Once more into the mailbag. First up, in our April 29, 2007 "A Note to Our Readers," Jim wrote, "Iraq Quiz -- We thank those who came before. NOLA Express ran a great Vietnam quiz in the early 70s and this is us updating it. Since the press won't deal with reality (see 1st part of the trilogy), it's very likely we'll have another illegal war in a few years. Hopefully, someone will see our quiz and carry it forward as well. (NOLA Express' quiz is not available online. We're not even sure if they're archived -- in the older sense of the term -- anywhere.)" An e-mail from BD advises us, "Nola Express is indeed archived.The entire work files of the paper were sold to Temple University and are available in a special collections library, along w/ a complete 145 issue run!" Nola Express was an independent paper out of New Orleans back in the day when the alternative press meant something more than dining reviews and Teens on Steroids cover stories. Those able to visit the archives are strongly urged to. You'll not only get a strong sense of history, you'll grasp all that is lacking into the alternative weeklies allegedly serving various cities around the country. Thank you to BD for passing that on.
Karen e-mailed about Ava and C.I.'s TV review of CSI Miami and runs David Caruso Personal Fan Pages. Karen e-mailed at the end of June and we've been meaning to give her a shout out but the last few editions have been rough. We're noting her now.
Participating in the responses for this feature are The Third Estate Sunday Review's Dona, Jess, Ty, Ava and Jim, Rebecca of Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude, Betty of Thomas Friedman Is a Great Man, C.I. of The Common Ills and The Third Estate Sunday Review, Kat of Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills), Cedric of Cedric's Big Mix, Mike of Mikey Likes It!, Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz, and Wally of The Daily Jot, just FYI.
Mel e-mails that he just saw Hairspray and was wondering if we were going to review it and why we don't do more movie reviews?
Ty and C.I. saw Hairspray (Ty and his boss kidnapped C.I. for a preview showing awhile back) and they have nothing bad to say about it and encourage anyone who's able to see the film to make the time. But we don't do movie reviews here. From time to time, we do a DVD review. That's generally a documentary though we're also trying to include as a new feature noting strong films you may not have heard of the way you should. (our review of Grace of My Heart is the first in that series and, so far, also are only one.) We've also (use Google, our archives are screwed up) reviewed all of Jane Fonda's comedy films available on DVD in the lead up to the release of Monster-In-Law. (Those start out as a group project but quickly became Ava and C.I. features -- this piece by Ava and C.I. has links to some of those reviews.) Ava and C.I. did a critique of the critiques to Monster-In-Law back in May of 2005. But we don't do film reviews. We get offered DVDs all the time via e-mail (thank you to those who offer and to the woman pushing a Darfur film, you don't want us to review it). Via Ty, Ava and C.I., the core six and Kat can see anything previewed on the West Coast. It's equally true that when five of the core six (Jim, Dona, Jess, Ty and Ava) were in NY (back when this site started), we frequently went to the movies. This site was much talked about (among Jim, Dona, Jess and Ty) and when it finally started (when Jim snagged C.I. at a campus lecture and asked for help), we had ideas about what we would be and what wouldn't be. One thing we thought we would be was a weekly that covered realities college students addressed. Having reported on the realities of a fellow student's (bad) rehab stay and another student's decision to have an abortion (after being impregnated by someone in her family) that shifted. We really appreciate that they allowed us to report on those (as well as some other people allowing us to report other stories). In the print edition (still distributed on our old campus for at least one more year), those were well received. In the online edition? Ignored. In fact, months and months later, when there was a big reproductive rights rally in DC, C.I. pushed our abortion story (at The Common Ills) and it only then garnered any attention. It was really disappointing to us, then five journalism majors (Dona, Jim, Ty, Ava and Jess), to bust our butts trying to tell these very real stories and see no response to them. It also really bummed out Jim (yes, Jim, of all people) that these people sharing these deeply personal details of their lives were doing so with the hope that someone else would be helped and yet no one gave a damn. We gave up on that. However, that was one of our primary goals when we started. Another goal was telling the truth about