Letters to the Editor
LeCastor
Published Letters: 1916 Editor's Choice: 86
-
Louis, i'm still unclear on why YOUR opinions should be the rules for EVERYONE
[Read the article: Unhappily ever after]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]LeCastor,
Yep, considering everything that life consists of, orgasms are shallow. If what's between your legs is that important then it's no wonder women think staring at it in a mirror brings "vagina wonder."
WEll, Louis, you can see that we disagree on how important sex is. I think most people would weigh in on my side, but why not let everyone pursue what they think is important instead of imposing your opinions on them? If some men and women think sex is the important thing in the world, and the way they want to pursue it is by having sex with many people, why should you or society tell them that they should get married and have children and move to the suburbs?
I believe children have a right to a childhood (a time of innocence when they don't have to deal with this kind of stuff) so to suggest parental attitudes should focus on adult concerns is pornographic in itself. (Hello Jon Benet Ramsey) Whatever.
As you are well aware, every generation, there's people screaming that children have a right to a childhood and that society is going down the tubes. Just think of the resistance there was to women wearing pants in high schools. I think children have a right to a childhood, but again (1) each family, within legality, decides what that means (when to start discussing politics, whether TV will be involved, etc.), (2) not everything has to be safe for children. Even the Supreme Court has acknowledged this -- 10pm to 6am (i think), everything on TV and radio doesn't have to be kid-friendly. Adults have a right to adult discussions, adult entertainment and it shouldn't have to be compeltely secret, late at night. (3) childhood is important, but between Janet Jackson's tit, and the gender wage gap, i think the gender wage gap is more important, you catch my drift?
If you don't understand that then there's nothing else for me to say. You women can have your crusade without me and, I gather, most other men too.
Don't be so bitter.
As you point out, there's porn, and prostitutes, and enough stupid girls that any man can convince to fuck and then make walk home for laughs.
"What's love got to do with it?"
Even love involves orgasms. Love isn't rainbows and lollipops and flowers all the time -- it's an adult endeavour.
-
Scholarship money?
[Read the article: Do male athletes deserve paternity leave?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Wow, so the rest of us who can't throw a ball very well, or hit a ball with a stick (not exactly academic endeavours), we have to take out loans or have our parents pay for school, but these athletes, whose athletics have nothing to do with getting an A in Organic Chemistry or Theory of Computation, they get 5 years worth of scholarship money, and now on top of that, they want maternity and paternity leave? That doesn't seem very fair to me.
-
Women and the Myth of Sourcing Power From the Home
[Read the article: Unhappily ever after]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]we have never been docile
the commentators on the article seem to assume that before feminism, all women were submissive and docile. they were not. being a housewife did not mean being docile. it meant managing a family, including a husband sometimes. it meant doing the best for your family. that was your job. in many working class families it was the tradition for the husband to give the wife his entire salary, and she would then give him his allowance and use the rest of the money for the family's expenses.
This was exactly Phylis Schafly's argument against the ERA. She said that women are already treated so well, that they already have all the power in the home, so why try to gain power outside the home? In the home, women are the masters of the house, and that should be more than enough. It may be a difference in upbringing -- my mother didn't stay home, my grandmothers didn't stay home with their children. And not my parents, nor my grandparents had the kind of household where the husband gives the paycheck to the wife -- it's insulting to men, this whole idea that they are overgrown babies that need to be managed/taken care of, and that they can't live responsibly without a woman's sobering influence. This is also Dr. Laura's favorite schpeel. If i were a man, i would find this incredibly degrading.
alot of women in the past and many today enjoy being housewives. I did when I was one when my kids were small.
Alot didn't. Read the feminine mystique.
the notion that before feminists saved us we were all miserable slaves is nonsense.
Well, not miserable slaves, but, right up to feminism, women's career choices were severely limited. Emily Post's etiquette book from the mid-fifties has one chapter on working outside the home, and the choices for women are department store clerk, or secretary. That's it, folks. Maybe women living in the 50's didn't even think it was possible for women to work as engineers. Notice it's not about women being able to do these jobs -- many of the women who became wives and mothers in the 50's were college-educated. They were certainly capable of challenging work, but there were no opportunities. That's partly where the discontent came from.
along the same lines, alot of the writers assume that every woman who is not a career woman is stupid. this is not true. i'm not arguing that women should not have careers. but let's not compare the status of women to that of blacks in a racist society or jews in germany or anything like that. that's arrogant nonsense on the part of white women.
Well, first, i guess it's strange to assume that every woman on this board is a white woman. But,
for most of history (yes, tehre are exceptions, like the amazons, but they are exceptions) women couldn't vote, couldn't own property, could nto get higher education, if any at all, were barred from most professions, and could not even control their own bodies, and were considered somewhere between children and property in relation to their male caretakers.