To the writer’s credit, though, she seems to not be entirely over what happened to her, and it can be very hard to see beyond “these are horrible people” when you’re the victim and still in pain.

MaryTracey, I certainly get that. I am in fact a fairly emotional person (just ask my mood swings), and I also think that I have a bit of knack for turning emotional reactions into reasoned ones, but I also think that there is a line where you can become overly-emotional, take things far too seriously and disrupt your own life. The sad fact is that in our world where these kinds of stories are so rampant, if we took the time to sit down and cry over every one of them, we wouldn’t get the time to do anything else, including sleep. Which is the place that my comments are coming from.

And the problem is that this isn’t a one-off thing. It happens constantly — if it has to do with women, it goes in the “style” section. The section does in fact include stories about “lifestyles,” but that doesn’t change the fact that it’s almost entirely fluff. Fashion, food, wedding, the occasional celebrity piece and “lifestyle” stories that are usually rather flippant in tone. And all of that stuff is fine and good for those who are interested in it, but it’s hardly the place to put the kinds of stories about women’s lives that they do. A few weeks ago it was a story about how no matter what women wear in the workplace, it’s always wrong and women are always seen as unprofessional. An important issue, and if anything it should have been under “business.” Where was it? Style. The only reason that I bother to look there? Because I know that’s where they bury women’s stories.

My comment was just to shed light on what I understand the protocol of that particular NYTimes column to be and my mixed feelings.

But I do, very much, understand your emotional reaction.

This particular essay made me angry for many of the same reasons that it angered you, I can’t believe there was no mention of the word rape.

However, the Times isn’t at fault for “style” aspect or the heading of “Modern Love”. This writer had to have specifically intended for her essay to appear here. And that is her right, to express her mixed feelings about a past event that maybe had impact in her life/modern view of sexuality and love. I think the theme can be relevant.

The Style section of the times is actually about Lifestyles, not fashion. (I think it may have even used to be called “Lifestyles”. I cringe at the association of “Rape” with “Style” as well, but as a regular reader of the Times and specifically that column… its taking it out of context to be so upset with the Times. They didn’t do that.

I’m conflicted about whether or not it was appropriate to accept this essay in this section. I’m not sure I would agree with them seeing the essay and feeling like it had a place in the conversation and then saying “no.. its too controversial” or telling a survivor which words she needed to use to make it appropriate to print.

I think ultimately the article is about how the women in the situation really betrayed and hurt her in the long run, in a way that was as psychologically violent as the rape. I think she conveys it appropriately, using words like “criminal” and “victimized” and “violence” and “crisis” – and yes, I believe its important to call it what it was, a rape. Absolutely.

However… in this case, the point she was making was that the actions of the sorority sisters were on par with the violence. The relationships she is talking about, are not about the men or the rape, its about the betrayal of the women. And how women perpetuate these stereotypes, this shame, this cruelty. I think thats a very harrowing and valid point. That women can be rape apologists and worse is something we don’t hear NEARLY enough about.

And I’m not trying at all to blame women for the problem, I don’t believe they are on par in a larger sense with the violence of the larger patriarchy and rapists and a male-dominated system that does this and condones it and blames victims etc.

All the female rape apologists in the world are not causing this problem and I know that.

But there is a culture of women in America, specifically, that is negative and bullshit and all tied up with their oppression and women do choose to perpetuate it. Women who know better. I think this essay attempts to explore that and how dangerous that is in a personal, honest way. I think there is room for her conflict and what she calls it (even if she doesn’t say rape), in the conversation. I just wish it could be a conversation where someone says to her “please, for your sake and others… call it what it is…”

I guess I would say I have mixed feelings about this article.

Being emotional is a human characteristic, devalued as a result of it’s association with women. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with being emotional, nor is it any better or worse than being “rational”, though few would question which one is more desirable.

The hell?!

This is exactly what patriarchy wants – for women to treat each other like this. Makes the jobs of men (and other beneficiaries of patriarchy – whites, etc) that much easier – just sit back and what, and then say “See how the wimminz are?”

And, yes, I’m livid about how NYT chose to cover the story. “Style” and “Modern Love”, my ass.