the illegal war and we've carried that goal on through. We don't even remember what else was in the first edition (and with the archives so screwed up, it would take forever to locate) (C.I. says there was a cutting of lyrics or poetry most likely and that we did that for several months -- that was Dona's idea) but as we were finishing up that first edition and trying to figure out what was missing, Jim seized upon TV. He noted that you couldn't go into anyone's apartment or dorm room without coming across the TV being turned on. Dona swears Ava and C.I.'s response was a loud groan (they don't dispute Dona's memory) and Jim, Dona, Ty and Jess can tell you that they had to be talked into that first feature. This and only this was the thing that resulted in any e-mails. Dona and Jim were checking the e-mails constantly. The Common Ills community members, tipped off by C.I. to our site, e-mailed welcoming e-mails and encouraging ones. But the only e-mails commenting on anything we had done were the ones on the TV review. Those e-mails and the ones that followed helped us figure out who our original online audience was: mainly young couples struggling with bills and often with a young child or two. When this became a constant in the e-mails, Ava and C.I. (with support from Dona) declared all TV features would be on broadcast TV because the majority of the early readers did not have cable or satellite. Jim, Jess and Ty fought that. After the first month, the TV commentaries would be written solely by Ava and C.I. so it really didn't matter what Jim, Jess and Ty thought. But when we were planning that first edition and doing it (and planning as we went along) there was a movie that three of us had just seen (Jim, Ty and Dona can no longer remember what it was) and there was talk about that but there was also the fact that every time they talked it up on campus (it was a small film) there was a "What?" response and a general sense that who has time to run off to the movies? So films were never the focus of this site. TV was a last minute thought and it's probably what we're known for now more than anything else. Ava and C.I.'s TV commentaries are always the most e-mailed on feature each week and their audience continues to increase. Things they wrote in 2005 are still stumbled upon by people today who discover this site for the first time. The point there is, in answer to an e-mail that came in this week from a 19-year-old female wanting advice on starting her own site, try to do what you want and don't toss aside an idea that others may disdain. (Ava and C.I. disdained the TV commentaries -- karma is the fact that they now write them.)
Lori Jones e-mails to say "TV: Global Boring" "was epic and amazing and I'll leave it to just that since I don't want to freak Ava and C.I. out but I do wonder if that means the return to epic promised for this month has been put on hold?"
No, the planned return to hard hitting, slap you upside your face, leave you laughing and stunned does appear this week as planned. It's amazing. They took the longest on this one they've ever taken and that was mainly in debating, after they wrote it, what to leave in and what to pull.
Bryan appreciates "Boys & Girls . . . have a good time together " from two weeks ago but asks that we note the explanation of Ava and C.I. recreating the Liza Featherstone for "Nation Isle" was covered by Mike on May 16th and asks that we note that. (We are happy to.)
Kate has "had it with Katha Pollitt and all her nonsense." She's referring to a blog post at The Notion (The Nation's blog) where Pollitt trashes Alexander Cockburn for a column (link goes to his column at CounterPunch and we're not linking to Pollitt's nonsense). She wondered what our thoughts on Pollitt or Cockburn's pieces were?
Elaine: I think the plus is that Katha Pollitt's finally grasped, after the four year mark, that an illegal war is going on. Other than that, I have no comment on Pollitt. I will note that Alexander Cockburn is one of my favorite writers and I always enjoy reading him.
Ava: Was she again being "sardonic"? That is her favorite catch-all when she's called out for a mistake, right? She was clearly being "sardonic." I'll agree with Elaine that it's nice Katha's finally discovered a war is going on.
C.I.: Katha Pollitt's comments are uninformed and racist. That's the reality. Whether you agree with Cockburn or not, just on the face of it, Pollitt's comments are racist and uninformed. Now Cockburn has many points, one of which is that the resistance is little covered and that it's all lumped into one grouping entitled "insurgency" or, sometimes, "terrorists." Pollitt proves Cockburn's point by immediately going to the issue of sexism.
Jim: It's the only thing she can go to because she is so grossly uninformed.
C.I.: Agreed. You want to grab this?
Jim: No, go on.
