Really. Really seriously.

Because, yes, I can imagine how Briston Palin would be trashed for appearing in Playboy. And she'd be trashed hardest right her at Salon.

If you think for one moment the Right would touch the subject (and futher tarnish media-darling-failed-governor Sarah Palin), you're wrong as wrong can be. If you think liberal men would attack her for essentially refuting her mother's value system, you're wrong again. The stand up comics might get a few laughs out of it but men, for the record, don't usually diss the women willing to serve as sex fantasies for them; quite the opposite, usually.

The only people who would seriously taunt and shame and malign Bristol would be the very women who write for Broadsheet. And they would ream her. Every single female writing for this site would find a way to produce an article on it, trashing her and snickering at her mercilessly and not letting the subject go for weeks. Because Salon is ruthless, absolutely merciless when it comes to women of a different ideological background.

Really, really stupid "editorial." A non-think piece.

Maybe the best image that has ever accompanied an article on this site.

I don't often agree with you, but you really nailed this. How can a rich, powerful celebrity be exploited by a cover shoot she chose to participate in?

If this were some anonymous model or new starlet, sure I could see her lacking the authority to control the shoot. But Rihanna? And what's with the tunnel vision that fails to see the erotic interest women as well as men have in BDSM? Or how such an image could appeal to both sexes? How can someone be a cultural critic when so unaware of current cultural trends?

The whole article is just stupid. I get the feeling Berman actually considers herself forward thinking (perhaps even daring) for considering the image as a message of liberation and power.

I appreciate it. Sorry to jump on a writer who's work you often like. Her work published here really rubs me the wrong way, but it's just a personal opinion.

Not just pot, but "skunk" (ew, tough name to make it sound more "street" like "crack!). Apparantly it's superpotent pot, never heard of it. Is it like hash? Anyway, if it's more potent than average pot, shouldn't her son have been more docile when on it? Pot is not a drug that creates aggression or antagonism. Though it can induce paranoia. But people who are suffering pot paranoia don't respond violently.

Obviously there must have been other issues, and they were probably anger issues based on a self-centered parent (two perhaps, since the husband sides with the wife) using the kid from birth onward for source material. What do assholes like Meyrson do when the kids are driven away by her toxic behavior and there's no source material left? Turn on the husband I guess, and ride that subject until she's gone through divorce court.

As with Anne Lamott, I hope the kid gets a good attorney and sues her ass for half of all profits made off him.

Is it some male chauvinist cabal that keeps promoting brain dead female journalists to the achor positions? There are so many great female journalists. Chritiane Amanpour comes to mind (though its unlikely anyone could keep her at a desk when she wants to be searching the globe for stories).

Dianne Sawyer looks smart, with those cat eyes. And she has that deep, traditional newscaster's voice rather than a chirpy daytime t.v. sound. But she hasn't a brain in her head. She is embarrassing to watch.

So surely she will fail as Katie Couric failed, and everyone can decide that women really aren't fit to anchor the news. It's really airhead news show celebrities who aren't fit. There are plenty of smart, dedicated women journalists who are.

To clarify, I was referencing people like NP or NR who whatever his/her initials are. I'm not sure I'd read your posts (which I'm not saying as a dig; just a lot of stuff written on this thread). I do find demonization of pot a clearly conservative/right wing position. And one can hold a right-wing position on one specific topic contrary to one's other positions (look at certain feminist ideologues who are liberal and even socialist but who's sexual ideology is clearly Victorian).

But I have no idea whether you demonized pot or not.