Kathy Shaidle has made herself a walking illustration of her own argument (I use the term loosely) that women should never have been given the vote. And she will never allow herself to see it, much less step back from it.
I'll keep my own comments and opinions to a minimum and let Miss Shaidle speak for herself.
On her personal blog a few days ago, Miss Shaidle linked to her recent effort at PJ Media. The first few sentences left me both yawning and sure that whatever it is she was on about, it was something about which I don't give a damn ... apparently something to do with her Glory Daze as a leftist (**) and a 'punk'. *Oh! Yawn! Rebellion! Edginess!* No biggie; we're not all going to be interested in the same things. So, I just closed the window and moved on to something else on her blog that would interest me.
Then, today, she linked to a comment someone had made that tickled her fancy. I don't normally read the comments made in response to her (or other authors') articles. But, I followed the link ... and while I was there I read this comment by a 'MAPN':
Came here because of a Kathy Shaidle link. Read it, and still have no idea what the point is. Except that I've always avoided people with strong clothing prejudices of any kind, or who use clothes to "make a statement".and her response to it:
Not a fan of subtlety. Noted!I'll spare the reader my opinion of that sort of use of "noted".
So, because 'MAPN' has a valid point about her style and because her brush-off mildly irked me, I sent her this little email:
I think the problem the fellow was trying to bring to your attention is that oftentimes your "subtlety" approaches that of a blank piece of paper.The point being, of course, that that "subtlety" which leaves your readers with no idea what your point is is a "subtlety" too far.
This is her response to me:
No, he's just a moron. Anyone who doesn't understand what I'm getting at should stick to their college football games, because expecting them to catch up with my years of reading and influences would obviously be too much for themThis is my response back:
I hope you someday re-read what you just said.And this is what will likely be the last correspondence between us:
Other people's thickness isn't my problem; when they boast about it, it is singularly unbecoming and deserving of scorn. It's that simple.Well played! It is surely the goal of every author of note to pointlessly alienate her fans.
Call me old fashioned, but you've recently begun assuming a "familiar" tone with me that I don't care for. I have no time for patronizing scolds who presume to tell me what to write and how to write it, particularly total strangers.
Kathy Shaidle has no time for "patronizing scolds" ... and I have no time for whining feminist hypocrites.
(*) Oh, you know the one I mean! "Do these jeans make my ass look big?"
(**) News Flash: She's *still* a leftist ... she just, for whatever reason, no longer wishes to consider herself a leftist.
0 comments:
Post a Comment