Letters to the Editor
firefly82
Published Letters: 328 Editor's Choice: 30
-
Literature and literacy
[Read the article: What is your literary deal breaker?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I can't say I'd reject a suitor on the basis of a single book. It's more about appreciation of the beauty and importance of books in general. I care about them; I have strong feelings about them. If a partner doesn't, there's a huge swath of what's important to me that's not going to be a productive subject of conversation for us.
There's also the matter that a long-running enjoyment of certain authors or series is likely to signal deeper rifts in values and outlook on life and relationships (notably: Left Behind, Dianetics, any of the Shopaholic novels). I'm even relatively forgiving of Ayn Rand, depending on the perspective.
But I've found that I just cannot be attracted to someone who isn't able to express himself clearly in writing. And I don't mean that e-mails have to read like Whitman...but that they should include capitalization and some sense that he knows what punctuation is for. I know how snobbish that sounds, but I love language, and I feel like it signals a certain amount of carelessness if someone hasn't even figured out basic use of his own native language.
Also, anyone who, upon learning that I don't have a television, responds "Oh my God, what do you DO?!" is out.
-
Re: Look up her Wikipedia Article
[Read the article: Rape is like force-fed chocolate cake?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Right, because (as a wonderful history teacher of mine used to say) everything you read on Wikipedia is true...
-
I think I understand it.
[Read the article: T-shirt: "I was raped"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I still would never wear it, but I think I get it.
It compels viewers to acknowledge a real human, who is standing in front of them, to whom this was done. It's harder to take something seriously when you know of it only as an abstraction. It's harder to dismiss something when you're confronted with its actual perpetration on a specific human being.
In one of my favorite lines from The Prince of Tides, Tom explains "I was taught to hate Communists when I was growing up. I never sighted one, but I hated the sons of bitches." A lot of people are able to hold ugly attitudes because they have no sense of the objects of those attitudes as being a real part of their world. That their attitudes have real and horrible consequences for specific people. It's probably too much to hope for that the t-shirts directly prevent a single rape, but it's just possible that men who see one on a real woman will find it a little more difficult to hold cavalier or flippant attitudes about rape.
-
You can't be a feminist and a humanist at the same time.
[Read the article: Real female heroes: Ingrid Betancourt]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Amen, Silenced.
This is my new motto.
-
Real female heroes
[Read the article: Real female heroes: Ingrid Betancourt]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]One more thing: what Betancourt is, is a 'real hero.' No qualifier required.
-
Clinton's $109 million
[Read the article: Why did Clinton wait to release her tax return?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Juliebird says "I wish I were so fortunate, but I don't begrudge the Clintons or the Obamas their money. They earned it."
I absolutely agree. It's not a sin to be rich. And I'm rather impressed they gave so much of it away.
But there is something very wrong with someone that rich mandating what percentage of my income I have to hand over to a private insurance company. She knows nothing about my life or budget.
-
We'll know in July how bad the economy is...
[Read the article: The Starbucks economy]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I think real desperation will be apparent when Americans start systemically forgoing air conditioning in the summer.
-
As if there aren't enough real reasons to oppose her
[Read the article: My last word (for now) on sexism]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The sexism that's been targeted at Hillary Clinton is toxic to the dignity and credibility of the entire democratic system. It hurts everyone, including the other candidates, not just her. It robs everyone looking to the news media for real information.
But I still refuse to have a hand in electing her.
-
Targeted marketing
[Read the article: Coming to a theater near you: Dumb arguments]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]They're actually not the result of traditional cookies, which is why you're wiping your cache, DurianJoe, and still getting them. It's newer technology that searches out specific key words appearing on the page you're visiting, making the wager that you searched for those words, or that what you actually searched for is related to them, and sends you ads containing or related to those terms. At the momet I've got the US Air Force (probably because the word 'war' appears on this page) and Livestrong apparel (probably because the word 'winning' appears on the page). Someone I know actually had a job assignment looking up the top three synonyms for a long list of commonly searched words for a company that designed targeted marketing systems.
As for the article, I agree with MaryDunne. Your partner, no matter who he is, deserves better than to be thought of as a consolation prize. Of course there's a reasonable extent to which one has to accept certain flaws and make certain compromises in order to get married at all. But as a person, your partner deserves to be loved for the whole person he is. I'd much rather be single than settled for. I just wish more people had enough of a spine to be honest with themselves about what they really--and realistically--want in a partner.
-
Sorry LeCastor
[Read the article: The mommy wars rage on]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Another woman's choices, even if I dislike them, don't threaten my freedom.
People who are blind to individuality do.
-
The right of women to vote would be gone pretty quickly thereafter, don't you think?
[Read the article: The mommy wars rage on]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]No. The work of stay-at-home moms is not removed from the public sphere. Even the obligations and influence of people who just choose not to work are not segregated from the public sphere.
And if so, would it be the fault of the women who chose to stay home, or would it be the fault of people blind to or threatened by individuality, and who believe themselves to be in a position to enforce their blindness on everybody?
Besides which, for this hypothetical scenario to hold any water, I think you have to be completely discounting or ignoring the number of young women who are not "careerists," but who are sustained by work they believe in (which is often more or less life-consuming and not that well-paying), who are not driven by finding a romantic partner and settling down, who have no idea if we'll ever want kids or be able to have them, given the demands of what we do with our lives.
Even if everyone else decides to stay home, we'll still be out there.