We were discussing this very thing in my social psych class tonight. We were reading about group processes and the concept of cyber anonymity: that people are more impulsive when they know their identities are secret. I've said this before, but this is the only website I've ever posted anything on. I've wanted to post on other sites, but I'll read through the comments and it's just a lot of swearing and name-calling that has little or nothing to do with whatever blog item or article was at the top of the page. Drives me nuts because there could be intelligent discourse if people weren't compelled to talk to each other in ways (I hope) they wouldn't were they face-to-face.

I actually take extra care with what I post and email because I know how easy it is to let your emotions run away with your typing. For me, it's easier to organize my thoughts and put together something reasonable when I'm not looking the other person in the face. That's a huge benefit for me because it means I won't get defensive or indignant or side-tracked.

Completing classes towards my PhD in clinical psych, and putting together a commitee for my dissertation.

Note to self: do not give money to a clinical psychologist who would send an email professing to take issue with the content of an article but merely dismisses the author as immature and unlikely to catch a man with her current hair color. I fear for her future patients.

Activities: Ageism

So...she practices it on a regular basis? No wonder she was so disappointed to find out you were "old."

I also like the "Eastern Psychological Association" bookends.

What does hair color have to do with anything? I was also apparently completely unaware that red hair is least desirable color considering the men I know all seem to love "fiery redheads."

Speaking from personal preferences, blondes are my least favorite. few things disappoint me more than when a natural redhead or brunette goes bottle blonde.

At any rate, I worry about the fact tht people may soon refer to this woman as "Doctor."

"least desirable hair color"

And her name is Ginger...

A little off topic: I don't point this out to knock Ginger personally, since it's not her fault she's being taught whatever (though a little critical thinking wouldn't hurt), but I was bothered to see what she's learning in her clinical psych program.

On her Facebook wall she says:
"I was reading for my social change class that the planet was really only designed to support 2 to 3 billion people max.
We're being trained that psychologists are suppose to play a role in facilitating behavioral changes for global sustainability. We’re suppose to help with changing peoples’ underlying value systems. The United States in particular has a strong value of human mastery over nature which is well illustrated by the injunction of the book of Genesis, “Be fruitful and multiply, and replenish the Earth, and subdue it; and have dominion over every living thing that moveth upon the Earth” . This value system would need to change to one that promotes living in harmony with nature."

Well Au Natural this comment has me confused

"I was reading for my social change class that the planet was really only designed to support 2 to 3 billion people max."

Actually if you believe in evolution their is no set design to support only 2 - 3 million. The planet/biology or systems change or fail due to other changes. If so who designed it - God, Spaghetti Monster, Aliens.

As to the long distance hate fest. I do tend myself to avoid to get into conflict and forums fights. But when I do I really want to tell the person why they are wrong not just call them names. It is more satisfying to call someone an idiot and give valid proof.

I'd wager 10-1 odds that "Ginger" believes herself to be an unusually perceptive and intuitive, as well as socially enlightened and highly intelligent.

The truth is probably that she is perfectly ordinary, and exceptional only in her immaturity. Now she cast aspersions on Miss Alkon because she thought she was 23, or so she said, now I don't know a single 23 year old that thinks less of themselves for being 23, so I'm assuming that "Ginger" is rather older, in her 30s or so. But her response to disagreement was on the level of an angry 14 year old girl, so what does that say about HER maturity level.

The planet is already supporting over 6 billion just fine and we're not even using all of our farmable land, or even close to it, moreover thanks to the use of artificial fisheries, we are going to be able to avoid depleting the ocean AND making sea food cheaper.

The "2-3 billion" assertion is just more proof of the idiocy that the social sciences have become.

I say we all friend her and deluge her with well-thought-out refutations to her every post. Of course, I'm recovering from surgery right now, and have nothing else to do. In a few more days when the kid help goes home, that will sound less appealing. I can't figure out what she was taking issue with, in Amy's article. She obviously believes it, or she wouldn't be a bottle blond with fake boobs.

Red is by far the Most desirable hair color. So there.

Sorry I wasn't clear. I don't really care much about the validity of the empirical 2-3 billion assertion. Even if, for the sake of argument, it's taken as plausible, I'm disturbed that clinical psychologists are being taught it's their job to change people's "underlying value systems" in matters unrelated to mental health (yes, you could make some highly tenuous connection between long term planetary sustainability and mental health, but it would be disingenuous).

According to Wikipedia, clinical psychology is "an integration of science, theory and clinical knowledge for the purpose of understanding, preventing, and relieving psychologically based distress or dysfunction and to promote subjective well-being and personal development." What does that have to do with brainwashing people on policy issues?

Why is it the 'live in harmony with nature' crowd never wants to give up air conditioning? Or fire? Or anti bacterial soap?

Living in harmony with nature means predation, intestinal parisites, and starvation

I'm disturbed that clinical psychologists are being taught it's their job to change people's "underlying value systems"

Exactly! This is activism by the instructors in fields that they know little or nothing about. While everyone is entitled to an opinion, this should not in any way be presented as part of the curriculum or the professional responsibilities.

Some of the most messed up teenage gals I knew as a youth became social workers, teachers and psychologists.

I assumed that was because they some time trying to figure out why their own lives became disasters, and then decided to make a "career" out of it, rather than actually working for a living.

If Ginger is so educated surely she can see an ad hominem attack when she creates one.

Ginger must be related to the woman who tried to elbow me in the face (the only reason she didn't connect was because I've got fairly good reflexes) to get in front of me while we were standing in line to see Tich Nhat Hanh, the Buddhist monk who teaches about mindfulness and non-violence.

Such people are totally non-self-reflexive due to their perception that they are well-educated and elite (special snowflake syndrome) but they can't recognize the irony of the disconnect between their professed beliefs and their words and actions.

I went from blonde to red a couple of weeks ago, and it seems to be very popular, at least with the single-husband focus group I assembled.

LW is coming very close to defining the difference between credentialed and educated.

And when you educate a crazy person, the only thing you get is an educated crazy person.

I tell my 8 yr old that people who name call do so because of their seriously limited intelligence. Apparently, this self righteous brat never learned that lesson.

And as a fellow red-head, I say she can kiss my ass. Ann Margret, Nicole Kidman, Christina Hendricks, Emily Blunt, Juliane Moore... somehow these women managed to make it to sex symbol status with red hair. Huh.

And let's please point out the irony of someone named "Ginger" mocking the red heads.

"Such people are totally non-self-reflexive due to their perception that they are well-educated and elite (special snowflake syndrome) but they can't recognize the irony of the disconnect between their professed beliefs and their words and actions."

Well-said.

She looks like a nasty piece of work.

Her Facebook page name is Dr. Ginger Peterson, but she's a Ph.D. candidate whose wall posts contain annoying grammatical errors with which I wouldn't get though my master's program. She doesn't say with what university she's affiliated. I'm very curious.

A friend of mine who has her PhD in polymer science refused to let us call her "doctor" except mockingly until she finished the PhD. She has what's called humility.

I agree, Beth. I see a made-up world there. I don't think she's in any program at all. Cheap ink isn't super-common in the PhD arena. Plus, she said hehehe in an email to me. No educated person does that. As in hehehe I see I pissed amy off. Uh, no hon, people are laughing AT you, not being consternated by you.

It was my understanding that only medical doctors and professors in their work environment are called doctor. Not a single friend of mine who has a PhD goes by that title. None of my professors allowed themselves to be referred to as dr. off campus and most of them asked to be called professor on campus.

For this person to call herself doctor when she has not even finished her PhD is fraud. Maybe she should conduct a study on people who lie about their credentials in order to give credence to their belittling of others. I have yet to meet a psych major who did not choose that course of study in order to diagnose their own problems.

