WOW! Once again I prove to be a horrendous judge of writing!

Personally, I liked Lucy Caldwell's piece. Yes, she said 'I" a lot, and entertained many career options (playfully in places), and she is young and doesnt have much experience, and all that. However, to me this was a very personal peice of soul-searching by someone trying to find their place in their chosen field. Why shouldnt she mention her personal experiences, and the negative feedback she has gotten? She seems more self-aware and self-examining that sefl-absorbed to me. And the 'girl' thing? She seemed to use that to acknowledge that she is young and is still tryng to sort thru things.

And, while I am no fan of conservatives, I feel she is right about the attitude of many in the art world and the literary world and most of the news/entertainment worlds (I confess, I pretty much feel that way about conservatives, too, and I feel bad about that. I *do* try to listen to what they say on occasion, tho, as every once in a while, they have a good idea). As she says, maybe if her positions and perspectives were repsected, then she might stay in an organization that doesnt require its employees to apply a deep right-wing perspective on everything.

Just my take...

Carolle :)

PS: Actaully, I wish she *would* write a piece on her views on the Larry Summers thing!

Caerolle, are you Trying to be annoying (even the spelling of your name grates...)

Okay, fair enough about Lucy. Maybe we all judged her a mite too harshly. After all, it seems like she is attempting to not insulate herself amongst those who think on positions exactly the same. I think a liberal in a conservative environment would hardly even be allowed in, though, so for her to be worried about being seen as odd by liberals is rather mild.

Then, too, if everyone is so apparently liberal, how come this country is so crazily conservative?

Mara wrote:

Caerolle, are you Trying to be annoying (even the spelling of your name grates...)

Nooooooooooo, wasnt trying to be annoying, just saying what i felt. However, I run across ppl like you every day who are just naturally pissed off by how I am or who I am or how I look (and by most everything else in life to boot).

So what did *you* find so annoying about me, other than my name? And why is that annoying anyhow?

And yes, I agree that most conservatives are much less tolerant toward liberals than most liberals are toward conservatives, but really, do we want to be like that? Or are you eye-for-eye, and feel that we should respond in the same manner? This is one of the things I love about Obama is the idea of rising above that kind of approach.

I hope you can spend the remainder of your day without encountering ppl who annoy you!

Carolle

I haven't really figured out why conservatives can't be feminists, according to the recent entries of XX Factor, Lucy's included.

Does being conservative keep her from thinking that men and women should be equal in all things? Or are they just using a different definition of feminism on this blog?

It's a wider issue than just here, otherwise no woman would ever say she wasn't a feminist. I just find it more odd coming from a 20-year-old girl. (And yes, I have a 20-year-old intern right now and think that "girl" is a perfect term to describe her and most her age. Adorably naive, as I'm sure I was as well. I'm a wise old 28 now! Hehe)

Well it's important to remember that Lucy's writing caused a number of independent people to react in the same negative way. There's no point saying "we were too harsh," because "we" don't act as a group.

When I read that she was a 20 year-old journalism student, I basically just thought "oh thank you Slate for publishing the opinion of someone with no qualifications whatsoever."

Malarkey,

I am assuming this was directed to me, even tho it appears as a reply to someone else?

Yes, I know that many ppl reacted negatively to Lucy's post (and seemingly to her as a person, also) independent of each other. So by 'we' I didnt mean that we were directed from the home office of the United Liberaltarian Front or any thing. I just mean that as liberals, do we want to engage in the same sort of personal attacks that accuse conservatives of making?

I have seen so much ends-directed activity (a very conservative/Republican sort of approach, to me) on the part of Democrats lately, and I feel we have lost a lot by that. To me personally, altho I *definitely* understand wanting to keep the Republicans out of office and away from Supreme Court nominations and such, I dont feel we have accomplished much if we become like Karl Rove.

Does that make any better sense?

Also, personally, I am very interested in what young ppl think! Yes, they often have the confidence (arrogance?) of thinking they know everything because they often dont yet understand how complicated and nuanced things are (I am assuming that the ones who *never* learn that become conservatives?). However, I find their ideas ans opinions interesting, and they are part of our society, so however we feel about what they say, isnt it ok to give them a chance to speak?

Finally, the reason that I made this post, with this title, is that I felt many of the posts were really mean, way beyond finding her ideas repulsive or her credentials lacking. I dont agree at all with a lot of what she says, or what she says she has done (like bragging about taking on women's issues), but I worried about her reading these posts and being hurt (maybe ppl feel that comes with the territory?). I dont feel that *anyone* deserves that, and I wanted to have a counterbalance to that if she read the Fray reaction to her blog post.

FWIW,

Carolle :)

I think you have overestimated the value of being nice. Not that I think it's good to be mean, it's just that I don't tend to pay attention to it either way. I place a higher value on honesty and free expression, unencumbered attempts to reach sensible conclusions about things...

I also think you lump people into groups based on whether they are nice or not nice. For example, you compared Fray posters to Karl Rove.

So on one hand, you have Rove. He is not nice. He engages in vote-caging and encourages election fraud and illegally firing US attorneys and leaking the names of covert CIA agents as a form of political retaliation. He also likes to spread lies and rumours about his opponents.

On the other hand, you have a group of people who all independently express a similar idea: that is, why is this 20 year-old undergrad who is not a particularly exceptional writer featured on a major online publication like Slate? What the hell is Slate thinking? Don't they know they can lose readers this way? That idea may not be nice for Lucy to read, but it certainly doesn't compare to vote-caging.

So you see, the mere absence of niceness does not a Rove make.

Also, the validity of a person's political opinion has nothing to do with whether or not they are nice. By publishing on Slate, Lucy has made herself fair game for Fray criticism, and she knows it can be harsh. Anyone who writes for the internet needs the thickest skin. So long as she doesn't abandon her ambitions in the face of criticism, this will make her a better journalist. Call it a learning experience.

Have you ever heard it said that the one thing worse than being despised is being pitied? I doubt she needs your sympathy. For cryin' out loud, she's only 20 and she's already published in Slate!

Malarkey,

Thanks for your reply! :)

A couple of things. First, I am sorry I compared the posters who were just voicing their own personal opinions to Rove. As you say, I think their actions cant even begin to compare to those of Rove. I was just trying to give the hero of the personal attack as an example, prolly not the best analogy!

Next, I guess by 'the value of being nice'' you are referring to how useful it is as a means to get to an end? I accept that it prolly isnt very useful, esp in the short run. As far as its value, tho, that is pretty high to me, at least, for better or for worse. I still firmly believe that good points could have been made without using hateful rhetoric.

I guess my final point relates to my second point. No, I have never heard that saying, but like most old sayings, it doesnt make a lot of sense to me (I tend to see things very differently from everyone else, so it is me, and not the saying). Although I may be making too fine a distinction, or missing the point somehow, I was really trying for pity, just empathy.

Maybe this was misplaced empathy, I dont know...maybe as you say, harsh attacks go with the territory, and she expects that. I just know how I would feel, and it would be great to read a post from someone who supported me at least a little bit. And honestly, I didnt find her post as disturbing as most ppl apparently did, so I wasnt lying to make her feel better or anything! I certainly didnt like or approve of a lot of the content, but I personally felt it was well-written and sincere.

Sincerely,

Carolle :).

For one anecdotal experiment on liberal tolerance of conservatives and vice versa, here's a piece from our very own Slate from 2004. Proves nothing, of course.

ok, that is just too funny!

pretty believable, too...

thanks for the link, o_b!

Carolle :)