C.I.: Feminists in the Arab world will often speak of how they are more than a little tired of what they see as the West's attitude of pity for them. Pollitt's resorting to extremes to build a case against Cockburn and ridicule him. In the process, unintentionally, she resorts to stereotypes. There is very real violence directed at women in Iraq today. There is a femicide going on. That didn't start because Iraqis woke up one day and said, "Let's subjugate all the women and kill some for sport." That is a direct consequence of the US involvement in Iraq, the illegal involvement. Women had higher social standing before the illegal war, they had even higher standing before the sanctions and other events of the 90s. Who are the resistance fighters? Pollitt's nonsense reads like every bomber and kidnapper is the resistance. As an Arab feminist said, "She's suffering MSM damage." The resistance to the illegal war and the illegal occupation in Iraq is very real. Among those resisting are the oil unions. Katha Pollitt doesn't appear to grasp that or is in such a rush to over simply that she presents the Bully Boy's version of the illegal war. There are many forms of violent resistance going on and there are many forms of non-violent resistance going on in Iraq. She lumps them all into what the Bully Boy has termed "terrorism" when the real terrorism is occupying someone else's country and refusing to leave even when the people wish you gone. Cockburn was attempting to introduce an element into the discussion, Katha Pollitt ridicules him for it and nothing she writes indicates she grasps what he was getting at, the nature of resistance or even the nature of historical struggles. Like Kate, I found Pollitt's comments outrageous when I heard about them repeatedly, mainly from Arab feminists.
Jess: It really isn't surprising that The Nation would want to shut down this discussion that Cockburn is attempting and that Tom Hayden attempted before. Some of the resistance can be found in the many legislators and professionals who met with Hadyen and CODEPINK in Jordan last year. Pollitt was too busy ridiculing CODEPINK domestically to ever note that meeting. As my mother has said for two years now, Pollitt started planning her wedding and apparently lost her common sense.
Rebecca: Jess' mother and I talk about that on the phone quite often. How Pollitt picked a funny time to have the spinster woes and began writing as if she was also suffering from severe Carrie Bradshaw damage. I'll just add that it's amazing that Pollitt can bring nothing to the discussion of Iraq but wants to come out punching at Cockburn.
Cedric: Well it's not really that amazing because that is what she does. Whether it's a rightwinger, CODEPINK or Cockburn or the then president of the NAACP, that is what she does. She's proven herself incapable of presenting anything -- unless you can count that weak ass yearly "Most Worthy Charities" column that needs to go online and stop trashing up the magazine -- and is instead only capable of doing that sort of thing. And I'll add, The Nation feels they're so high minded and above the fray, judging by their infamous e-mail 'passed on' to us so I'll assume they've never read one word of Pollitt.
Betty: I agree with everything that's been said and will back up Cedric because I actually raised the point of her writing style a day after we finished our response edition to The Nation's insane e-mail. I called C.I. and said, "What about Pollitt?" They're offering that we should be more mindful of our tone. What about Pollitt? But Cedric's exactly correct. A year after Abeer is in the news, Pollitt, under criticism, finally writes a single sentence about Abeer. A fourteen-year-old girl is gang-raped and murdered, her five-year-old sister and her parents are murdered in the same war crimes conducted by US soldiers. To Pollitt, that's one brief sentence. But let her be able to grab the knives and carve someone up and she's got all the time in the world. The Nation needs to worry less about what we do and, if they're so 'high minded,' worry about what Pollitt does. She can't talk about Iraq or any big issue because all she can do is carve up. One of C.I.'s friend who was offended by the Arab portrayal in Pollitt's nonsense asked me if I got how much that offended her and I explained how much I am and will always be offended by Katha Pollitt's decision to speak for what my race, not her race, needs to do. The woman said, "So you do understand." And believe me, I do. Katha Pollitt is 2% knowledge and 98% hot air that is increasingly and increasingly offensive. It's past time that she got she is not the template for all human experience. And that "loud" just makes you loud, it doesn't make you a feminist.
Ty: Betty's done so I want to go back to C.I. and anyone else can speak but I walked into a very private conversation on this topic and thought C.I. might share on that.
C.I.: I can't believe how hurtful Pollitt's scribbles were. I can't believe that she can't grasp that. The conversation Ty's referring to was with a feminist, a feminist who is Arab, and she was just destroyed by that nonsense. There is so much hatred of a race of people being expressed in those scribbles by Pollitt. And a White reader from the West, fed the propaganda of the administration, might fall for it without a second thought, but it is highly offensive. I don't want to get too personal because I don't have permission from her to speak on this topic but the question my friend was getting at was, basically, "Is this how feminism sees me in this country?" It's a very serious question and Pollitt's lack of knowledge and cheap pot shots were not seen as "Welcome to the USA." The Nation's got a real problem with race on so many levels but that nonsense by Pollitt, coming from a feminist, did more damage than they may ever know.