I also find it hard to credit her supposed education when she has such poor grammar and cannot spell simple words (not to mention, but of course I will, her total lack of reasoning skills).

Her Facebook page name is Dr. Ginger Peterson, but she's a Ph.D. candidate

I saw that and was amused by it.

Also, if you're about to defend your dissertation, I think it's probably not such a great idea to go around sending nastygrams. I'm guessing that she thought she'd get away with social thuggery, because who publishes messages saying they're old and have ugly hair?

Oh...that would be me.

Fist of all that chick is butt ugly. And second of all most guys I know love redheads. Also my redheaded female friends have related that they have been in high demand from around 13 or so.

And this is one of the reasons I went into research in psychology but wouldn't touch clinical/counseling with a ten foot pole...too many freaks with agendas that think they know far more than they do.
And my advice would be suck it up and get on with it...which isn't what most people who go to counselors want to hear. :-)

And my advice would be suck it up and get on with it...which isn't what most people who go to counselors want to hear. :-)

That's why counselors have jobs. If you solve their problem, you're out of a client!

I bet she's a big fan of Jezebel.com!

Now I can't find her on Facebook at all. Your link is no longer working. Hmmmm. One word: cybertwat.

The icing on the cake is that it appears that she's lying about her age. If that woman is 31, she's a very worn out 31.

She is a Ph.D candidate at Whatsamatta U.

Actually I would be surprised if she was really a candidate for anything anywhere except Miss Nasty of 2010.

"The icing on the cake is that it appears that she's lying about her age. If that woman is 31, she's a very worn out 31." Damn beat me to it.

"I have yet to meet a psych major who did not choose that course of study in order to diagnose their own problems." (Raises hand) Um the girls were hotter. Lots of bubbly smiley cuties. Having taken several courses when debating double major it was tempting. Now after that masters in engineering I got I really starting to wonder if engineering was a better option. The need for a masters was what turned me away from psych.

Lets not get too down on clinical psych. There are plenty of people who are in the field to help the actually mentally ill. Just cause some dumb bedraggled skank uses it as an activism platform isn't fair or logical.

Amy: That you in the silhouette?

As for her being 31, I suspect she's actually 48, two years older than I am -- her e-mail address listed on her FB profile has a 62 in it at the end. I was born in '64, and I'm 46.

She puts Rod Coronado as her activities and you jump on ageism? Have you looked up this guy?

Also she lists her political views are moderate. What the fuck?!?

Why is everyone ignoring the key item in her profile? She's a member of PETA. Why would you expect courtesy and common sense from her?

Also unless they were really badly done tats don't' fade and blur like that after a decade. Assuming she got them in her early 20s that about what they would look like without touch up in her mid to late 40s.

Eww. I'd never go to a "doctor" who looks like that. Oh well, I guess I'm look-ist.

Yosemite called, they want their cougars back.

"She's a member of PETA." Where? She says she is an animal rights activist and a member of the ASPCA. ASPCA not PETA. Though given the other points in her profile I would be surprised if she wasn't.

"So Doc my marriage is going down the tubes, fast. My home life is a mess, conflict around every corner, should I get a divorce?"

"Well, you must consider the negative impacts that one more household will have on our population density, and all those extra miles going back and forth Wednesday nights and every other weekend. Can you afford child support AND carbon offsets?"

We should giver her a break though, it looks like she did work her way through school, all the way to a PhD. The registrars office didn't like her paying in stacks of small bills but hey, no loans.

I find redheads, especially flaming redheads, to be the very height of beauty. I suspect that may be due to their scarcity, but no matter. I still do. Amy, you are hot and far superior in appearance and intellect to this "Ginger" person. As we say here in Texas, she looks "ridden hard and put away wet!"

I'm thinking a lot of people casting aspersions on this persosn, are really acting the same as she... she didn't do anything to the rest of us...

My curiosity is more what problem a stacked bleachblond with tats has with Amy's piece in PsychToday. It's obvious that she agrees with it implicitly. Dunno, maybe she is the type that wears something low cut, and then gets mad if you look? PhD. wise She lives in a Suburb of Vegas, so there are a buncha colleges and Universities in the area.

Dunno, at this point I'd bet we'll never find out what her initial problem with the piece is, perhaps she doesn't know. It is pretty maddening when somebody doesn't even try to reply with fact, or even opinions that they have thought about...

I left Ginger Peterson a message on Facebook:

Really would love to know what you actually took issue with in the piece. Also, I do have to say that it's rather hilarious that you list "ageism" as one of your interests in your profile. Is your interest in practicing it or combating it?

Feel free to leave your criticism beyond your thoughts on my looks here, where I've posted your message to me:

http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2010/11/17/youre_an_old_ha.html

As we say here in Texas, she looks "ridden hard and put away wet!"

Aw roadgeek, ya beat me to it!

That girl's got some issues.

>> Living in harmony with nature means predation, intestinal parisites, and starvation.

I gotta say, that is about the most concise, intelligent observation I have heard in at least a month.

And seriously, Ginger. There are real boobs, but they're not like Pamela Anderson's boobs, and there are women who are confident with their looks and style, and that makes them attractive to men.

She looks like a hottie to me.

Can we arrange a nude mud-wrestling contest, Alkon vs. the Contender?

The bitch crazy.

Someone mentioned PETA? If you expand the "Other Pages" link on her profile, you get:

"Why We Love Dogs, Eat Pigs, and Wear Cows", Save Japan Dolphins, Jerry Vlasak, Ingrid E. Newkirk, The Skeptics Society & Skeptic Magazine, The Skeptic's Dictionary, Dr. Michelle Callahan, Andrew Weil, M.D., Feminism, Mensa International, The Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science (Official), Science, Dr. Michio Kaku, Pamela Anderson, Science Channel, Carl Sagan, Discovery Channel, PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals)

You'd think, from some of those groups, she would have learned to construct a meaningful argument.

Amy - you were witnessing a variant of John Gabriel's Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory.

People are, on balance, nasty pieces of work.

I loved this by Amy:

"I'm guessing that she thought she'd get away with social thuggery, because who publishes messages saying they're old and have ugly hair?

Oh...that would be me."

It would serve her right if you went to her FB friends and directed them all to this blog of yours.

> Drives me nuts because there could be
> intelligent discourse if people weren't
> compelled to talk to each other in ways
> (I hope) they wouldn't were they face-to-face.

I could not disagree with this more strongly.

The last thing, the last thing, the last thing in the world I want for the internet is certification by pinky-extended, nose-in-the-air cotillion attendees, people who think all the world's complexities can be answered with shallow cleavage in an evening gown and a bogus British accent and weak tea in tinkly little cups.

Six, try to understand the circuitry of this: Who you callin' "intelligent", and what are you callin' "discourse"? And why the fuck should we care?

This is exactly, precisely the same arrogance that commenters, anonymous or not, bring to their first interactions in these fora... A naked attempt to imperiously dismiss 40% - 70% of competing beliefs without comment. It's loathsome and cancerous and hateful, and it deserves to be shot down with the most aggressive language which strangers can muster. It works like this:

A guy turns on the computer for the first time. (Maybe he's heard that the web is a seething hellhole of demonic child-rapists, so he decides to go anonymous.) And then he start participating... With two monstrous presumptions.

The first monstrous presumption is that everyone else basically agrees with him. Because after all, people are mostly nice! Strangers don't usually punch him out on the bus, and they mostly don't stick knives in his back in line at the grocery. So he thinks we're all kind of moving through the world having the same thoughts and experiences; we're OK and he's OK.

