Letters to the Editor
leftychris
Published Letters: 354 Editor's Choice: 4
-
@bradylord
[Read the article: Binge-drinking problem? Blame Amy Winehouse! ]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I've read your posts on this thread and frankly, I'm mystified. You seem to see Augustus as some patriarchal dictator who implemented terrible, misogynistic social policies that have haunted us to this day. You wrote:
Marriage as we know it in the West has only been since Augustus.
Prior to that, men openly had wives, concubines, slaves they fucked, both male and female, etc., etc. Abortion was an extremely popular and welcomed practice. The form of marriage we take for granted, i.e., Monogomous, sexually repressed, anti-gay, anti abortion, masturbation is a sin, etc., was initiated by Augustus to get his armies repopulated. This is not opinion, it is fact according to antiquity scholars.
So then, men living with wives, concubines, and slaves of both genders that they fucked was somehow NOT a patriarchal arrangement? But the monogamous institution that succeeded it WAS patriarchal, even though it arguably benefited women in many ways as compared to the old arrangements? And somehow the situation before Augustus, with men owning slaves, having concubines, and fucking everything in sight, was preferable to the monogamy that came later, because the latter was sexually repressed, anti-gay, anti-abortion, etc? Men fucking their slaves--that is, human beings that they owned and treated like property--was more admirable than enforced monogamy and the sexual modesty (no matter how hypocritical) that accompanied it? What?! Do you honestly think that?
Do you see Augustus as a good guy or bad guy? Do you prefer the social arrangements that preceded him or that he implemented? (Assuming, for the sake of argument, that your historical interpretation is correct, which it's not.)
Finally, you wrote that infanticide was "super popular" among the Romans before Augustus presumably outlawed it, and tacked on, "Just so you know." Coming, as it did, right on the heels of your apparent vicious criticism of Augustus as a tyrant who implemented repressive social policies, are we to interpret this to mean that you think banning infanticide was a BAD thing? Or do you just have serious problems with consistency, argumentative structure, clear and concise language, and logical flow?
I'm stumped, I must confess.
-
Tried & True Method
[Read the article: Bringin' home the bacon, but no boyfriend]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"Women are encountering forms of hostility they weren't prepared to meet, and are trying to figure out how to balance pride in their accomplishments against their perceived need to bolster the egos of the men they date," writes the Times' Alex Williams.
Well, they could fake orgasms, tell their male partners that they're well-endowed, and tell them that they're good in bed. It's almost guaranteed to work every time!
Men are simple. Men are pigs.
-
Two Thoughts
[Read the article: Bringin' home the bacon, but no boyfriend]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]First, are these studies the current version of the much-ballyhooed "studies" from the 80s that puported to show that a single or divorced professional woman over the age of 35 had a greater chance of dying in a terrorist attack than she did of getting married? You know, those studies that caused a mini-tempest and much hand-wringing among feminists and the traditional "family values" crowd, only to be later discredited?
Also,
according to a recent analysis of 2005 census data ... 53 percent of women employed full time in their 20s were college graduates, compared with 38 percent of men
This is only part of a troubling long-term trend: The decline of male performance in education at all levels, and the rapid withering of the male presence in higher education. Already we're very close to a 60:40 female/male gender ratio in tertiary education nationwide (among students and graduates), which is greatly disproportionate given that the male population of the key college-age demographic is larger than the corresponding female population. If current trends continue we'll reach a point where 2/3 of students and graduates of higher education are female, and we'll reach that point much sooner than most people think. Colleges and universities have dismissed any proposal of affirmative action for males as anathema, targeted recruiting of males has shown few benefits, and the numbers of males applying to tertiary schools continues to drop, at the very least on a relative basis (and probably on an absolute basis too). The number of males who meet college acceptance standards appears to be shrinking on an annual basis, and those who do go to college suffer greater performance problems than females, with a much higher dropout rate. Females now also comprise a sizable majority of graduate school students and have attained parity or very near-parity nationwide in many or most professional schools, such as law and medicine, and will most likely become absolute majorities in them very soon.
None of that should be construed as criticism of the superb performance of females and the great progress they've made in academia and the professional academies. Good for them, absolutely! From a female perspective, there is much good news to celebrate in higher education, or education in general. But for males, the news is pretty bleak, and the flat denials that there is a problem at all (a la Kim Gandy of NOW) do nothing to help alleviate the situation.
What is happening to males in education? It's a very complex question with a multi-faceted answer. I don't pretend to know all the causes, still less the solutions, but I do know there's a problem.
We're slowly creeping toward a society in which women largely constitute the educated, professional class, and men comprise largely the lower, working, uneducated classes. In other words, a class system with a very strong gender component, but the exact reverse of what it was in the 19th century. What will that mean for society? What will it mean in 50 years when the large majority of doctors, lawyers, and other professionals (as well as college graduates in general) are women, and a disproportionate number of those with limited economic prospects are men?
I'm not saying this is a good or a bad thing, I'm just saying this appears to be the direction in which we're headed and people need to give it some thought.