>>>>>I cannot imagine my life without the '60s, however. I grew up being told that I, a girl, could become president. I grew up with an abortion being available if I needed it. I grew up with African American classmates and Asian classmates (no Hispanic kids in the area) and didn't think about it. I grew up never knowing that there used to be time when the "Help Wanted" pages were divided between Males and Females. I do not think the culture of the '60s created this; but they did make this readily apparent to a kid living in the '70s. So they built on (in awkward ways) to the consciousness of the late '50s-early '60s, but it came into common culture so that even a kid born to midwest white-bread parents thought nothing of homosexuality, or a woman in business, or a black person doing anything.>>>>>

As a classic Boomer, I want to thank you for making the justification for our generation better than I could.

I graduated high school in 1968 and right now, I'm laughing my ass off, about how karma is biting us Boomers in the ass. I don't see why younger generations shouldn't turn against us as many of us rebelled. It's only logical, and they need to in order to build something of their own. Just as we did.

It takes awhile to evaluate a legacy. Oddly enough, I'm optimistic that ours will come through and be recognized a couple of generations from now.

Kennedy took us to the moon in 1969.

Many of us had a respect for education that amounted to faith that it could bring about social change. Now, it's more class-stratified than we'd like -- as university tuition soars.

I had five years of grad school for my Ph.D. from Harvard (please believe, I've mentioned the place in order to give an indication of potential costs, rather than to snoot at people: I've compared notes with a Marine DI, and we agreed that grad school was like boot camp, only with bad sherry. Total cost, $5500 in student loans, with debt service of $52 per month.

It is no bad thing to respect education that much and work hard for it. We didn't win a war that saved the world as our parents did. We didn't survive a depression as our parents did. We stopped a war with the help of other generations. We changed the face of our world until we are all sick with cultural change.

Being a crazy, narcissistic Boomer, however, I suspect some happy generation will get us well again, and then their kids will turn on them.

Personally, I haven't a problem with this, provided we continue to grow and learn.

I hate to say it, since her tone was measured in this column, but I've come to believe that Ms. Paglia is the Ann Coulter of the academic left.

Translated from French, she's marketed herself as a "sacred monster."

I don't know if we need a Sibyl vying with Cary Tennis to give odd advice on Salon.

I'm as boggled as you are.

Regardless of what we do, SOMEONE's going to criticize it and generalize about it.

What's the best thing to do when caught in a double bind? Think about it, and decide -- as independent from feedback as possible -- what you think is best to do.

Was it Davy Crockett in the movie (good grief, I'm showing my age!) who said "Be sure you're right, then go ahead"?

You may not be right, but at least you've acted on your own. I've tried to live that way, and so far, the world hasn't ended.

It all goes back to personal choice.

If you're acting on your own, another person's choice doesn't invalidate yours.

Didn't we learn that from the footbinders YET?

I don't see why feminist porn isn't a logical development from OUR BODIES, OURSELVES.

Personally, I get bogged down in erotica-vs-porn semantics, but why have none, when there should be both.

I also think that people have the right to make a decision -- whether rational or emotional -- about whether they want to read or watch it, without attacks, preening, or proclamation.

In my opinion, those three things are a distinct turnoff, which is probably WAY too much information.

I agree with you. I think what's happened is that we are increasingly about not being people, but about being brands: behold the Representative Whatever, who has to have ALL the trappings. Without ALL of them, s/he is a failure at whatever brand it is.

No one is ever thin enough, rich enough, married enough, has smart enough kids, the perfect divorce, perfect body parts, the perfect portfolio, etc. The brands, like the people who try to force themselves into those Procrustean molds, are imperfect.

As a result, instead of deriving satisfaction from what you -have- accomplished, you (or one) use what you have -not- got as a means to rip into yourself -- and that creates a "perceived marketing need" to fill in the gaps, physical, psychological, and retailing. Especially retailing and, these days, surgical tailoring.

As I see it, this holds true for men as well as women.

It's important to remember that we are more than the sum of our resumes. We don't -apply- for lives as if for jobs. We've been gifted with them, and we do the best we can.

Or we don't -- except that our market-driven culture makes like HR with the negative evaluations.