Letters to the Editor
leftychris
Published Letters: 354 Editor's Choice: 4
-
@DurianJoe
[Read the article: Stopping the hands of time]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I don't shave my chest hair, but I do trim it to keep it manageable. I generally trim a lot of my body hair on a regular basis...they call it "manscaping" now. LOL! It really does help one to look a bit slimmer and, ahem, a certain feature to look bigger :-)
I only shave smooth one part of my body other than my face, but that will go unmentioned here ;-)
I see the cultural "lookism" pressures on my gay male buddies all the time. It's not nearly as bad for straight men, yet, but it's coming. Trust me it's coming.
-
@Pyrian
[Read the article: Warren Jeffs found guilty]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]And now that they have [charged Steed], do you think they will shake that accusation?
Yes, I'm sure they will (or at least they should). They did the right thing by charging the "husband" in this case. Anything less would have made the state look hypocritical and inconsistent.
With this move, I think the state has pushed any criticism of its actions to the cultural fringes--namely, among the cult members who are vested in these revolting practices to begin with. And who really cares what they have to say about it, anyway?
-
Shock marketing is hardly new
[Read the article: Fashion weak]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I think this Nolita ad is merely the latest manifestation of something that's been around for a while. Doesn't anyone remember the "shocking" and provocative United Colors of Benetton ads from the 80s and 90s? They weren't as gutwrenching as this ad, but the trend was pretty clear.
That said, using a woman's horribly emaciated and unhealthy body in an advertisement, to drive sales, is deeply disturbing and depressing to me. I could see a PSA addressing anorexia using the image, maybe, but this is just tawdry.
-
@david sugarman
[Read the article: Warren Jeffs found guilty]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]my fear is that a much smaller group (agreeing with leftychris) will become radicalized and dangerous.
Excuse me? What on Earth could you possibly be talking about? Are you snorting crank?
And no, my message in this case was NOT "send a message, destroy a group" or whatever you wrote in your last feverish ramblings. I don't care what these people believe, they have freedom of religion, and they can separate themselves from society like the Amish and live their peculiar lifestyles all they want. But when they cross the line to committing criminal acts then the state can step in and put a stop to it. And I don't care what you think, forcing young teens to marry and have sex against their will is CRIMINAL.
-
@Valhalla
[Read the article: Warren Jeffs found guilty]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]If Jeffs had killed someone...no court in the U.S. would give him a free ride just because God (or Joseph Smith) told him it was ok.
With all due respect, isn't this precisely what has happened to numerous women in recent years who've killed their children, and then blamed their horrific atrocities on God's orders, or Satan, or voices speaking to them, or their religious delusions? Andrea Yates is only the most well-known example, there have been several other notorious cases in Texas alone, and others elsewhere in the country. In virtually every case like these that arises, the devout and delusional women have been given a pass by the courts and by society, and treated to a comfy spell at the funny farm instead of prison.
Yeah, yeah, yeah...I know that they were considered "insane" by some (but not all) mental health experts and were determined to be legally insane by the juries. But wasn't one of the big reasons they were found to be legally insane in the first place because they were so religiously delusional and because they thought they were getting orders from God?
Also, it seems to me that the courts have a much higher standard for legal insanity when a man is the defendant. When men kill their kids, it usually doesn't matter if they blame orders from God or religious delusions or mental illness or anything else for that matter. No matter how batshit insane they may appear to an impartial observer, they almost always get life w/o parole or the needle.
We can't have double standards in this regard. If we're going to treat religious delusions as adequate for legal insanity, then we need to apply that standard consistently across the board and to both genders. If we're NOT going to treat religious delusions as adequate grounds for legal insanity, then we need to start holding the Bible-thumping killer moms accountable for their actions and punishing them.