it might be the first time that people have fought and then made up all on the same thread. Hallelujah! :)

As for LeCastor & being menacing -- my real-life name is already so frighteningly Eastern European (long & consonant-y) that i don't need to be more menacing on the internet. :)

I agree that the system can be very problematic. Another guy I know arranged to be fired from his job (he quit, and then either pleaded or offered a bribe to his employer) so that he would receive welfare. Enough to move to Paris and start writing a novel!

Anyway, that's something to talk about at another time, and possibly in another thread. I think I've wasted enough time on salon for one evening (no offense, of course!) Oh... (wait for it)..... : )

A lot of times I'll be reading a thread and somebody will say something so blantantly racist or sexist, or just plain wrong, that I'll feel obliged to respond without really feeling like it, but then I scroll down and see that, thankfully, you've beaten me to the punch!

You should change your handle to something more menacing than a beaver.

Because I am pretty bored of all this now.

I do completely, 100% see your point. Chances are it would have been my point if there hadn't been an entire thread about women shouldn't criticize other women. That I find far more offensive than anything Hilton has done. In fact, as mentioned, she hasn't done anything to hurt me, except skeeve me out some. And I did go back and read your original post: you said nothing whatsoever about girl cattiness, per se. You said, "but that might be too much to bear for the smug, smart and virtuous (ha) people here who are trying to pretend that their sipping on haterade has some social meaning. Nah...." So I conflated your insult with the others I have seen here, which tend to be of the "you're jealous 'cause she's so rich and pretty" variety. I apologize. Yours was an instinctive swipe at those whom you percieve to be uptight.

I happen to think you're right about this being blown out of proportion, at least in relation to the emotional responses here. That doesn't mean it isn't serious or real. This kind of stuff interests me. It really, really does. Paris Hilton is not going to steal my boyfriend. And you are ABSOLUTELY right re: what did she do to make this all work for herself. Also, incredibly fascinating (to me at least), but not especially separate from the other things. Would you consider it relevant if the answer to her success is her narcissistic image? Would it be socially or otherwise relevant if that's what the kids aspire to these days?

In short, what I was really responding to the idea that Paris, or any other woman, gets a pass. I don't think she does. It's not something I worry about too often. I don't like her, or at least her persona. If asked I will say so, and I will say why: I think she represents personality traits, etc., which I find deplorable. I have seen her express delight and happiness at the suffering and humiliation of others. That's truly not something I shrug at. And it IS her persona we are talking about. The fact is, when I see someone in real life, I'm a complete softy. Always have been (see above for my distaste in the suffering and humiliation of others) If I ran into her, I'd probably hold her hair out of the toilet.

Look, you react to snarkiness, I respond to people telling me to shut up. If anyone is content to ignore her, then by all means, go ahead. On better days, that's what I do. What I have a much harder time ignoring is this whole idea that women can't critique other women. This stuff actually MEANS something to a lot of women, because it tells us what is expected of us. Great, women think, now we're supposed to be stupid and sexually pliant. By rejecting that -- yes, her persona -- we're rejecting the idea of meeting that expectation. Now, we can get all into why women are so subject to meeting expectations, but frankly, it's not necessary.

And to clarify to everyone, I'm not saying we should put her in bhurka -- or that the two options women have is to either be promiscuous and evocative, or to be in a bhurka. I'm not saying she should be stopped, or laws should be passed, etc. I'm just saying we all have the right to say, "I don't like it, I don't like it, I don't like it."

And please don't consider this a cop out. These are my genuine thoughts on the matter.

Best to all.

Yes, let's all be nice to each other.

Everyone in my social circle is a working professional, and they live very well. I have a friend who has been unemployed for three years who is also doing extremely well, getting ample assistance from the government.

I was also amazed at how much social assistance France gives to people, including non-EU citizens. At first, it seems great, but money doesn't grow on trees, right? So I'm just wondering, absent some disability or retirement or student status, do you think the government should simply keep paying social assitance to the point of "doing extremely well" to someone who is unemployed? Their social assitance comes out of other people's salaries, either through direct taxes on salary or purchases, or taxes on their employers, who then have less money to pay their employees. It's not something that's "annoying," it's the way taxes and social assistance work.

I apologize for calling you a beaver and making fun of your emoticons. I guess they're kind of cute.

I think it's the first time anyone has ever apologized on Salon. Ever. haha. I use the emoticons not to be cute, but to try to better convey the tone of what I am saying. Perhaps because I am a poor writer, I can't simply convey it with words.

I think people get frustrated with you because you don't appear to be listening, but rather piling up rebuttals... But it makes for a very one-sided conversation.

I don't know why people get frustrated with me. I keep "piling on rebuttals" to what people say, to what i hear from listening. Maybe it's overwhelming.

To (very badly) paraphrase Tolstoy, every country is fucked up in their own special way.

Yes.