Letters to the Editor
-
thanks to those adressing me by name
first Ross, totally forgiven. i just wanted you to give a good guy (who occasionally slips) a break - for me, it's breaks *all the time*. "LBS" i don't know what you really said about me - sounded vaguely negative, but not blunt enough - sorry. i'm also sorry that an off-hand comment , "opinionating" rankled so much (i liked the word so much that when i thought of it i *had* to say it - even if it wasn't strictly accurate - i think of myself as a poet more than anything else (no comments!), as far as jews go, me and weiss (posted below) sign our own (jewish) names, so we invite it. but it's really not so bad. this *isn't* thirties germany (if it *were* i would mind more) so an occasional "jew boy" just amuses me (hiding behind hate of *israel* hurts more - but that is *exactly* the point!) weiss, i agree with everything you said except that bit about fred and ginger - it is the *timing* the rhythm, that counts, not the heels (or the physical orientation). Ktwdawg, delete and document threats? finally, "No Name Given", you were right and i was wrong - and i am man enough to admit it. SUE! you had your chance! (to document you assertions - that a university student newspaper article called for your rape. it's been over an hour. i must conclude, YOU ARE A LIAR!) see Ross? if i accuse (and i do) and if i disagree vehemently(and i do also), i also have an obligation to apologize and forgive. that's the deal. FREE SPEECH, SALON!
-
wrong workshop
Okay, Lamott has a point as writer, artist and a person; these kind of attacks are good opportunties to thicken the skin. (A bit solipsistic, but that how writers are.)
But the pressing problem is how the anonynimity of electronic communication is fundamentally dehumanizing. And what happens when we nurse an entire culture on that diet of mediated interactions?
It doesn't look good.
-Michael
-
dave
I love your word 'opinionating.' It makes its point well and has helped me a great deal.
I was actually being positive: Do you think we could speak more openly on these issues if we did not have to engage in a personal blame game? In other words, is blame part of the dynamic itself?
I think I'd disagree with you here: I think racism, sexism and homophobia are alive and well and very much a part of our culture. We misunderstand the culture itself (and the way oppression functions) if we don't understand the role of prejudice.
You don't have to reply; I just wanted to clarify.
-
Definition of "fagged out"
I know this has been posted before, but apparently some people need to hear it again.
Fagged out:
Tired, worn out, exhausted, physically exhausted.
Carry on.
-
Jesus Daniel,
Was that the best you could do?
-----
Your response IS indeed utter crap.
Make sure you call your daddy up and tell him what a big man you were on the internet today.
...
Anyway, I advise the ladies of Salon to keep typing away. Don't let the bastards drag you down.
See the contradiction there? Yeah, I didn't think that you would. Pot, meet kettle. Kettle, meet pot.
---------
Some utterly lame-ass riposte claiming that you're as victimized as they are? No wonder you have to push people around online you'd make a fool of yourself in person.
Flame war over- I win!
-
michael, it's the *anonymity* not the electronic communication
and by *anonymity* i mean just that, "Anonymous", "No Name Given" - a bunch of *connected* posts with a screen name *makes* a person. Locutus? i think i know him, and Golden Boy and LeCastor and many others. david sugarman is also known as a person. if you had a screen name that was more unique (or if no one else used it - oh by the way, jack, i "got over it" - thanks for the nose rubbing, did me good) we'd "know" you too. it's all about putting yourself out there. some folks are less articulate - and engage in name calling. let them. ignore them. they are people too and people can change (yes, there *are* folks you can't stand and won't even name - but they are very few). you have to have a bit of "heart" to live.
-
re: the article
Thank you for writing this article. There are a lot of ugly trolls on the Internet, which is why many of us women took great pains to disguise our gender back in the early days (ambiguous or masculine user-names, etc).
But (and this is an important point), you mustn't confuse legitimate criticism/dislike with misogyny. Many of your readers really dislike Debra Dickerson's articles and say so in the comments section; this has nothing to do with gender or race but everything to do with poorly constructed and illogical arguments on her part.
-
david sugarman says:
i probably don't have much longer to live...my family thinks the net is a godsend because at least they get a few minutes' peace from my ranting and raving...so when i die and meet my maker and he asks how i spent (wasted) my last years on earth...all i'll have to show for it is about a year at the keyboard typing to salon these moronic missives...in other words, nothing to show for my life.
Now, once and for all, i will finally shut the fuck up until you i something to say. That would be July, 2008 by my best guess.
-
patricia schwarz
stopped typing under her own name about half a year ago...but you're right, she still can't stfu about pot and PTSD...her posts are so obvious...just like mine would be under any other name...bfd
-
This is your brain on porn.
I consider myself a feminist and have noticed that I have a fairly harsh reaction to the feminist content on salon--mostly a class issue I think. I don't even know anyone with a nanny (other than a former boss) and I live in San Francisco. The problems of young wealthy urbanites are not the problems of most of the world or even most of the people I interact with on a daily basis.
I think there's an element of class envy or professional envy in the violent comments of the flamers. I can't pretend that I know what these dumb guys are thinking, but I think there is an envy issue. It seems like [largely] inarticulate rage that some women is getting a voice and is listened to and respected on the web when troll-guy can't get any attention. It's essentially a five year old tossing a fit with an adult vocabulary.
These posts are also very cowardly. These men have wives, mothers, and girlfriends who would be ashamed if they knew. These posts only exist in such a quantity because these men can show off their knowledge of porn films and hateful personalities without fear of exposure.
I also think this has something to do with the mainstreaming of porn (much of it focused on female submission). I don't think porn should be illegal but there are some obvious side effects on its primary (teenage and young adult) demographic that are not good. My San Francisco values solution would be that parents (and schools) should talk to their children (both boys and girls) about porn and explain that it's natural to be curious and that a little bit of porn won't kill anybody, but the messages we read and view stay with us and shape our personalities. And then maybe a publicly funded advertising campaign showing some troll guy bashing women on the internet-- this is your brain on porn?