Letters to the Editor
lookoutvladimir
Published Letters: 6 Editor's Choice: 1
-
Woo!
[Read the article: Mnemonic for 11 planets sure beats "Roy G. Biv," "Homes"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Yeah! I live in Great Falls, Montana. It's just exciting when our name is mentioned.
My coworker's son goes to school with the girl who thought of that device.
(I agree that it's probably just easier to remember the names of the planets.)
-
don't be a cynic
[Read the article: Google gives free voice mail to San Francisco's homeless]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I doubt that there would be a lot of illegal drug activity on these lines. IF the individual does have a drug problem, they will likely use a more efficient route.
I think the question is whether anyone will ever actually use the lines. It's a brilliant idea, but I doubt that it will be taken advantage of as much as it should.
-
Thank you!
[Read the article: Thank you, Rush Limbaugh!]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]So many of the letters here do the same thing. People are passionate about and defensive of sexism they don't even realize they have.
It shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone that the writers of salon.com expect a certain level of self-awareness from their readers.
We shouldn't glorify sexist or racist talk by calling it a "right." It's not a right, it's just impossible to control - and dangerous to attempt to control - how people think. All we can do is openly condemn such talk, call it out for what it is, and say, bluntly, that it is below our standards.
-
yeah...
[Read the article: What's so bad about "sweetie," anyway?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Everyone is a sexist. Me, you, Barack, Hillary, that reporter. Have we still not figured that out? The problem is in the whole damn lot of us, not in individuals.
As a bi-racial homosexual man, I figured out long ago that coming to terms with my own racism and homophobia and sexism, and everyone else's, was the first step in addressing the issues.
The problem with bigots is that they don't know that they're bigots.
Finding and labeling transgressors and violators is a waste of feminist energy. I am glad that this was brought up, the terms-of-endearment debate is extremely important, but I could have told you years ago that Sen. Obama was a sexist. That's not the point. He's a person in this world, right? The point is the larger trend that he's tapping into, which has as much to do with each of us as it does with him.
This applies to the Republicans, too. Though they have a larger helping of the bigger, unforgivable problems - hatred, fear-mongering, greed, numbness-to-violence, etc.
-
This is getting so old.
[Read the article: A split Democratic decision]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]It seems like so many people in this campaign season are more concerned with the nomination than they are with the general election. The "history" being made is good for everyone, espcially those groups who are represented. However, the gay vote, the Latino vote, the native vote, the trans vote, the Asian vote, et al...I can't speak for everyone, but I think we'd all just like to get someone nominated who is going to fix this mess.
You are delusional if you think Hillary's continued run is actually helping. It's certainly not helping the party. It seems she's trying to do as much psychological damage as she can before she leaves. And once again, the media is encouraging it, because such controversy brings in the readers/viewers.
Hillary says that sexism is playing a major role in this - yes, thank you for the acknowledgement.
She says that racism isn't playing such a large role - you really have lost your mind, Hillary.
And for what?
-
Well...
[Read the article: Rush Limbaugh was right]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]What bothers me most about it is that it doesn't address the utter chaos of "information" that led to the rumors it makes fun of. These paranoias really are not fringe ideas - very good and smart people have been led by parts of the mainstream media to believe these things, or at least to fear that there may be something similar to them lurking beneath the surface. These just aren't the same "good" and "smart" people who read the New Yorker.
The magazine may contain quality material, but it is a status symbol. I am not a reader of the magazine, though I'm very familiar with it and have enjoyed many a good story from it, but this is the first time that I've ever felt like it wanted to reinforce the stereotype of its largely classist readership. For the supposedly "normal, everyday" Americans [i.e. - non-liberals, non-intellectuals] who generally don't read the New Yorker...it just feels like Fox News sets them up and now the New Yorker knocks 'em down.
Maybe humor is just humor. But our gross misunderstanding of our own people, our willingness to ridicule the groups most starved for knowledge and understanding (thanks to large media companies similar [but not the same as] the one that owns the New Yorker), really just make me uncomfortable. Laughter isn't a choice. If we're not laughing then maybe there's a lesson to be learned from the silence.
It's irritating to be told what or what not to consider funny. That sort of power-lust is to be expected out of Rush Limbaugh. Jon Stewart is funny because in every joke he makes there's a very clear appreciation of the silliness of humanity. This is just cold.