it should be said that the difference between the writer friends who are sensitive and the ones who appreciate criticism is that the former are almost universally not published (or very minimally so), and the latter are heavily published.

The friends who are sensitive also tend to treat me like I have no writing experience and therefore must not know anything about writing, and if I offer any insight into their work they treat me like I don't know what I'm talking about. Yet, even though I haven't published much in the last few years, I am still a well-published writer and have worked as an editor, as well.

Go figure.

I have friends who are writers that are like this. Very sensitive. Painfully so. My husband is also a writer, and while he can be sensitive to criticism at times, he is also very used to it and recognizes constructive criticism as helpful insight that he may or may not use.

One thing that's helpful when giving criticism is to be highly specific, and to put it in the context of praise and questions. So something like:

"I really like the overall idea of the story! But one thing I didn't get was why so-and-so did such-and-such. Can you tell me a little more about that?"

And then, in the discussion, "this is great - I think if you add that to the book it would really improve it."

If you don't like her writing style, that's one thing. If her writing style is just eh, and she doesn't get it, that's another. Either way you can't do anything about it.

In any case, I think you can be supportive without being disingenuous. Rather than calling the work brilliant, praise her for working hard and completing it. And if she gives you the draft to review, ask her first if she wants a critique or if she just wants you to read it. If it's the former, then just tell her you don't feel comfortable critiquing her work. If it's the latter, then you can be free to not comment further than "I appreciate your hard work on this!"

But yeah, if she can't take criticism, she will never, ever make it in the publishing industry.

I'm pretty sure that everything Tarantino does is a masturbatory pile of old rubbish, and that professing love for his movies is akin to playing the "I'm so cool, I love Tarantino" card. I just can't be bothered to watch any more of his films, and can't understand why people seem to think he's so brilliant. Self-absorbed? Sure. Stylized? If you want to call it that. Brilliant? Not so much.

Well, I think it’s, I think it’s proper because it's within the context of what people are seeing in some of the legislation that’s floating around out there. When you’re talking about panels that are going to be imposed, that will be making life and death decisions, that will be making decisions about whether or not you get health care or don’t receive health care. I think that’s perfectly appropriate.

Except NONE of that is true.

Ridiculous.

...is that it is even LESS regulated. There's no need to put on the label what is in dish soap, because according to the FDA, it is not meant to come into contact with human skin. For goodness sakes, if you're going to use dish soap, then at least use something like Seventh Generation or something that doesn't use petrochemicals and phosphates.

The most common ingredients in dish soap, hand soap & shampoo (and conditioner for that matter) are sodium lauryl sulfate, sodium laureth sulfate & propylene glycol.

Sodium laureth sulfate has been linked to:

- cancer

- contamination with 1,4 Dioxane (a carcinogen & reproductive toxin)

- irritation & environmental toxicity

Sodium lauryl sulfate has been linked to:

- cancer

- reproductive toxicity

Propylene glycol has been linked to:

- cancer

- reproductive toxicity

- persistent bioaccumulation (meaning, it builds up in your body over time, increasing your risk of cancer & other bad stuff)

etc.

That this writer is suggesting we use dish soap, which is even less regulated than cosmetics, in order to avert danger is preposterous.

EWG has a database where you can check your products and ingredients for safety, based on all available scientific data: www.cosmeticsdatabase.com

The Campaign for Safe Cosmetics has a list of cosmetics companies who have agreed to produce safe products and not use dangerous ingredients: www.safecosmetics.org

is because of the stripper drop she does when she first climbs up on the cart. The rest of the routine is fairly innocent apart from that single move, which was probably put in place to tart up the rest of the routine. It's reminiscent of a stripper move, with the open squatting position and the hotpants.

If it weren't for that particular move, nobody would be calling it a stripper pole.

I also agree with the commenter who said, since when is a stripper pole a rite of passage for young adult women???

Anybody who wonders why Miley Cyrus is doing all this tarting up of herself only needs to look at the huge amount of publicity it generates across lots of demographic groups to know why she does it.

Maybe I'm cynical, but I wouldn't know who she was without all the outrage and backlash on the outrage publicity.