Jim: I think the issues that Betty, C.I. and others have focused on are very important. And I'm not trying to cut off discussion of that but since we've got a pause, I'll offer that lumping everyone practicing resistance into terrorists is offensive just on the face of it. You would think she would grasp that.
Dona: She can't. She's too busy playing "I'm so much more feminist and in the West this is how we do it." Because of this nonsense and the reaction of at least two friends of C.I.'s, there was a meeting on this topic last week. And I got how offensive it was just from hearing about it, I heard about it from Jim, but attending that meeting where American feminists and Arab feminists spoke freely, I realized that we all have our issues. As someone from the West, I see traditional dress, forget burkas, and think, "Liberate yourself!" That is wrong on my part and I never grasped that until the meeting. But there were all these issues and everyone speaking on their own understandings and confusions. Katha Pollitt needs to do a little work before she passes herself off as SuperWoman who will save the world because her 'saving' is not needed by all feminists and it takes supreme ignorance to look at a US created problem and try to indict another people for it.
Jess: Exactly because this and the civil war and other issues didn't pop up from the American people. The woman from MADRE, last year on RadioNation with Laura Flanders, was speaking of how the Shia/Sunni split was created by Americans. By the same token, women had to protest, during the American occupation, to get the limited rights that they currently have. The US was alll ready and prepared to sign off on a Constitution that would have completely destroyed women's rights. As it is, the rights aren't preserved and it's a huge setback. But who courted religious extremists and put them in power?
Ava: Let's say Sweden invaded and occupied the US tomorrow. Let's say that for easy compliance with their occupation they went to the extreme right. Jerry Falwell's dead, right? Pretend he's not. They put people like Falwell in charge. Suddenly women's rights are stripped away. How would Katha Pollitt feel if Ruth Roach Pierson was writing a piece, in Canada, about American women, like the one Pollitt wrote? My guess is she wouldn't be pleased.
Mike: I'm going to repeat what I said to one of C.I.'s friends who was bothered by Pollitt, we're talking about the Den Mother to the Mud Flap Gals. This isn't a great thinker or even a consistent one. That's what that whole nonsense about "economics" in that recent column was really underscoring. When has Pollitt written about economics? She hasn't this year but she wants to get on her high horse. I said, Yeah, she's offensive. But the thing is, you're talking about someone with a very small mind and a very small scope.
Dona: Mike's editing his summary but he had the woman laughing and she said "Thank you" at the end of it.
Mike: Well, she was just so torn up about it and I can understand that but my point was, this isn't a Robin Morgan or Alice Walker. It's just the in-house feminist for The Nation, a magazine that doesn't give a damn about women. Think of her as the cover the magazine hides behind and, realizing she's turned herself into a beard, you'll grasp how little she means in the big scheme of things.
Wally: I don't disagree with anything that's been said, I agree with everything, but I'm sure The Nation will see it as "There they go again attacking the women."
Ava: B.S. I know what you're saying and it's a point worth raising but Pollitt wrote a racist screed and too damn bad for The Nation if they can't take the criticism. We've been overly kind in the past to the print version of Melissa from thirty-something. She was racist and her comments hurt women. Let the Mud Flap Gals rally to her defense but she's not getting support from real feminists when she stereotypes and insults and hurts -- hurts -- Arab women. She's becoming George Will in drag more and more as she sees herself as the expert on everything and capable of weighing in all races. She's stereotyping and she's offensive. I hope they do whine to C.I. again. If they do they can expect a very loud WAAAA back from me if I catch that in the inbox. Someone really needs to explain to Pollitt, dear, you're an old line socialist gone soft, White woman who stopped progressing around 1992, you are not an expert on all races, you are not an expert on much of anything at all. Go stalk your ex-boyrfriends on the internet and write your lame poetry but quit thinking you're carrying a feminist torch because you are nothing but the worst example of elitist, White "America first" thinking trying to pass itself off as feminism.
Jim: And that's going to be the only one we respond to in roundtable fashion. Ty picked that one and knew C.I. would respond due to the fact that it had been a huge issue at the house, with many women covering over to explain how offensive they found Pollitt's scribbles. We actually had three other e-mails we were going to respond to in roundtable fashion but Dona's noting this has already doubled the allotted time for this feature.
