>Emanuelle:
>What’s fascinating to observe is that a majority of the commenters here did exactly what Solnit described in her piece–
>denied the validity of her experience.
“denying the validity of her experience” means …challenging her. A contest to a child is not necessarilly oppression of the child. And number two, children should be controled and disciplined.
>And, as if that was not enough, personally >attacked her.
I did not agree with the type of attacks/arguments against her. Especially since I don’t want a society of hard bitten, psychologically tough females; for the harder the females, the harder the males have to be to still be the males. The problem with that is the males –unlike the females– are capped in how tough they will allow each other to be (despite feminism’s belief to the contrary). Consequently the hard bitten females will go on to be the toughest members of the community. (Christians/ american conservatives don’t think their beliefs thru, because they are anti rational [not just ir-rational].)
But solinit is not a shrinking violet–she is a political activist advocate! A speech making big mouth blabber mouth. This makes her contention (‘shes being bullied’) that much more absurd.
>A perfect illustration of her points.
Actually a perfect illustration of why females shouldn’t be involved in public.