The second monstrous presumption is that he's secretly just a little smarter than everyone else... After all, he's been having very deep feelings that other people haven't experienced, things that he doesn't even talk about very much. Also, he knows some very personal truths that other people don't seem to know. So as he offers his first comments, he's going to expect a little special love and patience from total strangers, even though he's anonymous. See, in this new realm, he will finally demand the extra adulation he should have been receiving all along.

And he starts commenting.

But whaddya know!... As it turns out people DON'T agree with him about everything! They DON'T agree that the United States should cancel all foreign aid (or increase it to a full percentage point of GNP); they DON'T agree that abortion is murder (or a righteous sacrament of full womanhood to be dispensed at no charge in the high school nurse's office).

Nope. As it turns out, a lot of this new commenter's beliefs are stupidities... Just daydreams from someone who's never had the courage to have his views challenged by anyone, let alone by someone who's seen more of the world than he has.

And there's no reason to listen to him clucking about how vulgar and uncouth the rest of us are.

Y'know, last time I really ripped someone a new one here, I logged off and felt kinda bad about it.

Then I logged in again and reread the condescension that the guy had so carefully built into his opening response... And suddenly I felt OK.

The internet is the street. It's loud and smelly and trucks go too fast and healthy people park in the handicapped zone and you can get mugged. People don't like each other much, and there's no reason they should.

If the stink of horse dung on the curb offends you, stay indoors. No one will miss the magnificence of your delicate insights, and you'll not be offended by the coarseness of it all... YOU'LL be spared the horror of dealing with people "face-to-face", and your naïve cluckings will live on, muted and unrebuked, as they've been heretofore.

_____________________________

Meanwhile, pretensions almost never work out for anyone anyway. Did you google any of Ginger's "activities"? With the possible exception of the ASPCA, these listings are a catalog of whack-a-doodledom.

It's kind of naughty for Amy to have saved all that stuff though. (People should have SOME right to control their web publishings.)

Except for that leggy, busty photo from the couch.
Could kinda go for that.

> seriously, Ginger. There are real boobs

Oh, fake rack. OK, lusting impulse withdrawn... Sorry.

Also, found this for you, but I don't know how to save an internet page as a PDF, so hopefully it'll still be there for you to view!

I'm thinking it's her:
http://www.classmates.com/directory/public/memberprofile/list.htm?regId=7406331360

Oh shit that's fuck hilarious. I never read that till today. Really gramps that's your definition of ripping me a new one. Hey grandpa fuck toy I was raised by a marine. Really that your most offensive. I really expected better when you went hostile.

You think I was being condescending? Oh I'll keep in mind your prune infused sensitivities you self righteousness Twinkie molesting shit muncher. I can go on.

> "least desirable hair color"
>
> And her name is Ginger...

Good eyes, CD

> A friend of mine who has her PhD in polymer
> science refused to let us call her "doctor"
> except mockingly until she finished the PhD.
> She has what's called humility.

I love that.

> I can go on.

We know.

"Not only that, but you have the least desirable hair color to men."

Oh no she didn't! Cat fight! Interests include activism (no way!), feminism (quelle surprise) and animal rights (no fur?)! Wait, she's a feminist, why would she care what hair color men like? Thats sexist! Don't judge people on their natural attributes! Thats wrong!

Its like shooting fish in a barrel. As pointed out, her name vs the hair color is greatly amusing. The tats and her studying to be a psycho er clinical headshrinker is tops though.

Something nice.. something nice.. She has a cool dog though from that facebook picture.

Anyway, you're just mean Amy! Stop it! Being mean and rude is wrong! Only pretty girls with Doctor titles can be mean n' stuff n' junk.

Completing classes towards my PhD in clinical psych....

Good to know she's completing those classes rather than merely taking them.

Pretentious much?

Also she lists her political views [as] moderate.

It's a common leftist delusion.

I have a number of friends who consider themselves politically "moderate" yet reflexively condemn Republican candidates or positions, refuse to consider any candidate to the right of the Green party, and regularly advocate for left-wing political positions (socialized medicine, cap-and-trade, tax-the-rich, etc.).

Yet, they get indignant when you point out that their behavior belies their claim to be moderate; that they're as much a partisan drone as the average dittohead and not the intellectual independent thinkers they've invested so much of their self-esteem into convincing themselves that they are.

> I like to use modern technology to
> reimpose those constraints.

Point taken. But I like how so very many people have taken the opportunity the internet provides to trot out their most darling little egocentric presumptions... Only to have them violently deflated.

More unencumbered communication is good. People who really want high-bandwidth lectures, either as teacher or student, should go to the university and earn for them.

>> Also she lists her political views [as] moderate.

> It's a common leftist delusion.

Next time a liberal pulls that on you, as them to list the people who they think are farther, or too far, to the left. Make 'em name names.

Wow, bimbo alert. She doesn't look like a spring chicken herself, so wtf? What an idiot.

This is the trouble with modern universities - they have no standards and have been taken over by leftists with an agenda. Some Ph.D.'s are not worth the paper they're printed on. Now this twit thinks she's smart and is too stupid to know her own lack. More proof that we're going to hell in a bucket.

A serious Ph.D. contender does not call herself "Doctor" before she has been awarded said Ph.D.. But you know what they say: B.S., Bull Shit, M.S., More Shit, Ph.D., Piled Higher and Deeper. People who brag about the letters after their names are over compensating - she's probably an obnoxious bore. It's bad enough calling yourself "Doctor" because you have a Ph.D. (pretentious), but before you even have the Ph.D.? Pathetic.

Crid: I'm slightly confused by your post on playing nice (or not) online.

If you and another person are getting into it, isn't more interesting to actually argue the topic instead of making fun of each other's hair color? If yes, isn't it okay for Amy to ask this of people who are taking up her time with emails constructed simply to be mean?

I support the woman's right to be a ninny it and I think it's fine if people want to waste their time calling each other fat or stupid or racist or whatever. But if someone does it, and you don't like it, isn't it equally okay for you to tell them to cut the shit and get to the point? I don't see a problem with doing that and it seems you do. Just curious.

Thanks for giving me something to post about Cridditch.

momof4 - "I can't figure out what she was taking issue with, in Amy's article. She obviously believes it, or she wouldn't be a bottle blond with fake boobs."

For once I agree with you wholeheartedly.

lola - "The icing on the cake is that it appears that she's lying about her age. If that woman is 31, she's a very worn out 31."

Beat to the punch again.

Six, try to understand the circuitry of this: Who you callin' "intelligent", and what are you callin' "discourse"? And why the fuck should we care?

There's been a misunderstanding her, Crid. I don't know if I wasn't clear enough or you read my comment in a way I didn't intend, but your interpretation of what I wrote is not what I meant. What I meant is that it makes me mad when people claim they want to debate articles and issues on their merits and then degenerate into name-calling. I'm not one of those who bemoan the internet and all its idiot-making glory. What I'm saying is that I've been on sites where I'd like to comment and I don't because the people that say they want to actually discuss things don't ever get around to it. So I leave. It's not like I'm trying to remake the internet in the image I deem fit.

My comment about cyberanonymity was quite relevant to the blog item at the top of this page. I'm not trotting out any darling little egocentric delusions, because I'm not saying that there should be stringently enforced rules about what gets posted on sites like these. That's ludicrous. The very reason I come to this site is because Amy encourages discussion and doesn't censor what goes on here, like we were all getting down on Jezebel for doing.

My problem is not with websites or moderators or any of that. My problem is with people like Ms. Peterson who come on the sites to theoretically discuss content and then call the author old. Because it is easier to do things like that when no one knows who you really are. People say things online and in emails that they wouldn't were they face-to-face.

