Letters to the Editor
-
When I stopped reading
"He invited me to write for the Examiner, and the result was articles such as "The Female Lenny Bruce," my celebration of Sandra Bernhard ( more about her later)."
Who in the wide wide world of sports wants to hear ANYTHING MORE about Sandra Bernhard? Maybe we can have a side article about Joey Buttafuoco?
-
Mitt Romney _creamed_ Ted in the 1994 senate debate.
Romney is not to be underestimated. He can walk away--easily--with the Republican nomination for president. In Massachusetts we've observed him manipulate every resource available to him to get what he wants. And he utterly lacks a moral compass.
In fact I'll make this prediction: he will win the Republican nomination.
-
What A Crack-Up!
Reading these letters by people who are just apoplectic that Paglia is back has made my day! Few, if any, have anything sunstantial to say. It's mostly just playground tantrums and bullying.
Having been an undergrad at the heighth of academeic feminism/marxism/structuralism I can say that I always found Paglia a breath of fresh air. She cut through the crap and turned out be right on most of the issues she dealth with in the 90s. Let's just take feminism as an example, since so many readers are bringing that up and that is how she made her big splash.
1. "Men and women are exactly the same. The only differences are cultural." Paglia skewered that bit of feminist wisdom, and guess what, science has proven her correct. Men and women are surprisingly different. This is not to confuse her position with advocating inequality based on that fact. She has never done that. In fact, Paglia is a true feminist advocating true equality, but has always recognized that biology cannot be trumped by ideology.
2. "Rape is about violence and not about sex." Paglia turned that on its head, too, and was right again. A decade's worth of reserach has shown that though violence is obviously a big factor, rape is about sex — that's why it's sex! Along with this, Paglia attacked the victim mentality foisted upon rape survivors not because she didn't believe they were in fact victims of a crime, but because she recognized that perpetual victimhood was toxic.
3. "Ms. magazine gives the best new artist award to Cyndi Lauper over Madonna." Yep, once again Paglia wins.
Now that Salon has Broadsheet - a throwback to late 80s Dworkinism - it needs a counterbalance, and Paglia is it. If for no other reason, we need Paglia just to offer an alternative to Rebecca Traister!
Salon readers who have their knickers in a twist need to grow up.
-
Dear Happy Camper
Please feel free to purchase a Premium subscription to Salon. They need the money. If you think that Paglia on Salon is a wonderful thing, why don't you pay up? If you don't, Salon is going to go away, and Paglia along with it.
I did my part for 7 years to support "independent journalism". Now it is your turn. Step up to the plate. Put your money where your mouth is. Or shut it.
-
Uh
I hope I'm not the only one who's noticing that the letters welcoming Paglia back with open arms are disproportionately represented in the editor's choice group.
Are the editors of Salon as self-congratulatory as Ms. Paglia? Or, should the question be asked the other way around?
I read Salon every day, but one of the reasons I haven't ponied up for a subscription is because I've never been terribly impressed with Salon's very high opinion of itself. Given the recent spate of eyebrow-raising goofs like their "uppity" characterization of Barack Obama, and Debra Dickerson's bizarre tirade about "blackness," one might think that it's Salon, and not Hillary, that ought to admit to its mistakes, rather than engaging in further self-adulation like labeling one of their founding writers as a "cultural high priestess" and conveniently ignoring her (numerous!) detractors.
-
Groan!
And I used to be a fan. One of the (many) predictable charges Paglia likes to lay on others is that someone or something is outdated (John Edwards' hair, for example.) Well, Camille feels so tired now herself. Even when the topics are "new" (Anna Nicole), her responses are so predictable. Sorry, Camille, you lost your credibility as a Salon-worthy commentator when you went AWOL for the worst years of Bush's strangehold on the mainstream media. For instance, I'm no longer intellectually "provoked" by her defense of right-wing radio. Just bored. No one care about those goons anymore. Talk about a completely insular crowd. Reading her now is like stepping into the time warp. She was once on the pulse, in her way, but she just doesn't seem to get that the world has moved on.
-
Well, I am hoping that headline is a joke....
Cultural high priestess? Somehow I myself got through life without giving that writer a second glance. Am I not part of the culture? Perhaps I am part of the wrong culture.
Gee Salon, there surely are better writers out there ..... at least it is only once a month.
-
I'll do it every single time
Methinks you must work for Salon, otherwise how would you know I'm not a subscriber?
Actually, I've subscribed to Salon since it became a subscription site, and have read it regularly since 1998. This is the first year since subscription began that I haven't subscribed and only beacuse Salon had become so tedious and dull.
I'll tell you what, as a long time reader (I'll bet for more years than you), I'll renew if you put your money where your mouth is, cancel and go away.
-
Happy Camper
We're in the same club, Bub. Subscriber since Day One, just let it expire this past fall. My apologies.
-
More Salon Columnists We're Likely to See...
Gee, don't forget to push that button and send Salon more money, folks...and you'll have even more fun to look forward to:
- Glenn Beck and Salon's own "GoldenBoy" with team coverage of Middle Eastern affairs
- Donald Rumsfeld, discussing military events
- Ann Coulter, covering politics in general
- Donald Trump's real estate reports and analysis
- Isaiah Washington on gay rights
- and a special new daily feature, "Paris-Watch" (and no, we're not talking about France)
-
Well, Happy Camper --
It's simple. See the little star next to my handle? That's what indicates I'm logged in as a "Premium Member."
Your posts in this letters column don't have the star. Therefore, either you are not a subscriber, or you specifically log out in order to post letters. Which is it?
By the way, 28 pages of letters? Most of them in the first few pages negative? And, yes, stars only to the fawning ones? Good move, Salon.
I probably won't be renewing either, though I'll miss King Kaufman.