Letters posted here are associated with the following Salon Premium Member:

Anony2

Published Letters: 645
Editor's Choice: 18

Friday, October 5, 2007 02:30 PM
Original article: Plastic mommies

to clarify

Everytime I hear women get huffy and declare they "did it for themselves", it makes "them" right. "They" win then.

The "they" was meant to mean all those critiques from people, male or female or media.

Friday, October 5, 2007 03:30 PM
Original article: Plastic mommies

tit for tat

Why would someone's husband not find them sexy after having children?

What is the husband doing (surgically) to make them more "sexy" to the wife?

Why is it that women's bodies are deemed unsexy and needing of surgical intervention, and not men's? I am not being sarcastic here - I would really like to know why this is.

I can tell you, as a woman, men's bodies are not as "pretty" when they get older as when they were 25, but somehow that doesn't make them less "sexy".

Why aren't men running out to get that belly and butt and pecs and scrotum and penis tweaked?

As far as I can see - only women (as a force) feel they must do that to be "sexy"

Monday, October 8, 2007 01:36 PM

Don't waste time or money.

The audience for intelligent thought provoking interesting movies is not going to spend the time or money going to the theater to see something that will waste both.

It doesn't matter what gender the lead is - the audience for that kind of a movie is not going to pay for junk or something poorly rehashed or cartoon like.

The audience for the crap movie with lots of action and little plot will certainly support movies with female leads - expecially if they are put in sexual scenes and there is lots of boobage eye candy. Best though is male muscle leads with booylicious females for plot devices and gratuitous sex.

I guess the studio has just decided on which audience they are going after.

Tuesday, October 9, 2007 09:36 AM

Just Republicans?

"Dumb as Hell" doesn't just seem to be a Republican preferred trait.

Unfortunately, it seems an American preference.

Americans vote in these people - the Republican party just knows and caters to the intended audience better than any other party.

Tuesday, October 9, 2007 04:33 PM

Who values old women? (or old men for that matter)

I don't see it when I look at my own mom - 69 and still working.

Not full time anymore - she can't take it. But old nurses are pushed out, which is what happened to her. So, she fills in here and there and collects social security and pays her mortgage.

Retirement? You know, not the kind where you shrivel up on the rocking chair, but the kind where you get to have some leisure to do hobbies, time for family, live a little more healthily? Not in her future, nor in mine either.

I don't think it is a reality for most people.

And I most definately do not see older people valued - especially women. Who seem to start on the devaluation track after 35.

How many of us can really work as Walmart greeters anyhow?

Tuesday, October 16, 2007 09:13 AM

Draft and a War Tax

That is what this country needs, and has needed since the beginning of the Iraq thing.

Nothing like a tax to pay for the "advventures" and a (universal) draft to people it to help Americans really think about what they stand for.

Tuesday, October 16, 2007 09:38 AM

destroy the village to save the village

AKA Smith - I am with you: the draft is a form of slavery, I never supported this war and a lot of the things I said would happen have - and the people who called me tree hugging liberal terrorist aiding sadam lover for those statements, have decided to pretend there is no war going on.

I do not want to pay for it out of my paycheque (but we all will in the future) and I do not want my family or the young people I know to pay for it physically.

However - what is going to wake of the majority of Americans who used to crow over it and now try and act like it doesn't exist?

Perhaps if they got a war tax or saw their children sent off - maybe that would make them take a stand?

Perhaps we do it as a vote - all those who support the war get a tax increase and they are liable for a draft. Tally the vote and see where America stands on this travesty.

Tuesday, October 16, 2007 09:59 AM

face value

My comment about doing it by vote was sarcastic - I believe that the majority of Americans would not support this war if they were impacted personally (and sooner than later) by it.

Excluding those of us who have strong sense of commitment to ideals, I believe the majority of Americans are fairly shallow and were excited by all the rah rah chain rattling early on, but now prefer to ignore it as much as possible.

As far as standing together or falling? I believe that Americans have the right to refuse the draft. We have the right to refuse wrongful laws. That may mean a price is paid, but ultimately, wrongful laws have been changed, not by the people who merely go along because that is what America expects, but by those who take a stand and say that is not what America stands for.

If everyone got hit by a 2% war tax on their next pay cheque - Americans would demand something be done - instead America floats along and only pays attention when forced to.

Most Active Letters Threads

682

Obama's exceedingly familiar justifications for escalation

The "new" approach to Afghanistan touted by White House officials seems quite old
543

The crazy, irrational beliefs of Muslims

Tom Friedman explains the real problem: stupid Muslims think the U.S. is about war and aggression.
440

The face of rotted Washington

Evan Bayh demands more debt-financed war - fought by others - while boasting that he's a stern "deficit hawk."
326

The commendably missing element from Obama's speech

There was no pretense that human rights is our goal, or the likely outcome, in escalating the war
274

Yes, it's Obama's war now

An uninspiring speech sells a dubious policy, but progressives who feel betrayed have only themselves to blame

View all »

Letters Help

Currently in Salon