I don't think the people who run the sites should crack down more or that all websites must be places where only the serious issues are discussed, I just think people should think more about what they're posting. Not sure why that's such an issue, and I'm not actually asking you to care.

Gretchen: I will be getting drunk on 4 loco just to protest the ban. Also about to order 5-10 cases of the stuff to lock in the basement.

Here's what I don't get. Does she actually attack anything in your article? Is there more to the discourse between the two of you? I've read the article twice and I'm basically lost as to her rancor. You (Amy) don't actually state any where that women must do any of this. All you point out is that if you want to attract a man dress in a way that appealing to them. Seems like basic sense; sense that she follows by shaving (those ain't hairy legs) and wearing really short shorts and revealing tight top.

BTW there is the alternative of going to comic con where simply being female makes you rare. Do that a few times and plucking, shaving and heels will feel like nothing compared to the unwashed masses. I'm a freaking nerd and I stay away.

Whoa, she claims to be 31?! Methinks someone spent too much of her 20s at the tanning salon if that's the case. I'm reminded of the song, "Nice legs, shame about her face!"

Again, I find that the smaller the person, the more likely they are to look to use/be called "Doctor."

I knew someone who did a "doctorate" on walking her freaking dog around the neighbourhood. Yes, she proudly uses "Dr." in front of her name and refers to herself as a "scholar." In reality she's some rather bitter and petty nobody. It's a joke, really.

If you cannot answer a man's arguement, at least you can call him names. John Rosemond.

Amy, really, if you’re going to get vindictive and try to portray me in an unfavorable light, at least don’t fib. I’m sure your readers would appreciate your honesty. I never changed my privacy settings, and insinuating that I am a coward is unappreciated. I’d be more than happy to tell this all to your face.

Here’s my issue with your article, Amy. First off, I don’t have a problem with women putting in effort into their appearance. It’s what the current standard of beauty is that I have an issue with. It’s unattainable for anyone over the age of 27. You know, and I know that we live in a youth obsessed society. This is of course evidenced by your vindictive response. If you had been brought up in Okinawan culture where the elderly are venerated you would have been quite flattered with my comments. In America it’s become quite the norm to denigrate and marginalize women when they reach a certain age. Our value is often measured by it. I don’t know about you, but I feel and many professional women feel that their value has increased with age. Words like wisdom and experience have a negative connotation, and this can largely be attributed to the images portrayed in the media. Just a few years ago, actresses didn’t start worrying about aging until close to 40, but it is increasingly becoming younger and younger, and now movie producers are reluctant to put an actress in a starring role over the age of 27. Well where does that leave you and me, Amy? We’re a couple of antediluvians by the media’s standards. These images are largely responsible for forming our perception of beauty. So when you author articles like this, these evoke images of youth, as it is youth that is associated with beauty, and as a result elicit feelings of fear, worthlessness, and dread which further perpetuates the issue because you don’t place any value on the other attributes that women possess.

By the way, before I move on, you place such an emphasis on beauty and physical appearances, and then criticize women in their 50’s who cave in to the societal pressure, and get a facelift. Nice.

Do you have a background in psychology? I take contention with this line in your article : “There is a vast body of evidence indicating that men and women are biologically and psychology different. Hormonally, yes, but there are only minor differences between the male and female brain so most psychological differences can be attributed to socialization. Also, you assert that there is a universal standard for beauty such as the hourglass figure, and then proceed to delve into cultural differences of beauty which are strikingly different. So where you initially try to make a case for biologically based standard of beauty that span cultures and generations, you contradict yourself by saying that not all cultures place the same value on these attributes. The deterministic stance that you initially take in your article would probably rub a lot of people the wrong way. Most people do not want to believe that they are slaves to their genes, and have no freedom of choice.

With that said, many of our perceptions and behaviors are learned including sexual behavior, and what we find attractive. If the studies that you reference in your article had been conducted in Greece in 340 BC the research would have yielded far different results. Many men had a penchant for homosexual relationships. Much of what is perceived is learned regardless of biological tendencies. In present day America, we’ve collectively decided that the only truly beautiful women are in their teens and early twenties. Many argue that this is just natural. But what happens to women beyond the age of 23? Are they suppose to refrain from becoming involved in relationships? Let’s face it, 95% of American women don’t fit the idealized perception of beauty, and are still finding partners.

Another problem I have is you exclude entire populations of people. You placed the skewed focus on arguing the "biological tendencies" of men over a certain age, and never mentioned younger men being attracted to older women. Certainly you could argue that there is a biological basis for why this may occur, but unfortunately we seem to be obsessed with what men of a certain age have learned to like. The cougar movement wasn’t a success because of the youth obsession of the media is aimed towards women. You also seem to advocate on behalf of caloric restriction in order to maintain a smaller frame. This is of course in alignment with the currently held standards of beauty. I am a vegetarian for ethical reasons, so I will probably never have a lot of extra weight however, I do not think that women who do have some meat on their bones should be perceived as being any less attractive than their thin counter parts. I was upset when they nixed the Lane Bryant commercial with the plus sized model, and applauded Glamour for featuring a size 12 model on their cover. Really I could go on and on about this subject, but I’m going to end it right here. Maybe instead of trying to convince us that “this is just how things are, deal with it” causing women to develop feelings of worthlessness, and promoting eating disorders, you should focus your efforts on changing the underlying value system in America.

"Do you have a background in psychology?"

Here we go again, trying to win an argument with appeals to authority. Automatic deduction in debate points!

Not to mention the points taken away from you for ad hominem attacks.

Dr. Ginger! You are so erudite.

Ginger: First off, I don’t have a problem with women putting in effort into their appearance.

Then why don't you?

Ginger: If you had been brought up in Okinawan culture where the elderly are venerated you would have been quite flattered with my comments.

So, you're pretending that you were paying her a compliment?

Ginger's original PM: I read your article in Psychology Today, and figured it was written by a 23 year old that didn't know any better. I looked up your site, and was surprised to see that you're old. Not only that, but you have the least desirable hair color to men.

Oh, spare us. The comment about being old was immediately followed by a mean-spirited remark about her hair color.

And personally, I think her hair color is hellamore desirable that a bottle-blonde who's too stupid to redo the roots of that dried out haystack before she has her picture taken. I'm talking about the picture of you in the white outfit.

Methinks you're just jealous because Amy's hair is not only naturally red, but it's naturally curly. Looking at your lackluster mousehide mane, it's obvious that nature did not deign to give you curls.

By the way, the doctor who did your boobs? You paid him too much. You should have opted for something more subtle than going to the plastic surgeon and saying, "Super-size me."

I'm sure you had some interesting things to say in the rest of your mile-long post. But, in light of the fact that you went out of your way to make personal insults about someone you don't even know, and have dishonestly (and transparently) misrepresented your intent in the nasty, hateful missive, I no longer care what you have to say.

Nice wall of text, Ginger.

Maybe instead of trying to convince us that “this is just how things are, deal with it” causing women to develop feelings of worthlessness, and promoting eating disorders, you should focus your efforts on changing the underlying value system in America.

What a crock. It is how things are - past a certain age, women tend to become invisible. If you think this youth and beauty culture sucks, why do you buy into it yourself with the way you dress, what appear to be fake boobs, etc.? If an article like Amy's "causes" women to develop "feelings of worthlessness" she's got bigger problems than that extra 30lbs. Do you really think we're that weak? This crusade you're on is about 40 years out of date. Time to stop blaming the media and grow up.

The cougar movement wasn’t a success because of the youth obsession of the media is aimed towards women.

