Ya know I really do wanna be open to what Camille is saying, and what her letter writers are saying, but as I worked through her column I just became more and more depressed. All this angry judgement about feminism seemed to make feminism the enemy. Everyone seems to forget what feminism arose in response to in the first place.

Camille's call for dialog is undermined by her failure to acknowledge that feminism is worthwhile. Whats the point of a dialog about feminism if everyone has to agree that femiism is bad or on the wrong track or fatally flawed or hopelessly elitist, etc...

The accusation that liberals are intolerant makes me crazy, because the argument usually runs along the lines that liberals are intolerant of intolerance. For instance, a couple of the the letters Camille prints seem to say that feminism is intolerant of the letter author's desire to be antifeminist. So feminists are supposed to accomodate intolerant anti-feminism to avoid being intolerant? Excuse me? My head just exploded.

It happens all the time that conservatives complain about the response to some cause but they never seem to remember the bad things about that cause in the first place. So the response always seem to become the issue rather than the initial cause.

The show Mad Men depicts a pre-feminist America. Its fine if there are some women who would prefer that world to the one we have now. But it stikes me as odd they seem to want to say that their choice to live in a pre-feminist world is somehow a feminist choice. Isn't it actually a reactionary choice?

Sarah Palin's appeal has nothing whatsoever to do with her looks. It has to do with her being a very typical, small-town, basically conservative, America-loving, strong-willed woman who is completely divorced from the elitists on both coasts who think they are the font of all wisdom and urbanity. For decades, you on the left have dismissed most of America as "fly-over" country, unworthy of notice and chock-a-block full of "trailer trash," completely lacking in sophistication. I've got news for you. There are more of us than there are of you, with your Ivy League indoctrination masquerading as erudition and your brie-and-crackers brunches and white-wine-sipping cocktail parties. Liftig one's pinky finger while you sip your Earl Grey and munch on your cucumber and watercress finger sandwiches is NOT a sign of social superiority--howevermuch you'd like for the rest of us to think so.

Be prepared. On November 5th, I fully anticipate that you'll be both hung-over AND reaching for the zanex because Americans are not dumb enough to install in the White House a man who's little more than an empty suit who is glib and articulate but without character. We had eight years of that with Clinton and the chickens HE hatched have now come home to roost.

I'm just amazed at the ignorance, hatred, and outright spite shown by many posting to this article. Most of those idiots (and many don't even know who they are) will praise someone like Hillary Clinton without even blinking an eye.

You won't call her a phoney as you do Gov. Palin. Yet, you have no problem with Clinton (towards the end of the Primaries) when she's "knocking down a shot" with "the boys" (I'm sure she's done that all of her life - NOT), or talking about "loving to fish when she was a young girl" (NEVER heard her bring up that subject in the past), or "learned how to fire a gun from her Grandfather" (right, I'm sure she's a life long member of the NRA), or talking with a Southern accent when speaking in the South, or trying to talk "street talk" when in front of minority groups. Obviously you don't know the meaning of the word PHONEY, or you're just blind to reality.

It must be killing some of you that Palin has made it on her own (i.e... elected Mayor and Governor) without the help of her husband's name, taken on her own party, and tripled taxes on "Big Oil". I feel sorry for you.

Yeah, Palin may have "lost" the debate, but she wasn't there to "debate," she was there to present herself to the public, and at that she did a great job. She is very smart and smooth, and apparently a skilled political in-fighter (albeit on a small stage, so far). She understands TV, which is how political messages are conveyed these days. Give her another 4 or 8 years, and she will be formidable.

I, too, am opposed to most of her views, but I will not be surprised if she becomes the first female U.S. President.

Q: "Why does Salon pay Camille Paglia for her writing?"

A: Page hits. (See the "Active Letters" list.)

You're just feeding the beast, folks.

Responding to a Paglia article is like getting at $10 BJ from a crack whore. It feels good for a moment, but the second after you come, you instantly realize you've just helped perpetuate something very bad.

I should have posted my new tilapia recipe. I shoulda gone for a walk.

Where does a Protestant go to do penance?

Camile should be discussing her feelings about Pallin with a therapist. I recommend she reread Susan Sontag's FASCINATING FASCISM.

I want to talk about real middle America in the upper Midwest.

First of all, I'm a male in my early twenties in my last semester at school and I was raised in North Dakota by a 60s feminist who doesn't subscribe to any litmus test. My mother stayed home to raise her kids and throughout the long haul of being a mom (my oldest sister is ten years my senior) served as head of the YWCA, PEO,and worked in any number of volunteer organizations (including at our Presbyterian church), writes a lauded and award winning weekly opinion column for the local paper, had a longstanding segment on public radio, and still found time to get her masters degree and teach freshmen English at a local University. Her hobbies include knitting, sewing, and gardening. My mother is exactly the kind of middle American feminist that you claim does has not existed and whose lifestyle is unacceptable to so-called elite feminists. Incredibly, she was raised by very conservative people and came to her tolerant and progressive worldview of her own accord (and persuaded my father, a man who voted for Reagan once, to do the same).

I write all this because my mother and sisters balk at the absurd notion that Sarah Palin represents a new kind of feminism. Just because Palin is a woman does not mean she is a feminist, nor does it mean she is a good representative of "real Main Street women". Sarah Palin does not come across as authentic because real people don't pepper their speech with excessive colloquialisms and condescending monikers (Joe six-pack? No one has ever actually said that) in order to prove their bona fides. She hasn't shown the ability to answer even basic policy questions (or even name a SINGLE periodical)! I don't think she's stupid but her willful ignorance (feigned or real) is insulting and condescending to true middle American feminists. I was raised to respect all but also to question everything and call a spade a spade.

Those are middle American values.

In addition, and this can't be repeated enough, Palin made women pay for their own rape kits! Feminist? You must be kidding.

Camille, I implore you to do some soul-searching. Perhaps it is you who is out of touch.