "thinking with your dick", I think we should all refer to women who reach age 30 and contract baby fever as , "thinking with their wombs."
has to be just about the stupidest thing I have ever read on this site.
-
My Question (okay, questionS):
[Read the article: Acting dumb to woo Prince Charming]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Who are these men? Who are these "typical" guys who are so insecure, so intimidated, so locked into their rigid little gender roles that the very notion of feminine achievement leaves them quivering in a corner?
And why would any self-respecting, intelligent, professional woman want to end up with one of them in the first place? Honestly, did anyone ever stop to think that maybe marriage rates for women in this demographic are dropping because SMART WOMEN MAY NOT WANT TO MARRY STUPID GUYS?
This is just another one of those hysterical predictions of familial Armageddon that sweeps through the national zeitgeist every couple of years. Much like that now-discredited terrorism study that sent young women scrambling for the altar for fear their chances at marriage would plummet to zero if they waited until after their thirtieth birthday to tie the knot. And it's tremendously disappointing to see someone like Maureen Dowd getting swept up in it - particularly if you look behind the statistics, as I have, and discover that the so-called "groundbreaking" research she cites in her article was actually conducted on undergraduate students in the 18-22 year age range, whose sum total experience with the opposite sex was likely limited to a few body shots at the frat house kegger.
These are the men we are weeping and gnashing our teeth over?
-
Why is it
[Read the article: Marrying for love or money?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]that whenever this type of column, research study, article, or whatever is foisted upon the world it is always spun as only a problem for women?
Just once I'd like to read the following headline: "Uneducated men twice as likely to be ignored by intelligent women, die alone, and be eaten by Alsatian!"
So accomplished women don't want to marry non-accomplished men. Why is this a bad thing only for the women in the equation and not for the men? Because the men will go elsewhere and settle for less than their intellectual equals? Does that mean we're missing out on something?
That lonely, desperate guy who is so threatened by female accomplishment he'd prefer to mail-order a bride from Khazikstan doesn't sound like much of a prize himself. Something tells me someone's dodged a bullet here, and it sure as hell ain't him.
-
Uh, yes, I did
[Read the article: Marrying for love or money?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]and the letters that followed. My comment was in response to both.