Ignoring the fact that this sentence doesn't even make sense... "The cougar movement"?? LOL What are you blathering on about? A bunch of middle aged divorced/never married single women who are having a desperate last hurrah is not a "movement" but a rather sad spectacle of wishful thinking. In another 10 years, today's cougars will be menopausal and invisible. That's right, better get used to the idea because it will happen to you. Might be a good time to get a hobby, get interested in something other than yourself, try doing something useful in the community, whatever. Just stop trying to be an intellectual because ur doing it rong.

The quality of the writing here is pretty poor. If this is representative of the university you are attending, it doesn't say much for that institution.

"you should focus your efforts on changing the underlying value system in America."

One could make a good argument that it was your feminist sisters who started the beauty obsessed culture and support it. Grrl power attention whore syndrome at warp factor five.

You'll forgive me for not caring about lane bryant models or cougar movements when I'm bombarded with football players wearing pink everything for boob cancer month. Where are my hot cheerleader/models wearing brown for prostate cancer? I think Canada got guys and gals growing beards for prostate cancer this month. Or when society thinks that the JC Penny "doghouse" jewelery commercials demean men as mere dogs who should buy trinkets to please their mistresses er I mean wives. But hey, every kiss begins with Kay (Jewelers).

Her profile is still up, if you're logged into FB, She's got 28 friends, all of whom must be mortified.
She's single, no surprise there, and lives in Henderson NV. So, that online PhD program must not keep her busy enough.

"The planet is already supporting over 6 billion just fine..."

Actually, this is only because of Western food distribution methods, dependent on fossil fuels and open sea lanes. A nuclear war estimate I've seen during the Gorbachev years would peg the worldwide deaths at over two billion, because American and Russian agriculture would be ruined and nothing else could come on line fast enough.

I imagine my brothers at sea would fare well, but Pyrrhus is no prize.

-----------

Ginger - if that's you - if you have been following Ms. Alkon for any period of time (such as, oh, the amount of time necessary to discover anything of substance about her) you'd have found out that she does more research on human behavior than some entire clinical departments, and has serious working relationships with many in the field.

The difference you see is that Amy has made a living, rather than made degree certificates to put on the walls.

I'd sure like to know what "the underlying value system in America" is and what's wrong with it.

> isn't more interesting to actually
> argue the topic

Y'know, Amy Alkon seems like a riiiiillly nice person.

Conscientious taxpayer, defensive driver. Good with children, housepets and the elderly... I bet she's a fine dancer. She's an attractive woman, too... Fanciful but not prissy about it. Many of her opinions are convincingly argued, and all are suitably modern. I especially admire her for the way she's made her living, which is ballsy and independent, even though it's a business which means essentially nothing to me. We've communicated a few times, but never made eye contact.

So do you know why I've been hanging out in here for the last six years?

Because she lets me: Because she never, ever tells anyone to stay on topic. And when people are truly interested in finding out how the world works, or arguing about how the world works, they should be able to consider whatever they want.

This is a quintessentially American insight, and Amy has taken it so deeply to heart that she's never even bragged about it. Maybe it's a Jewish thing, or a Detroit thing, or a beach-livin' thing. She's just not afraid of things people say.

Elsewhere, time and time again, someone will say we're drifting off topic. So what does that mean?

That means they already have an idea of where the conversation should go. And a conversation with a destination is a lecture, not an exchange. The Topic Police try to herd us into a very special courtyard... Presumably one from which they can wave down to us from the balcony as we chant in adoration.

In the best case –and it's not very good– the topic people sincerely believe that other people just don't understand. That if everyone had been given the same information they have –or can be tied up and forced to hear it– they'll have to agree about how things work. But this is not the case. We've each been given our own experience of the world. Grown men and women aren't permitted to force perceptions that way.

(This gets especially amusing when lefties complain about Fox because it's telling lies to the little people... Whereas the right understands that the problem with the New York Times and NPR isn't the dishonesty [which is nonetheless ugly]: It's the stupidity.)

I suppose if you really spazzed out, and started complaining about the how the Reds lost the '70 World Series after a blog post about fat people on airliners, Amy'd probably tell you to get a neurological workup or something. But when the blog scene was first starting to gel here in L.A. (and L.A. was a BIG part of it in early days), her blog was better than any other at choking weak commenters with the "enough rope" method... And that includes blogs from much bigger media figures and enterprises.

Name-calling isn't "degeneration", it's exhaust... And Star Trek to the contrary, you don't get propulsion without burning fuel. To complain about it is doubly pointless. If it offends you, close your browser: You can do it with two keystrokes, whereas complaining takes dozens. If you want a realm where everyone's like, super-nice to each other, you can find one... You can go to the shabbiest, lowliest branch of the public library, where huge squadrons of colliding human passion sit silently, almost coquettishly, beside each other on tidy shelves. You can go to a college class and learn about all sorts of battles and conflicts while sitting in a comfortable, inoffensive silence. You can go to a Christian coffee klatch on a Sunday afternoon, where even people who disagree strongly will be polite about it.

Here on the internet, people want to say what they want to say.

> My problem is with people like Ms. Peterson
> who come on the sites to theoretically
> discuss content and then
> call the author old.

I don't think "content" is ever so neatly divisible into things that appeal to us and things that don't. After working as a video editor for thirty years, I can't watch a TV show without a remote, hoping to watch just the good parts. I can take the meaning from a shot of television faster than almost anyone in Los Angeles County.... But a price is paid in narrative comprehension. I tried to watch Mad Men awhile back, and was constantly surprised that this person was sleeping with that person: I'd scanned past it.

And Ms. Peterson's assualt on Amy doesn't seem to have done any harm. Between that she actually said to Amy and the list of "activities", most of us had a few seconds of good clean fun choosing sides.

What you think of as "intelligence" is noise to others: What you'd call "discourse" to them is chatter.

Free country, though.

HOw ironic...she hates red-heads, and yet...her name is Ginger!!!

If I may:
"If you had been brought up in Okinawan culture where the elderly are venerated you would have been quite flattered with my comments."

First of all, Okinawa is a place so small you could walk across it in no time. So the only people who grew up in that culture are Okinawans, or maybe some families of U.S. service members that are stationed there long term. Your referencing a fundamentally "rare" culture in this instance is a transparent attempt at displaying either intelligence, or worldliness, or both, and cover up what was an obvious insult at the same time. But more to the point miss, you are an American speaking to another American, so why oh why under any circumstances should anyone have assumed that you were slipping into some other culture several thousand miles across the sea, to pass on some kind of a compliment. And why should we buy it?

-------------

Second of all, while American culture does tend to marginalize women sexually who age out of physical attractiveness, suggesting 27 as a kind of "cut off" date, is quite unrealistic, it may take more effort by the time one hits 30, but your posited date is suspiciously fixed.

Wisdom and experience are very fine things, but they do not stimulate erections.

-------------
Also:
Just a few years ago, actresses didn't have to worry before 40 because we didn't have high definition t.v. to display flesh as well. Watch a porno on blue ray vs dvd sometime...it is unsettling, the same women look dramatically different. If you look at the producer's concerns in light of the TECHNOLOGICAL changes, which provide clearer and clearer displays, then the concerns over an actresses age becomes obvious, what used to mean a little make up or vasaline on the lens, may soon mean a new starlette instead, to get the same attraction response.

----------------
Youth is associated with beauty, age is associated with wisdom, this is not unique to American culture, as you pointed out yourself in Okinawan culture, the elderly are venerated, nobody ever said they were lusted after or fun to look at. Age steals beauty, but grants, hopefully, some wisdom.

Men who want women don't just want them to talk to, if that were the case they wouldn't go out of their way to pursue them, because they can just always hang out with their guy friends, they want women to have sex with. If you don't want to have sex with a woman, what use is the relationship to either one of you, and because men are inherently visual creatures, maintaining or at least attempting to provide an appealing appearance is a perfectly rational thing to do.

