Letters to the Editor
domini
Published Letters: 1157 Editor's Choice: 79
-
I will not be guilted about a gerbil
[Read the article: To hell with Caitlin Flanagan]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]If we hold children's hands over every minor thing, they never grow up. There are too many infantilized, entitled kids out there already from that mentality. The death of the gerbil is NOT on par with the death of a human. It is something a child will have to deal with, just like a number of other things. To reschedule that interview for a gerbil's death would be sending the message that every slight in the world deserves fixing. There are somethings that parents can NOT fix, and should not fix. It's the same problem that parents cause when they refuse to allow children to fail. The child needs to learn to handle this. It is called growing up.
God help if they get a fish.
-
Uh, homeboy
[Read the article: Good Manly America]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]If you meant yourself with the "intelligent conservative posts" thing, that's a little hubristic. I did not read the Abu Ghraib letters, but the comparison you made is not particularly insightful. Many people have said the same thing about any publication of the photos, or any discussion of the impact. If you want to see more insightful critiques into "liberal" Abu Ghraib coverage and impact, try Foreign Affairs.
I was not trying to "prove" anything. I do not work for Salon, so I don't know who you are refering to. I've disagreed very loudly with Tennis over allegedly "liberal" advice, and I've been called a conservative (and worse) in the SYA section. I'm not a liberal, I'm independant, and I appreciate reading a diversity of opinion. So I do not want to see other posters deleted for their opinions or "offesiveness".
Go pick a fight with someone who wants to censor you. I'm arguing for more diversity of opinion here. You should see me as an ally.
-
Google's not comprehensive
[Read the article: Where sex trafficking meets masturbation jokes]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Just because something doesn't show up in a few Google searches does not mean it's there. It's in a library, or it's cataloged differently. I have had to search up to eight different terms to get information on specific things in pregnancy, some popular drugs, historical figures, etc.
In this ABC news story, we get girls as low as 9 years of age involved in sexual slavery rings.
http://www.abcnews.go.com/Primetime/story?id=1596778&page=1
This documentary on international sex slavery shows ages as low as 7 and 8
http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/daymygoddied/myths.html
Figures on prostitution and sex slavery are notoriously hard to get. American runaways are constantly brought into the American system by the use of drugs by pimps, and women age out very quickly. Sex slavers in foreign countries are documented to abduct and/or sell 7, 8,9 and 10 year old prostitutes. An average age of 13 makes sense if international slavers are involved and added. Most of the international child porn involves sex slavery rings. Pimps don't care about age; they are subhuman pieces of filth. Several underage (12-15) prostitutes show up in documentaries like "American Pimp", for instance.
"The average age for prostitution is 13," said Russell Dehnel, a coalition member who heads the nonprofit Heartland Human Relations and Fair Housing Association. "This is not a career choice." He is speaking of girls smuggled in to service farm workers around rural San Francisco areas. The link is
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20040721/news_1mi21prost.html
An average age of 13 for Asia/African/Latin American sexual slavery? Yes, I believe it. There seems to be ample evidence. For Eastern European, the average age seems to be 25.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/VAR207A.html
Polaris project argues for an average entry age of 13.
http://www.polarisproject.org/polarisproject/news_p3/BAM_Article_p3.htm
WIth new slaves brought in constantly, that could give an average age of 13 to the international sex slave population.
-
I'll defer to Robert Verdi's definition
[Read the article: If my wife dressed better, would gay guys stop hitting on me?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]When asked about metrosexuals, Robert Verdi (of "Fashion Police" and very, very OUT) asked: What do gay men call a metrosexual? GAY!
It's not her dress causing the problem, pal. It's yours. If she dressed up, they'd still ignore the "fish". By dress and action, you look bisexual or as if you are a gay guy out with a straight girlfriend. Actually, if she dressed up, that gay friend of straight women" vibe would be even stronger.
If you want the wife to dress up, ask her. If you don't want gay men to hit on you, DON'T accept their drinks.
The other posters are too funny today.
-
You have got to be kidding me
[Read the article: If my wife dressed better, would gay guys stop hitting on me?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I can NOT believe anyone is defending this guy. I don't know if he's gay, but he sure as hell is crazy. If you are in a GAY bar, and accept a drink from a GAY male couple, then you are sending the "available" signal. You don't do that in front of the significant other. Blaming her is the height of manipulation. It's the Shaggy song "Wasn't Me". Most people don't get "friendly" this way.
Then again, do straight men really casually lead gay men on this way? If you accept a drink AND go over to the table, you are accepting an invitation. Those acts are why people think he's closeted. Most people have the decency not to lead other people on about their interest.
As for the leather pants, the 80s called. It wants them back. Who wears leather pants these days? Does he have a Duran Duran haircut, too? Or was he in Prince mode? Or was this just a Eurotrash moment, wearing them with his velvet jacket? I stopped seeing leather pants on anyone outside of a Hoodah parade in 1988, I think.
Nominate him for What Not to Wear. Please!