Letters to the Editor
-
just poor quality
I could see that the article was facetious the first time I saw it, so I did "get it", I guess. But there was so much shrill self-hate and loathing in it that was still evident, and it lacked self-awareness to the point that it just wasn't funny.
It was like watching a drunk person puking out all their darkest and most revolting secrets, loosened up by the alcohol into saying things they wouldn't ordinarily say. The "humor" of the piece supposedly freed the author enough to do this, with chilling results.
It failed at being genuine. It failed at being satirical. It was simply really badly done.
It was poor writing.
The Times probably published it in the first place just to set off a shitstorm. If that is the case, they succeeded beyond their wildest dreams, so expect to see more of these "opinion" pieces in the future.
News isn't going to sell newspapers any more, but scandal will, it seems. If you have no scandal, create one with some poor slob of a woman who will hate on herslef for money.
That's all it's about.