Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
I agree that Atoosa Rubenstein's comments contribute to a culture of self-loathing that many girls must confront and overcome. I say this as an "ugly duckling" myself who has grappled with these issues, and I certainly do not take them lightly. However, Rebecca Traister's vitriolic attack on Ms. Rubenstein smacks of hypocrisy: not even a year ago, Salon published an article by Kate Hahn (http://www.salon.com/mwt/feature/2005/06/24/gut/index.html) in which Ms. Hahn admits to the exact same sentiments as Ms. Rubenstein. I don't recall Ms. Traister blasting her home publication last June when that article ran. Do Salon's editors feel that mean-spirited attacks like Ms. Traister's are fine, as long as the critical lens doesn't turn inward? Or do they simply assume that their readers won't have long enough memories to spot the contradiction? As for Ms. Traister, has she only recently developed these passionate views about potential damage to girls' self-esteem, or did she just not want to bite the hand that feeds her when her bosses ran Ms. Hahn's article nine months ago?
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
