Letters to the Editor
Janice78
Published Letters: 131 Editor's Choice: 6
-
@ Canuckistan Bob
[Read the article: Gender lessons]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"As the first serious female candidate for the presidency, Clinton got treated in pretty much exactly the same way as every other candidate: smears, hatred and loathing, vicious unfair attacks, name calling, code-word isms, etc... There is no reason to believe that she should be treated nicer because she is a girl."
Bob makes a fair point about politics being dirty, but the thing is that the attacks against Senator Clinton are just coated in misogyny, and always have been. Most political bashing happens in somewhat "gender neutral" terms, e.g. "liar." But Hillary Clinton isn't just a liar, she's a "lying bitch." And any of her failures or problems aren't just hers, they belong to all of womankind.
In other words, male candidates are seen as individuals because there are so many of them, but she "represents" all women because she's the only one. All of the establishment's problems with powerful women are focused on her and have been since the day she came on the scene in 1992's race. Her problems and achievements are a referendum on what "women" can do, which is a huge problem because "Hillary Clinton" is really a loaded term, as people have pointed out. She has so much baggage, it's almost like the first woman hasn't run for president yet. Instead, the first "Hillary Clinton" has run for president, and now we're all casting around for a "woman."
(Note: I'm not trying to imply that Hillary Clinton is not actually female or is mannish or whatever.)
-
Starting to get suspicious of the NY Times...
[Read the article: The monster snoring on the Serta]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You know, every time I read one of those lifestyle trend pieces in the Times, I'm mystified. I just don't know these people. I have what I'm guessing is a similar demographic profile as the people in these stories (middle class, white, college educated), but I'm at a loss. Do NY Times writers just have a lot of narcissistic, bored, over-privileged friends? Do I hang out with the wrong people? Do my friends all have these salacious secret lives that I'm unaware of?
-
Pets are a good "canary in the coalmine" for abuse...
[Read the article: Abuse me, abuse my pet]
[Read more letters about this article: Here](Sorry for the pun)
Anyway, I think there's a program in St. Louis that urges mail carriers, meter readers and other people who frequent neighborhoods to be on the lookout for abused or neglected animals because that's a sure sign that other abuse is happening in the household. I seem to recall that the program is considered to be a success.
-
Right on, melthough
[Read the article: How do you sell a pork chop to a woman?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]My first thought was "Why would anyone want to associate their food with nail polish?" That's just not appetizing. Whatever anyone wants to say about tricks advertisers use to appeal to women, put that aside. It's first and foremost a bad ad! Cannibalism and nail polish. Yummy! Where's Wilbur?
-
It's like women in public office...
[Read the article: Another pretty face of a generation]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I think the reason women writers with "real" stories to tell aren't more prevalent in the media is the same reason why more women don't run for public office: they're too busy living their lives and don't want to put themselves through that ringer. Women writers, it seems, often have to put a lot of their personal lives into their work because they're expected to be "relatable" and representative of all women, i.e. they have to be the "woman writer," whereas a man is just a "writer."
Much like with politics, you have to be either thick-skinned, power-hungry or just plain nuts.
-
It's about the math...
[Read the article: Older women: Sexy or scary?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I would imagine that the individual men involved find their older paramours to be interesting and beautiful, etc. However, I'm sure one of the main reasons these younger men are dating older women is that all the women in their younger age group are dating the older women's ex-husbands!
-
Quick question...
[Read the article: The next big female branded self]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"...Banks -- who catches a fair amount of flak for being narcissistic..."
Seriously, she's a model. Isn't she supposed to be narcissistic? It's kind of part of the job, no?
-
The grass is brown on every side...
[Read the article: How fast do your boobs bounce?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]It doesn't matter what size you are; bra shopping sucks. I've been liking the Gap's undies lately for price and variety, but I still have to try on every style in a couple sizes because they're all different. I don't know if it's manufacturer/human error or just a screwy sizing system or something else, but it's an arduous task. Much like finding good jeans. Or suits. Or skirts. Or t-shirts. I'm noticing a pattern here...
-
I agree, the analogy isn't quite right...
[Read the article: The superheroes of "Sex and the City"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]SATC is a little more like those Judd Apatow movies than it is like Superman, et al. It's fantasy with just an undercurrent of true emotions that make it relatable. I don't think "all women" are any more like the SATC characters than "all men" are like Mr. Apatow's overgrown man-children.
And as annoying as Carrie's materialism and narcissism can be, I choose to overlook that and focus on the positive aspects of the show. Namely, that these women love and support each other no matter what. I think that's a beautiful depiction of women, who are too often portrayed as catty, back-stabbing bitches. (as in rumors from the set of this show and Desperate Housewives. Or any project that involves an ensemble of women.) Also, despite the fact that these characters are somewhat archetypal, they also are realistic in the sense that they are flawed. Like people we all know in real life, they have good and bad qualities; they aren't wholly likeable or wholly unlikeable. For example, Samantha's focus on sex gets a little one-note at times, but she's also a tough, ambitious woman who's good at her job and loyal to her friends.
-
Re: The thrill of watching the pundits foam at the mouth...
[Read the article: Hillary's final curtain ]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I didn’t vote for Hillary because there’s a lot about her that turns me off, but I did keep cheering for her a little because it was just pissing off all the right people. Their sexism was just so gross. When Chris Matthews pinched her cheek (Pinched! Her! Cheek!), I really wanted her to respond by kicking him in the balls. "Pinch this, jackass! There’s your Hillary nutcracker!" That would have been sweet.
-
I have one word for this new Shortcake:
[Read the article: From shortcake to tart]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Bulls***.
-
If you can't have a conversation with your spouse....
[Read the article: Men, talk among yourselves]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]you probably shouldn't have gotten married.