Letters to the Editor
Published Letters: 217 Editor's Choice: 9
-
@AKA Smith
[Read the article: The other 18 million]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]... if she wants a Democrat in the White House, shouldn't she use that power?
That depends ...
On what?
What many people do not understand is that overturning Roe v. Wade does not automatically criminalize abortion.
OK. So? Your original point was that overturning "Roe v. Wade" would teach younger women a lesson.
I have long thought that feminism needs to be about more than abortion...such as pay equity.
OK. Which candidate do you think will be better towards the issue of pay equity - Obama or McCain?
I don't expect you to understand this if you are male.
Don't matronize me.
It is sort of a mother - daughter struggle.
That is your issue. If that's the case, then that's something for you to overcome. You can't control their actions - but you can adjust how *you* are.
Be the change *you* want in the world. Treat them like adults and peers - which, if they're over 18, they are - and you are much more likely to bridge this gap with understanding.
The rejection of Hillary's candidacy by many men was a forgone conclusion.
Really?
1. That's why she was anointed the winner at the start of the primary? That's why the vote was so close?
2. If Hillary had planned as well as Obama, she wouldn't have been blown out and effectively lost in February. She would almost certainly be the nominee now instead.
Which *proves* she lost because she was not as good a candidate, and not because of sexism.
It is about political strategy and justice.
Political strategy? Towards what? If it's for improving the overall plight of women - how does punishing young women with a GOP candidate achieve that?
Justice? It looks to me like Hillary lost the nomination, because she didn't plan or run her campaign as well as Obama. So please explain exactly what injustice occurred here.
And please note that your favored candidate losing a fair election is not injustice.
There needs to be an accounting done. Mere talk will not wake anyone one up. Only action will.
Good! Take some action. Help the plight of women. Don't punish them because they didn't vote for your favorite candidate *even though* she's a woman.
(And by the way - isn't voting for someone *because* she's a woman sexist also?)
-
@AKA Smith
[Read the article: The other 18 million]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Go to The Atlantic and read what James Fallows has to say about what would happen if Roe v. Wade were overturned. You might be surprised.
Once again, that's beside the point.
The point is, You said that maybe if Roe v. Wade was overturned, it might teach younger women a lesson.
This is clearly saying you want younger women to be threatened with back-alley abortions, so they will then pay more attention to what you want.
It was you guys who started it. When you make threats, expect counterthreats.
No, don't push it on me or "us guys". *You* made the threat here - towards your fellow WOMEN.
-
@AKA Smith
[Read the article: The other 18 million]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I didn't vote for Hillary Clinton because she was a woman.
Well, you sure seem plenty mad at younger women because more of them didn't vote for her - *and* you seem to think this is because they reject feminism. So, perhaps I'm wrong but the clear implication of what you're saying is: more younger women should have voted for Hillary, because she's a woman.
As to your many other questions, sorry but I gotta go have a life now.
OK. Good luck and remember:
1. Hillary blew it because she didn't plan well enough for the February primaries, and Barack Obama did.
2. If she had planned better in even one of those states, then even *with* sexism she would have won.
3. So, sexism didn't cost Hillary this election.
Cheers,
~j : )