-----------------

Thirdly, Miss Alkon regularly cites her sources with regards to her postings, if you are going to assert that the brain differences are "minor" (they are anything BUT) then you should cite the source of your information so its worth may be assertained. Trying to change the value system will not stimulate even one more erection for pictures of the Queen of England.

----------------
And finally, you are grossly wrong about her stated positions, absolute misrepresentation, her views have been quite consistent, that attraction to certain features crosses cultures, but may change based upon other circumstances, specifically, the availability of food. Plenty makes thin hot, famine makes fat hot.
-----------------

And one final point of my own rather than a rebut:

Let me ask you this Ginger, if a woman chooses for reasons of her own to not seek out or engage in a long term relationship when she is at her physical best by any standard, why oh why can we not call it pretentious, presumptuous, and demanding to expect men as a whole to change what they are attracted to sexually so as to consider her to be sexually desirable at the time of her choosing?

In sum, why is it that all these demands for changes to what men are attracted to, seem to boil down to a desire for the demanding person to be considered sexier?

---------------

I'll close with this, arguing hypothetically that it were possible for men to choose to be more attracted to older women, I'll say that it is none of your business miss Ginger, what I or any other man finds to be attractive. Men have to bust their metaphorical (or even actual) butts, to attract and obtain mates and/or sexual partners, if the fairer sex is entitled to set their own standards individually, then so are we.

What you're essentially asking for is for men to change what they find to be hot, for your convenience, well, what do we get in exchange? Heh, I'm thinking not much.

'If you had been brought up in Okinawan culture where the elderly are venerated you would have been quite flattered with my comments.'

Well Amy's obviously not from Okinawa...

I doubt many Okinawans would be flattered by

'I read your article in Psychology Today, and figured it was written by a 23 year old that didn't know any better. I looked up your site, and was surprised to see that you're old. Not only that, but you have the least desirable hair color to men.'

Where I come from that's not exactly veneration language. Rude is rude in any culture....and you're not selling me this bill of goods, I've lived in Japan for 30+ years.

Try again.

"In America it’s become quite the norm to denigrate and marginalize women when they reach a certain age"

Which is exactly what you did! Are you that unaware of your own actions and the motivations underlying them?

"If the studies that you reference in your article had been conducted in Greece in 340 BC the research would have yielded far different results"

And if 'ifs' and 'buts' were candies and nuts, well then every day would be Christmas! Why don't you just discuss the fact that

1. You were rude
2. Without originally alluding to the article but to Amy's personal appearance

While getting all in a bunch about and article on beauty standards, you insult someone based on their age and physical appearance. Clueless much?

In sum, why is it that all these demands for changes to what men are attracted to, seem to boil down to a desire for the demanding person to be considered sexier?

Because that's exactly what it is.

What you're essentially asking for is for men to change what they find to be hot, for your convenience, well, what do we get in exchange? Heh, I'm thinking not much.

You'll get a washed up, needy old slag! Come on, you know you want it!

Man, if that girl is 31, there has been at least 15 years of non stop booze and cigarettes, while lying out in the sun several hours each day. :-)

@Ginger -

TL;DR.

As far as your point about 27: I give you Kari Byron. 34, married, baby, red hair, hottest woman presently walking God's Earth.

If you're gonna make an all-encompassing statement, at least do some research on what constitutes "hot" before you make yourself look a fool.

@crella - Everything a Progressive says is projection.

Ginger- These people don't like you... But *I* do!... I think you're perfect, just the way you are.

(Jus' kidding about that whole "whack-a-doodle" thing....)

Am I the only one who thinks Ginger's kind of pretty?

Amy - both you and Ginger make me feel back in high school again. 2 freaking bullies.

> Am I the only one who thinks Ginger's
> kind of pretty?

No! No you are not!

The fake tits are a shame, but dammit, nobody's perfect.

Crid, I'm apparently not communicating what I intended. Because I do actually agree with you. The reasons you state for hanging around here are precisely why I'm here. I love that Amy encourages us to talk about anything and everything.

My original post was merely an observation that people are able to hide behind the anonymity of the internet and can say things they wouldn't out in the world. The part about what I do is just that: what I do. Me. Singular personal pronoun. Not what I think everyone should do. I was just pointing out that online discussion can be helpful to me.

I fully support people's ability to say what they like online without fear of moderator censorship. Another reason I like this site: Amy doesn't censor the posts, she and the other posters just reply to them or ignore them. I know name-calling is a byproduct of what's great about internet discussions, and I wouldn't get rid of it at the expense of the good stuff, but that doesn't mean it doesn't bug me.

Groovy, but next time you see some newby get all wounded and upset, go back and take a look at what they were saying and how they were saying it. They were almost certainly trying out some silly presumptions and arrogance that would have been shot down if they'd ever tried to share them "face-to-face", too. And there's a reason that they never did.

The real irony here is that, without realizing it, Ginger has already acknowledged everything Amy wrote in her Psychology Today article.

In an effort to look sexier, she got a boob job. Not just a boob job, but a deluxe stripper "super size me" boob job. She dyed her hair blonde. She expended the time and effort to get a deep tan. In short, she used cosmetics and surgery to make herself more attractive to men.

The anger at what Amy wrote most likely stems from her dawning realization that she can't hold back time any more. She's aging and flirting isn't getting her out of a ticket or into a club as often as it used to.

So, she's replacing the flirting with angry feminism - with the argument that less attractive women (including her now older self) should be considered stunning and attractive for more than their youth, boobs, and hair.

Calling herself "Doctor" Peterson before actually getting her PhD is an attempt to add gravitas in order to replace the coquette-ish blonde who used to greet her every morning in the mirror with an accomplished woman of wisdom.

The tricky part, however, is that wisdom is not something one suddenly decides to acquire at 40. It's an incremental thing. Each setback or advance in life provides a little of it. And, if you flit your way through life and don't acquire the experiences that give you wisdom when you're young, you won't have a store of wisdom to draw upon when your youth is gone.

Offtopic illustration.

um, crella or anyone else from Japan might back me on this...
but IIRC, in Okinawa if you are single and 31... you are old Christmas Cake.
The saying something like: "Japanese women are like Christmas cakes, if they surpass the 25th (Christmas day or their birthday), they’ll be difficult to dispose of…"

and it seems like anyone raised on Okinawa would know that... if they had ventured out of the American bases.

oh, and? Hormones. They RULE your life, and certainly your brain. Which is why different homones in the brain produce different outcomes. Which is why you display your narrow waist and your buxom front end so much... because you know that the part of my brain that IS different than yours want to see that, so that my hormones will cause a reaction... faster beating heart, flushed skin, dialated pupils, and Mr. Happy at attention. It is your hormones that push you to do that, GingerP. This brain chemistry thing, is a science, no?

Karen, I think you might be projecting a little here. I don't see any bullying going on. Person A sent idiotic insulting email to Person B. Person B responded by publicly shaming Person A, who has a choice to learn a valuable lesson from it or to go on being a moron. If Person B had any sense (and it seems she doesn't have a whole lot, but you never know), she would be grateful for an opportunity to learn something - probably something more useful than she's learning from her cracker jack diploma course she's "completing."

I meant if Person A had any sense.... Damn head cold.

Thanks for the PDF links so I could check-out the GingerBabe. I can't tell if she has implants in the pic at the first link but it looks like it, so I clicked on the "Poke Ginger" link to see if she's worth a TSA inspection for potential implant association and a poke or two.

forgot to add... The undrlying value system of America? Which one? The one where everyone married in their 20's and settled down and had a family, and they had to have a really good reason to divorce? Oh wait, that was unfair because some people are just no damn good.

