Last year Pamela Paul, in her book "Pornified," claimed that use of pornography "causes" men to become detached from and indifferent to their woman partners. Is that so different from a father claiming that a picture inspired his son to a level of kink that ultimately killed him?

Yes, this is a bit of a reach (which is in itself an understatement). Yeesh. The review was a good analysis of Mol's performance, but what a bunch of hype...most of performances in this film surpassed its quality, including Lili Taylor's performance.

I enjoyed the film, loved the "periodness" of it, thought Gretchen Mol turned in a topnotch performance, but I couldn't help but think...why? If the real Ms. Page didn't cooperate or want this film to be made, and there were legal considerations as a result, how in the world are we supposed to figure her out? It was indeed a rather superficial, distanced, muted view of a probably intriguing life...but a well-made, entertaining superficial view...kinda like the pinup itself.

I'm so sick of hackneyed writers setting up feminism as a kind of straw man to give weight to their slipshod "readings" of culture. Enough already.

Agreed. I don't usually find Zacharek a hackneyed writer - even when I don't agree with her, I've enjoyed all her reviews except this one. However, the gratuitous feminist-bashing in this article was just depressing. Why isn't it possible to celebrate this movie from a feminist angle (as SZ does) without loudly proclaiming that other "so-called" feminists are "uptight" and "facile"?

Spoxywife, bitter much?

Honestly, is it so hard for anyone to believe that being admired by men (AND women) is empowering, feels good, and is fun? Is it such a huuuuuge stretch that someone (though apparentloy not Bettie, much to my dismay) might actually... *gasp* enjoy bondage? Someone shoot me, I'm clearly a freak!

John Thomas, I am all for more male nudity in movies/tv. Sex and the City was one of the only places I caught a glimpse of a penis outside of porn, and I was tickled to see it. But I believe nudity in movies is coming back; think about how it largely went away for a long time. Remember back to the days of Porky's and other such films where penises were flip-flopping their way in every random direction. Finally I'm starting to see female nudity again, and male nudity hopefully is right behind it.

Shucks, I like EVERYONE naked!

Laurel, LOL it's hard enough trying to get people to accept that someone might LIKE to post for naked pictures, much less bondage pictures, much less a curvy woman in pictures! Curvy women are supposed to be ashamed and hurling over toilets somewhere. I'm going to get right on that.

Here I thought Salon was a bastion of liberal and original thought, and yet NO ONE has even touched this one. Why is it wrong for men (AND women!) to be sexually aroused by looking at a beautiful woman???? WHY????

NoNameGiven, FWIW, I enjoy being both naked AND nude, and I recognize the difference. Sometimes feeling vulnerable is good. In addition, if you actually peek around the Internet for five minutes instead of pre-judging everyone and everything, you'll find more and more amateurs (like me) getting into self-produced porn that IS empowering and IS uplifting and IS a celebration of women. There are still a million problems with the porn industry. But the way to change it is from WITHIN, not from without.

Just home from seeing "The Notorious Bettie Page," I was delighted to find Ms. Zacharek's piece on the film.

Stephanie's moderation in all things is a needed perspective in these days of media coverage of extremes. Her sense is matched only by the film's realsim-plus-iconism. Its freewheeling joy-cum-ugly environment. Its astonishingly open model-and-repressed consumer culture.

Few writers make me want to read their work over and over. I wish Ms. Zacharek all the best - but don't think she'll need much help from me. As owner of a company that publishes the work of a current-day Pinup queen, all of this is good.

David

dave@molly-online.com

What's interesting to me is that this time, some of the boys are objecting to Stephanie saying of Bettie that "no one could take anything away from her" or "she wasn't exploited" and assuming this means that Stephanie hates men.

Um, so, "self-possessed, non-exploited woman = feminist = bitch?" And I guess from there it follows that the only good women are the ones who are exploited and/or do lose a piece of themselves in the process. Way to encourage the idea of women being comfortable with their sexuality, dudes. Or is that actually a bad idea because being comfortable with it leads directly to exploiting poor innocent men?

"Spoxwyfe, don't be daft. It's clear as a bell that Bettie Page -- the real-life Bettie -- enjoyed what she was doing and had a natural sympatico for bondage scenarios."

Really Godmonkey, is it clear as a bell? How long have you been such good, good friends with Ms. Page that you would know this?

Oh, and men run Hollywood, not women, which is why you don't see men flopping around naked and free on screen, even though "it's clear as a bell that have a natural sympatico for such things."

I've no doubt that negative reactions to Zacharek's reviews have become commonplace by now. But I'm too tempted by the non sequiturs in her review of Bettie Page to sit out the litany of criticims at this point. I'm puzzled as to why she makes feminism the punching bag in this piece. The way she tells it, feminism produces a "facile" theory of vicimization. Which feminism is she on about? Mackinnon's? Rich's? Dworkin's? Kristeva's? Spivak's? Which feminists offer a simplistic view of women, of their bodies and experiences? I'm so sick of hackneyed writers setting up feminism as a kind of straw man to give weight to their slipshod "readings" of culture. Enough already.

You're welcome.

Single Man was just kindly and concisely showing us why he's single...