Letters posted here are associated with the following article:
The letters thread is now closed.
do ya think they could sell it as self defense?
Wow, you women are starting to sound...well, just like Imus and his misogynist defenders. Blame bad press, excuse immoral behavior. Since they're a double minority, it's double OK!
Such flowery prose. All it lacked was a comparison to "the riot of the tipsy Bacchanals, tearing the Thracian singer in their rage".
It's highlight there's nothing here that's defending the women. I often don't agree with broadsheet because they overreact, but too many people overreact in the commentary.
too many overreact to broadsheet's overreactions? then tell us what's the acceptable number of overreactions to shitty writing and we'll stop one before that next time
Anonymous: "if seven men beat up one "verbally abusive" woman do ya think they could sell it as self defense?"
No. But, if seven heterosexual men beat up one woman - a rather more common event - do you think they would be described as "killer heteros" and a "seething straight septet"?
But who can resist a headline like that? In all seriousness...
You can't discuss any New York Post headline "in all seriousness." The New York Post is notorious for selecting its stories, and coverage, based on headlines like these, in massive block letters screaming from the entire front page. In all seriousness, this is, after all, the tabloid whose lead story, during the time the Berlin Wall was being dismantled, was the fact that JFK, Jr. had flunked the bar. Not because it was an event that was most likely to mark a transition point in world history, but because it afforded them to fill the front page with the quip "The Hunk Flunks!"
Their most famous headline is the one I'm certain they'll never be able to top again: "Headless Body Found in Topless Bar." It wasn't really quite a headless body, but of course that's just a detail.
I found the Associated Press story about fashion for "boomer" women interesting but also incorrect. Baby boomers are generally considered to be people born between 1946 and 1962, which puts them between 61 and 43 years old. Gen X is, loosely speaking, people born from the mid-1960s to early 1980s. The synopsis (and presumably the article itself), refers to both the over-35 set, which would include both Boomers and Gen X women, and to women 25-40, who are not only not Boomers, some of them may even be the generation after Gen X. As a member of Gen X, I'm having enough trouble with aging without people telling me I'm a Boomer! As far as the article goes, this may help explain why people are having trouble marketing to us -- they don't even know who we are.
For Old people. That's what the Gap store for older folks smelled of. "We know you're not trendy or cool anymore. So here's some Old People clothes for ya'."
Who in their right mind would shop there?
Here's from the Post story:
Three of the original seven women are currently serving six-month jail sentences for attempted assault. But four others are on trial on first-degree gang-assault charges that could get them anywhere from three to 25 years in prison.The accused ringleader - Patreese Johnson, 20, whom Buckle called the "slightly pretty one" - is additionally charged with attempted murder for allegedly pulling a knife from her purse and slashing Buckle repeatedly, lacerating his liver and stomach.
You people creep me out. His liver was lacerated and all you care about is the headline and the politics?
His liver was lacerated. She was trying to KILL him.
Too bad he wasn't a laboratory rat. At least then some of the PETA members here might have cared.
I am 36; my *mother* is a boomer. I appreciate the point of the original post, but please, get the generations right.
His liver was lacerated and all you care about is the headline and the politics?
Of course. In a world where an average of over a hundred people shoot themselves with nailguns every day (to name JUST ONE type of accident), someone getting badly injured isn't, in itself, news.
http://www.reuters.com/article/oddlyEnoughNews/idUSN1236577020070413
Just had a crashing orgasm reading this story.
That's news to me. I believe the Baby Boom ended in in the early 60's, not in 1970! This wouldn't annoy me so much if I hadn't seen it before: women over 35 called "Boomers" because we are "middle-aged"? ROTFLMAO!
Dates vary as to the beginning and end of the Baby Boom, but most agree on 1946-1964. Generation X is generally seen as 1963 (or 1964) to the late 1970's/early 1980's. By no stretch of the numbers, however, would a 35 or even a 40 year old be considered a Boomer. Please get your facts straight!
To provide one of the article's "different perspectives" (that the closest thing to a point of view Carol Lloyd expresses in that text), 20 years sounds just right for those women.
And that is even implying that they actually were taunted by the guy. See it in the context of every potential brawl - the wise (and right) thing to do is to deescalate, not to escalate. Especially if you are in the vast majority. And you definitely refrain from violence, and you very very definitely never pull a weapon.
OTOH the women might more likely get something like 3 or 5 years. And provided they do time in an environment suitable for violent criminals, society will get along with that.
One hopes they will learn something from the experience.
When the police were profiling the murderer of Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman, they said that when a person stabs another person with a knife, there's a deep personal hatred being expressed toward that person.
I wonder if this could be called a hate crime. Is it a hate crime if a lesbian tries to stab to death a man who hits on her on the street?
If this were a bunch of straight men who had stabbed a gay man who hit on one of them, it would be absolutely clear that it was a hate crime.
Well, this is where Salon gives me the chills. This is the kind of moment where I'm reminded that politics is really just a kind of tribalism in disguise.
If you're of the tribal mindset then you don't care if an enemy of your tribe is wounded, all you care about is whether your tribe is offended. That's what really matters.