Or the one where you had large families because the odds were some of them would die, and you and the wife would work yourselves to death more or less at the end of your reproductive years trying to farm?

Women have more choice to do what they want to do than EVER, what is it exactly that is underlying that you want to change?

Just because people have more choices, doesn't mean that they will choose well. But that is up to them.

On her Facebook wall she says:
"I was reading for my social change class that the planet was really only designed to support 2 to 3 billion people max.
We're being trained that psychologists are suppose to play a role in facilitating behavioral changes for global sustainability. We’re suppose to help with changing peoples’ underlying value systems. The United States in particular has a strong value of human mastery over nature which is well illustrated by the injunction of the book of Genesis, “Be fruitful and multiply, and replenish the Earth, and subdue it; and have dominion over every living thing that moveth upon the Earth” . This value system would need to change to one that promotes living in harmony with nature."

She's a perfect therapist for the new Reich. Not exactly a compassionate soul, no?

So we have a great example here illustrating both sides of the state of education these days. Ms. (I refuse to refer to her as Doctor at this point) Peterson is a product of the leftist-dominated, ultra-orthodox academy. She is mal-educated; she has been taught a bunch of stuff that isn't true, including basic untruths concerning logic and the scientific method. She'd actually be better educated if after high school she'd said "lump this" and gone to work at a big-box store. Probably more interesting too.

Amy is an example of the new paradigm: do-it-yourself higher education. She has, totally on her own initiative, dug deep into psychology. With no help from the orthodox academy at all. This is actually a pretty good description of most of the smarter people I know today. The academy isn't getting the job done, so Americans are taking matters into their own hands.

It's bullying. I don't see how "projecting" fits in at all. Publicly shaming a person? What did Ginger say that is any different than this (all taken from the comments section):

"and exceptional only in her immaturity"
"immature and unlikely to catch a man with her current hair color"
"or she wouldn't be a bottle blond with fake boobs"
"Ginger must be related to the woman who tried to elbow me in the face "
"She's single, no surprise there, and lives in Henderson NV. So, that online PhD program must not keep her busy enough"

And it's Amy who put it up for everyone to take a swing!! Bully. You can pretend it's something else but I will call it what it is. Bully. Ginger didn't show great judgment with her note, Amy didn't show great judgment with her public "shaming" (I love that - makes Amy sound like the moral superior) and the responders didn't show great judgment with their comments that are just as rude, immature and irrelevant as what Ginger wrote in the first place. So - do we get a "public shaming" for those responders I quoted? Or do they get a pass? Let me know because I would like to know what the "morally superior" have to say on the subject.

Karen,

Bull shit. I'm calling it the way it is.

My back hurts just looking at those big fake knockers.

Karen, I'm with you on this.

Sure Ginger was rude (and wrongheaded). But Amy's original response was over-the-top out of proportion and ever since it's been mostly anonymous piling on worthy of seventh grade. At least Ginger put her name to her comment. In turn she gets a "shaming." That's just an excuse in this case to respond to immature rudeness with more of the kind.

The whole thing just made me cringe. Maybe Ginger really is beneath contempt for one stupid email, but this entire thread is beneath Amy.

It's elementary, my dear retort . . .

retort [ri tôrt]
vt.

1. to turn (an insult, epithet, deed, etc.) back upon the person from whom it came
2. to answer (an argument, etc.) in kind

Jay -

I know from a retort. And retaliation.

If you consider this thread in kind, does someone who stupidly insults your mother get the death penalty or just a public stoning?

> It's what the current standard of
> beauty is that I have an issue with.
> It's unattainable for anyone over
> the age of 27.

This is not true. Listen, I'm old now, and really pleased to see that older women are attractive in the important respects.

It's true that older women aren't attractive in the same ways that younger women are attractive. But why should they be? Why would they want to be? Grown men aren't as appealing to a lot of women as they were when they were baby boys... But grown men don't need to have their cheeks pinched when strangers play gitchy-gitchy-goo, either.

(I dig your girly legs, though.)

> You know, and I know that we
> live in a youth obsessed society.

Not especially. Not outside popular culture. Especially as the baby boomers make their way into life's lower intestine, this is a great time in human history to be older.

> movie producers are reluctant to
> put an actress in a starring role
> over the age of 27.

Right, but movies are for and about children anyway. They always have been. Anyone over twenty ought to be able to set that stuff aside, let alone anyone over forty.

> causing women to develop feelings
> of worthlessness, and promoting
> eating disorders

That's a pretty heavy charge to lay on an advice columnist. I mean, if you didn't spend the earlier stage of your life preparing for the next ones –whatever stage we're talking about– then you were going to have problems anyway.

And even if Amy's a little hawkish about appearances, it's not like she speaks with tremendous authority. It's "advice", the kind you see in a alt-weeklies. If it's what kicks you over the edge with an eating disorder, you probably having a pretty rough time of it already.

> It's bullying.

Yeah, I thought saving stuff and publishing it as PDFs was a little over the top. But, y'know, everyone likes a snowball fight, even grownups. Of course grownups are expected not to cry when they get tagged on the side of the head with a slushy sploder, and neither of these women did, right? Good clean fun for everyone.

> Maybe Ginger really is beneath contempt
> for one stupid email, but this entire
> thread is beneath Amy.

I dunno, I had fun writing some things in here today. Even in disagreement, this woman seems strong enough not to lose much sleep over this, even our shabby comments about her appearance.

And it's at least possible that if she does lose sleep, it's because her opinions about things are being changed. Isn't that what we want when we come here?

Besides, if this is all so beneath you, why are you here, even to cluck?

"This is not true. Listen, I'm old now, and really pleased to see that older women are attractive in the important respects."

You're right, Crid. What she's saying isn't even true. The movie industry has actually glamorizing much older women more than ever before. Many of them are major sex objects. Halle Berry, Sandra Bullock, Jennifer Anniston, Nicole Kidman...and a ton more...are all over 40 and considered very beautiful. Our culture is not ignoring women after the age of 27 at all! If anything, 40 is the new 30.

I think Ginger has a problem with her own age, which, as many have noted (I didn't see the photos) is likely higher than 31. Maybe that's why she's supposedly studying "ageism" because she has obsessive issues about getting older.

I mean, who studies ageism, then calls someone old with ugly hair? Hope her professors see this and flunk her for that.

Crid -

I have a third grader so I read through for insight into childish name calling.

And I read this thread the same way I sometimes rubberneck when driving past an awful accident. I can't not look at how bad it is.

And not beneath me, beneath Amy, who is smart and funny and sometimes gets carried away with this public shaming schtick.

But thanks for giving props to older women.

Sure this was all a little silly, but it's been entertaining - better than the telly at any rate!

> And not beneath me, beneath Amy, who is
> smart and funny and....

No. You're clucking.

Never do that.

Crid - From the king (queen) of the cluckers, that's hilarious. And just another nonsensical tsk tsking of yours to ignore.

I just love these threads that turn into and Algonguin Roundtables

I always liked Mary Ann better than Ginger ...

Karen: "and exceptional only in her immaturity"
"immature and unlikely to catch a man with her current hair color"
"or she wouldn't be a bottle blond with fake boobs"
"Ginger must be related to the woman who tried to elbow me in the face "
"She's single, no surprise there, and lives in Henderson NV. So, that online PhD program must not keep her busy enough"

Spastic one, you are holding Amy responsible (calling her a bully) for what other people (including myself) have written about Ginger on Amy's blog.

I'll let you process that slowly. Perhaps you will arrive at your own conclusions as to just how asinine that is.

