Letters to the Editor

• More comments (3)

  [Read the article: Real inconvenient truths]
  [Read more letters about this article: Here]

  Pedestrian 0: You didn't write to me, but I want to respond to this --

  "Thank you for throwing a bomb into the global warming "debate," where Stalinist self-censorship and coercion has surpassed the outrageous levels of the date-rape panic from the 1990s. I see the lockstep conformity of much of the left hasn't changed in a decade and a half."

  Personally I agree with all the people who are glad to have Camille Paglia around. I like reading her, I like her style, and I have been reading her since she came on the scene (and when she was at Salon in the mid-to-late 1990s). I used to write her emails in response to her articles then, too, when Salon didn't have an open forum like this. Often I disagreed with her. Disagreeing with somebody is quite different from trying to get them censored. I don't want Paglia censored, but I do think she should substantiate her statements better because it's better writing. Her global warming arguments are insubstantial and she deserves criticism for them. This isn't about "Stalinist coercion," at least not anything I have seen in this message forum. The worst people have done is to threaten to not renew their Salon subscription....scary Stalinist stuff, there. I enjoyed her take on the sexism/feminism debate and specifically remember her remarks about date-rape, which were a much-needed dose of pragmatism and reality, even if she did skate along the edge a bit. I like iconoclasts, even the ones against the sides I am in favor of. They sharpen people's games, make them work harder. But the iconoclasts need to sharpen their games too. Certainly Paglia does.

  Permalink Sunday, April 15, 2007 03:59 PM