How many times does Kate have to use words like "mixed feelings" or "I wonder" for people to get that she's not across the board condemning, but bringing up an issue for discussion.

Sorry, I'm not buying that (and clearly I'm not the only one here who isn't). If she didn't think there was at least a legitimate argument against these two kids doing what they're doing, there wouldn't be a "question" worth raising. (And there isn't, really, as her own perception of their intent indicates.)

And I'm calling foul on your bringing in your own experience with actual, full-on street harassment (and that goes for everyone who seconded your experiences). To do that makes this about a)you, and b)actual, full-on street harassment, which indeed is boorishly offensive in the best of cases and a potential prelude to sexual assault in the worst, and the prevention of which is not helped but harmed when you convict by association an innocuous social interaction. (This was a point made by an early commenter, but it got lost in the shuffle.)

I do not intend to belittle the threat you feel or the threat that may well at times exist when you or any woman is harassed in public. That threat deserves condemnation from any ethical human being, male or female. I applaud and support any and all efforts to stop it.

Having been harassed on the street by other men, however, does not make tarring these men with the same brush appropriate. Doing so is sloppy and imprecise, and, as you can tell by the letters here, it does nothing to reduce either the threat or reality of violence against women. Rather, it closes the ears of those you presumably wish to make aware of the problem.

None of us who has ever felt threatened in any context -- and believe me, men have that experience as well -- can fail to understand how easy it is to hear a story like this and associate it with one's own experiences. But, just as knowing that some black men commit crimes doesn't justify instinctive, irrational fear of a black man walking up the other side of the street, memories of personal experiences with harassment are no excuse for maligning these men, whose benign intent there is every reason to assume and whose malevolence there is none to.

These men are not those men. These men are not a threat. If one cannot distinguish them in one's mind, one risks ending up cowering under one's bed, afraid to have any contact with anyone. And if we repeatedly reject attempts by others to treat us with simple human decency, sooner or later they'll stop trying.

Which, I hope we can agree, is not a desirable outcome.

Anything that increases the total number of (consensual) orgasms in the world is good by me.

... rocked and rocked hard. Piven may be an ass, but he was perfectly cast, and he complemented Paula Marshall's passive cynicism perfectly. I mourned that series when it was cancelled so quickly, and I can't imagine that the new one will live up to it -- especially with Paulsen, who has all the warmth and sex appeal of a sturgeon, on board. (Haven't seen enough of Cannivale to know.)

Mr. Greenwald, I've been reading in the last couple of days about a reported threat by congressional Republicans to filibuster Obama's DOJ and other nominations, the explicit suggestion being that this threat is responsible for the Obama White House's conduct of late in the areas you wrote about.

It would be great if you could comment on those rumors in your blog. I'm as outraged as anyone by the secrecy and immunity claims of the Obama administration, but this new story, if true, would at least seem to explain (if not excuse) the line they've been taking. (In all honesty, I'm at a loss to understand why they've been so singularly inconsistent with Obama's campaign rhetoric on this subject. I expected better of a former constitutional law professor.)

I met his wife at a costume party the other night. She asked me if I wanted to pass the time with a little game of Solitaire. (And his daughter was dressed as the Queen of Hearts...)

Hey now, kids, let's not fight ignorance with ignorance.

It has indeed been a banner week for moronic right-wing nutcases spewing utter horsehockey. That, however, is no excuse for the wholesale slander of an entire region (Spencer) or a specific state in that region (Brent).

I'm originally from Georgia and now live in Seattle (after a fourteen-year sojourn in Los Angeles). The Aryan Nation held its worldwide rally in Olympia a couple of years ago. There are probably more right-wing militia groups and white-supremacist compounds in eastern WA, Idaho and western Montana than in the whole southeastern US. Some of the cracker-assiest places I've ever been were in central CA.

Racism is everywhere; crackers are everywhere; ignorance is everywhere. How about we confine our opprobrium to the subject at hand?

(Besides, as all Southerners know, nobody's allowed to crack on other Southern states but us. :P)