Letters to the Editor
queenmorriganna
Published Letters: 12
-
pride and pathetic
[Read the article: Pride and pathetic]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]thank you thank you thank you!! i am a jane austen fan (with cats--witty, unsentimental creatures they are) and i wore out my cassettes of the bbc version of pride and prejudice. i also think "clueless" was a superior version of "emma" than the gwyneth-flick. if you're going to ignore austen's wit and social criticism than why not transport the characters to the mall? it's more fun than watching the queen of hauteur gliding about period sets and mouthing insignificant dialogue (and what the hell was up with frank?! the bbc frank was foppish, yes, but he was also charming and good-looking. THAT frank--in that ridiculous wig--ech! you really expect me to believe emma would fall for a bad drag queen?).
but i don't understand why people are so nasty to jane eyre. yes, it's gothic, and brooding, and there's that ludicrous gypsey fortune-teller scene, but jane is not the bedraggled moppet that screenwriters seem determined to enshrine. the jane from the book was a strong, determined, capable and heroic figure, braving starvation, abuse and stultifying social conventions in an effort to retain her dignity and self-respect. i loved that when roderick proposes that they live together, the biggest reason for her refusal is not that society would cast her out or fear of a wrathful god, but rather her recognition of the contempt that her paramour has shown for past mistresses and the certain knowledge that their relationship would lose its equal footing. i also admire her willingness to speak her mind to her "superiors". and the way bronte skewered excessive piety in the form of st. john! i hope to live to see a screen treatment of jane eyre that restores it heroine to the strength, dignity and humor she embodies so well in the book...
-
and the bride's provision for her husband...
[Read the article: Girls just want to have frills (and cats)]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]...is contained in the traditional seussian refrain, “would you, could you, with a goat?”
-
Actually, his being adopted IS relevant...
[Read the article: A mother's love]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]...though i agree it shouldn't be in the subtitle. but the fact that he received no education until he was adopted at the age of nine is a significant factor in his development, and probably related to the issues he has now. what was the author supposed to do--mention that the child was uneducated for a large chunk of his life and let readers assume it was somehow her fault? it sounds like she tried to encourage an enjoyment of learning, but given all of the handicaps he experienced as a result of his birth situation, he probably never learned HOW to learn, the discipline and focus required for learning. and that's one more huge obstacle that he may never realize he has to tackle; an obstacle that no one else can force him to climb. i've had a number of friends and family in similar situations to her son's, and i know how hard it is to stand by while someone else drowns. but i also know how easily a drowning person can pull you down with them...good luck.
-
half a dozen of one...
[Read the article: Egg-selling ethics]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]men are financially compensated for sperm donation, for providing the genetic equivalent of half of a potential child; women should therefore be compensated for egg donation, on a cash basis or through an egg sharing program, for providing their half of a potential child (an egg is NOT a child and never will be a child unless fertilized, so arguments about "selling childen" don't hold up). and since donation for women involves drugs, invasive procedures, and significant time out of her life, they should receive more in terms of financial compensation.
as far as not permitting remuneration for donating eggs for stem cell research--no one wants to see an open market on kidneys. however, eggs are not at all equivalent to kidneys and other organs. unless you are born with a very small number of eggs, you're donating surplus material that otherwise might never be used. women who donate eggs for research should be offered compensation just as people who agree to test new medications or diets are compensated. all of them involve risks to the participants in the studies, and all are necessary for furthering scientific research. if you're going to panic over a 1.8% risk to egg donors from IVF medications, then in all fairness NO ONE should be allowed to volunteer as a guinea pig, since almost all research involves risks.
-
And a new phrase is added to the lexicon for "whackjob"...
[Read the article: Fox's Ann Coulter 2.0]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"Crazy as a fox news pundit"...what's next for that bastion of journalistic integrity, pedophiles doing the weather? oh, what sweet justice if she ended up stalking Falafel Boy...
-
the next generation of gynecologists?
[Read the article: The next generation of abortion providers?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]perhaps women should start sending the slides from their annual pap smears to the supreme court for review...i think we're entitled to have the best medical opinions bush's money can buy....