O Anonymous "Friend," please get some courage and name thyself.
Under cover of anonymity much harm is done by people who would never indulge in such behavior if there names were attached....
Rather than sloppily introducing a new argument, why not just directly engage or criticize what I've actually written?
A CD is not the same as a magazine; a song is not interchangeable with text. I specifically criticized the New Oxford American for ignoring the vast contributions of Louisiana women...ON THEIR CD.
That may not be a matter that interests you, but to toss up a non sequitur about writers when I am talking about musicians makes you come across as desperate--you know, as if you JUST gotta show up that Smirnoff for calling you snarky by finding some snark somewhere to toss back at him even if it involves you straying from the matter at hand.
That said, I'll address your non sequitur: I edited the magazine for twenty years. To pull out one issue of mine "at random" and compare its list of writers with a newcomer's list (which I did not even criticize) is glib.
Less glib would be to judge an editor's twenty-year career by more than one "random" issue. If you did that, you'd probably find that sometimes we published a majority of women and sometimes we published a majority of men.
Here's another hunch: I bet I've published more women than you've read.
I'll leave you with some free advice: In your last message, you composed two sentences and 50% of them made no sense, logically speaking. (Fifty percent would be a good ratio in many scenarios, but not this one.)
I refer to: "....while you apparently are better at recognizing that women can sing, you're not any better at recognizing that we can write."
Huh? I'm not any better at something that I'm better at?
Yeah, readers can stop and puzzle out what you mean, but why not just spare us that effort by writing with precision and clarity?
Becky, your snark is failing you--yet again.
The Old Oxford American CD on Alabama, which I curated, featured 27 artists of whom 7 were women. You could honorably argue there should have been more woman there--but don't miscount.
You also miscounted with regards to the New Oxford American CD on Louisiana, which has 21 artists of whom 3 are female.
Because your math is wrong, so is your "exact same ratio" conclusion and so is your slant.
The SouthComm Set
The City Paper |
LEO Weekly |
Medical News Papers
All contents © 1995-2013
City Press LLC, 210 12th Ave. S., Ste. 100, Nashville, TN 37203. (615) 244-7989.
All rights reserved. No part of this service may be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of City Press LLC,
except that an individual may download and/or forward articles via email to a reasonable number of recipients for personal, non-commercial purposes.
Powered by Foundation