Letters to the Editor
imogen_june
Published Letters: 88 Editor's Choice: 10
-
Privileged Pregnant Teen Envy?
[Read the article: What's so wrong with a pregnancy pact?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Certainly the author's background and experience seem very different from those of the young girls from Gloucester, but why is there so much resentment towards her for having emotional and, one assumes, financial support from her family? An accident happened, and she was lucky enough to be in the position to be able to make the decision she wanted to and still carry on with her life and her ambitions. I'm sure it wasn't easy and that there were plenty of sacrifices she made along the way.
While the considerable career accomplishments she now has under her belt would be much harder for a fisherman's daughter from Gloucester to achieve, that doesn't mean they were handed to Ms. Benfer on a silver platter.
I didn't read this article as a celebration of teen pregnancy, but rather of the benefits and community that can come from other women and moms supporting each other. I imagine that in lamenting her lost chance to parent alongside her close friends, she's thinking more about the fact that she got to the party ahead of them, not wishing they'd all gotten knocked up along with her.
-
Filing for Custody
[Read the article: What's so wrong with a pregnancy pact?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Regarding ideefixee's comments, I got the impression that Benfer filed for sole custody for her daughter for reasons having to do with the father's drunk driving, a gun thrown on the lawn during an argument, and his girlfriend's ex-husband's visit from prison. Not because he was a Baptist Republican roofer. She wasn't seeking to end visitation, just control it, and thank goodness! That's what I call responsible parenting.
http://www.legalaffairs.org/issues/July-August-2002/story_benfer_julaug2002.msp
Also, I thought Phoebelou made excellent points about mothers in their 20s and 30s receiving freely given uncompensated childcare help from their own mothers, as well as occasional financial help from their families for things like down payments and even the grandchildren's education. Nobody judges these women the way they do the so-called spoiled and entitled teen mother who has her family's support. I think there is indeed a Puritan sense of thinking these girls deserve to suffer for making a mistake of a sexually based nature.
I do agree with others that the connection between the Gloucester story and Benfer's own experience could have been more clearly drawn. As it currently stands, while I very much enjoyed the content of this essay in itself, the connection to its jumping-off point of the current event story felt tenuous, and I can see why some are feeling unsettled by the lack of real parallel between the situations of those girls and that of this author.
-
Now What?
[Read the article: I survived -- now how do I survive my survival?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]It sounds to me like you are wanting to make some big changes to make the most out of your life -- an antidote to that "is that all there is?" feeling -- but for entirely valid and understandable reasons, you don't have a) the energy or b) the financial freedom.
I like the suggestion of others to start small -- taking one easy weekend class, or planning one manageable vacation, anything to add something new to your everyday life. Those little changes can make a big difference.
It also sounds like you might be taking an overly self-defeatist attitude about finding new work or taking time off. Those options might be more attainable than you think ... or maybe not, but don't rule out the possibility of taking tiny steps towards them, at least glancing at some job listings, or brainstorming ways to get a sabbatical. It seems like you may have some all-or-nothing thinking going on ("nobody would want to hire a middle-aged cancer survivor") that simply isn't accurate, however understandable it may be.
And if you really don't have the energy to make any changes right now ... is that so bad? I wonder if some of your current ennui is the simple coming-to-terms with the fact that this IS all there is. No matter how fabulous and fulfilling our lives, they do end sooner or later, and being faced with that reality can be pretty depressing. Sometimes I think the only really effective way to go on is a healthy dose of denial.
-
@Aesehpe
[Read the article: Men (and women!) at work]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You may be a linguist, but you would do poorly on the analogy portion of a standardized test. "Get your ass over here" is a metonymy, in which the part (ass) signifies the whole (person). The problem with your comparison is that while we all have asses, not all of us have a penis. Therefore, "men working" is inherently exclusive of half the human population that could potentially be part of that workforce.
I don't personally have a big problem with these leftover expressions from the days when women really were not included in the groups described. However, I do think that changes like these create subtle, positive shifts in the public perception of the genderization of work. (This cuts both ways, btw -- think of a profession such as nursing. No signs are involved, but it's still strongly associated as a job held by women.)
It's not so much that we think about sexism or women working when we see a "Workers Ahead Sign," it's that we are more likely to connect an image of men holding the given job when we see the "Men Working" message. Without that inaccurate specifier in the statement, those out-of-date associations can slowly begin to erode.
-
Not the biggest issue
[Read the article: Men (and women!) at work]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]And perhaps it was going overboard to make a point of replacing those particular signs, but I really don't get why some are so offended by the concept of choosing inclusive over exclusive language in public signage.
We're not talking about the more whimsical fringe revisions such as "womyn," here. Does "Workers Ahead" (or "construction," or whatever) signify such a great culture loss when selected in favor of "Men Working"? What is it that is so outrageous about choosing accurate language that deserves eye-rolling, snarky put-downs, the heaving of sighs, and dismissive comments about those darn feminists?
If the standard term were "White Men Working," would anyone question the superiority of alternate phrasing? Somehow I doubt it.