Letters to the Editor
melthough
Published Letters: 1336 Editor's Choice: 103
-
Evolution Does Not Prescribe!
[Read the article: We are "natural family"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Let me just say first that I am a mother of three children and have made a lot of choices about how to raise them based on what I thought was "natural." I have stayed home "lactating" for 4-1/2 years, including an 18-month stint of tandem nursing. I have done this because I thought it was right for my family, not because I think it's right for everyone else.
Just Wondering writes: "Evolution prescribes that the woman of any species gestates the child, has hormones that are secreted during labor to bond her to said child, has hormones in breast milk to bond child to mother, and has a built in feeding mechanism; she lactates."
OK, first of all, most of the species on earth don't have "women" in them. Only one does. And even the animal species that reproduce sexually are not mostly mammals. Most of the animals born on this earth never meet either of their parents. And evolutionary theory is not just about animals. Evolutionary theory is not just about mammals or primates or humans. It is not about gender. It is not a metaphor. It is not readily applicable to economics or religion or dating. Evolutionary theory is an attempt to DESCRIBE the way species of all kingdoms of living things - lichens, lobsters, sea cucumbers, amoebas, bacteria - adapt to new conditions in order to survive. And since human beings as a rule intervene very aggressively in the natural progress of birth and death, evolutionary theory is barely applicable to current human life. People bend over backwards trying to prove how this or that natural phenomenon is a parable for how we should live. Fun! But that's philosophy, not science.
If you think you'd like to personify evolution and make it into an entity that hands out rules - an idea as ridiculous as personifying gravity, but why not try it - the only thing it would "prescribe" to individual members of any species is this: survive, that your species may survive. That doesn't even mean that evolution "prescribes" that every individual must reproduce. In many species (ants and bees come to mind), barely any of the individuals reproduce.
You can find an example in nature to support whatever value you would like to prescribe. That doesn't mean nature prescribes that value. It means something is working for one species in a particular ecosystem under particular stresses. If you think it might work for you, go ahead and try it! But don't think you can make other people do it too, just because you decide to call it "natural."
-
We Have a Hammer
[Read the article: The filibuster fiasco]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]His name is Howard Dean, and he didn't end up look like a viable presidental candidate because the conservative media portrayed him as a nut and a lot of democrats got scared that he couldn't win. Now he's heading the DNC and speaking with a strong voice so people will keep sending them money, but he doesn't actually have any power. I really admired him the other day with Katie Couric; he just kept saying "Not one dime of Abramaoff money has gone to democrats. Not one dime."
And that's exactly how much more of my money the DNC is going to get if our so-called Leaders don't learn a thing or two from Howard Dean and start actually standing for something real.
-
I usually only read Broadsheet for the movie reviews, but...
[Read the article: "Playboy go to hell"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]now I have the same question for Playboy that I have for men who claim to read Playboy for the articles: Why Playboy then? Whatever you think about this interminable controversy over whether porn is pro-woman because it is pro-sex or anti-woman because it is pro-male-power-fantasy, why the hell are they publishing it as "Playboy" if it's not going to include nudie centerfolds? If the mag is just dying to get into the evidently lucrative Indonesian magazine industry, why not create a wholly owned subsidiary that just publishes really great movie reviews of really chaste movies?
-
It's All Just Part of the War on Boys
[Read the article: Teenage girls experiment with drugs at a higher rate than boys]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Yeah, everybody knows that drug and alcohol use among teens significantly improves standardized test scores. That's why there is this massive feminist plot to funnel the drugs to girls and girls only. This is what Take Your Daughter to Work Day is really all about. Fathers, always check your daughter's backpack before getting in the car to go home. You'll unearth her stash, which is restocked annually by your (largely female) support staff while you are at lunch.
-
Who's Talking about Sympathy?
[Read the article: Too fat for Maxim's Super Bowl party]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I'm not sure I've ever read a less whiny piece of writing.
Thank god somebody has started writing response to this troll.h
-
You Don't Have to Live There?
[Read the article: Large pie, no abortion]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]If you're one of the many, many children these folks would have, you DO have to live there. Kids are human beings with rights to speech, religion, and privacy - independent of their parents' rules at home.
-
It's not your anatomy; it's your attitude
[Read the article: Good night and good frock?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Brighstar, if your point were EVER anything but to claim without any evidence whatsoever that women have all the power and get all the good breaks (ever read the Lucky Ducky cartoons in this mag? That's totally what you remind me of), people might take you more seriously. I'm not going to tell you to shut the fuck up, but I do think that if you did more reading and thinking and less running at the mouth you might learn something.