Yes, she's kind of pretty, but it's ironic that she will take Amy to task about an article that emphasized the importance of a woman's looks, when she is sporting a poor boob-job and hair thats been treated so much that it looks like dried out straw. To say nothing of tons and tons of makeup.

The one thing I think many people do not think about is careful who you piss off - they may have friends or skills or both that can make your life hell.

Miss Alkon, while I must say I whole heartedly agree with your practice of removing anonymity from insulting douche bags, I would also say that it would be interesting to see you post some of your more substantive critics, you know, the ones who argue rationally and don't need to critique hair to make a point.

Might be nice to see some of your educated and courteous counterparts.

-----------------

That people will come to Ginger for advice of some kind scares the hell out of me.

One thing about Ginger's 'standards of beauty' comment

It isnt men(mostly) buying womens magazines
It isnt men(mostly) desinging women fashions
It isnt men(mostly) writing articles on beauty
It isnt men(mostly) shilling makeup at malls across the US
It isnt men(mostly) in change of what women define as beauty

Women can pick their own clother, weight, hairstyle and color.

Guys are easy, guys are simple (usullay)

Guys arent the problem when it comes to 'stanndards of beauty'

I agree with you Luj. It is kind of funny when women blame guys, yet you have women like Anna Wintour, of Vogue, reigning over the fashion world and picking size 0 models that guys don't even find attractive. How come they get a pass? The fashion industry is largely controlled by women, who don't seem to even be responding to what men want to see, but setting almost impossible, elitist standards of beauty amongst themselves. Wintour, herself looks like she must eat nothing but carrot sticks to fit into the couture clothes that she deems acceptable. It's almost masochistic.

But you never hear feminists bash THESE women, They're role models of female power. No, it's somehow all men's fault.

WHy do you never see one of the "lower the earth's population" crowd offering to remove themselves?

Karen, if you push someone into the mud, you don't get to cry when they fling some into your face.

While this thread hasn't been the model of intelligent discourse, nor has it been the most entertaining, it was still worth having. Ginger seems hypocritical - the fake boobs and hair while complaining about Amy's article, denying her own ageist thoughts while railing against ageism, questioning the credentials of someone else when she herself has none. Her accusing Amy of fibbing when she seems less than the picture of honesty. Is it any wonder that people have been taking cheap shots? When someone starts with cheap shots, expect them back.

Karen, the point Amy was making in posting this was that people will often do things they think they can get away with that they wouldn't think of doing if everybody knew about it. You prevent such behavior by shedding a light on it. Amy shed a light on it, we all (well, mostly) tsked-tsked Ginger about it - the group attempting to enforce conformity to rules of etiquette.

I like looking at young women as much as any man, but I wouldn't want to be with one. If I was into one night stands, a sweet young thing would be great, but I think one night would be all the youthful outlook I could handle (and my aged outlook would probably drive her nuts too).

"I put it up to expose it. I don't control what other people here say." Amy really? You knew damn well we'd be on her like shit on Velcro. You don't drop some poor sap into a firing line then pretend that wasn't your intention.

Bullying? No not bullying. This is a straight up fight. Every school yard had them. Bullying requires that one person is cowed into submission and then perused. If you call this bullying then you have never been the target of actual bullying.

"causing women to develop feelings of worthlessness, and promoting eating disorders," Actually eating disorders are not a function of weight. Never were. They are either body dismorphic disorder or a function of control, as in the pro ana movement. You sure your in PsychD program and not a PhD in women studies? Worthlessness is typically caused by feeling of powerlessness. This is a function of not doing shit with your younger years to secure a future. That happens to men far more but we used to not make careers out of pandering to it.

The use of older women in movies? Helen Mirin in Red, also check out her 2 piece photos. There are women 1/3 her age that wish they looked that good. Pauley Perrette the black cross on the back legs exposed all the time lots of low neck lines. Sophia Loren was a universal sex symbol well into her 60. In many circles still is. Rene Russo in Thomas Crown top less at 45, and hot as hell doing it. Just cause I'm too lazy to keep typing http://media.gunaxin.com/forty-over-forty-top-sexy-hot-beautiful-older-actresses-women/3920

I get the impression that there are two types of feminists. One that take care of themselves and rise to positions of power and those that blame men for their failure to do so. One is called feminist the other just successful.

If you want to attack someone then go after women mags not an independent advice columnist. Read Cosmo or Ele and you will see two thing naked underweight models and diet plan adds. Guys mag have chesty hoties (Christina Hendrix), cigars, bikes and guns.

First of all, Ginger cannot be 31 (I have been skimming and have no idea where that came from), she is forty. Classmates (with picture) says that she graduated highschool in 98. Second of all, she looks forty.
--------------
I take contention with this line in your article : “There is a vast body of evidence indicating that men and women are biologically and psychology different. Hormonally, yes, but there are only minor differences between the male and female brain so most psychological differences can be attributed to socialization.
----------------
Anyone, ANYONE, who has spent any time with small children will tell you that there is a world of difference between boys and girls. The differences are actually quite obvious before the child is even old enough to talk. How can anyone be getting their PhD in psychology not know how great a difference there is between the genders. Hormones rule, they determine so much about a person I cannot imagine anyone claiming otherwise.
A simple example, is how much we change just by taking a low-dose birth control. I have tried many types and it always comes back to the same issue, I become too emotional. Or, women with higher levels of testosterone are credited with everything from being more aggressive to being the fastest runner - it effects the woman both mentally and physically.

Did you mean she graduated in 89? If she graduated in 98, she could be 31...or is my math wrong? You're around 18 when you graduate hs.

Actually, according to classmates, she graduated in 1993!! (So long as it's her).. I posted the link earlier, but here it is again:

http://www.classmates.com/directory/public/memberprofile/list.htm?regId=7406331360

It does say class of 1998.. for some strange reason, but if you look at the actual info where it lists all of her schools, high school was from 1989-1993.. which puts her at age 35 if she was 18 at graduation.

I'd say we should debate the merits of her arguments instead of her probable age...but there are no merits. 'sigh'

> While this thread hasn't been the model
> of intelligent discourse

Jesus Christ on a stick, what is all this "intelligent discourse" shit? Where is it coming from? Why is it landing on THIS blog?

What is the MATTER with you fuckers? Are you really like this? Do you go to your jobs, and to other peoples' homes, and to visit your families and all the other destinations of a modern life to snark and chortle about "intelligent discourse"?

And when you do, does any quick-thinking, sensible young man in your life ever whip out is his dick and take a piss in your coffee?

It's the only appropriate response.

"Intelligent discourse"!

Christ

Man I suck today, she would only be 31 if she graduated in 98, (unless it was school for adults) but she really looks to be in her forties so she must have been working on that tan her whole life. I assumed Ginger was older than me because she looks older than my husband and his friends from school, they are in their mid-forties. She is a good example of why we should wear hats and sunscreen.

I love Amy for doing this.

I am going to be catty with Ginger. She looks like she is in her 40's. She's a trashy dresser with bad tat's and tits. Needs a new weave too. How's about that oompa loompa tan, sorry honey if you are not naturally tan don't bother looking like a catchers mitt. Dye your roots please. Why are you trying to dress so young? I just want you to remember that real young women ridicule you all the time for the way you present yourself. My friends and I certainly do it all the time.

Man I suck today, she would only be 31 if she graduated in 98

I'm 32, and I graduated in '96, so that sounds about right.

I still thinks she's pretty.

No she's not. She's trashy looking. She could have been pretty, once. Now she looks like those 40 yr old porn stars-used waaaaay too hard, and used waaaaaay too many party drugs.

I"m 33. I don't try particularly (except for skin care, CAN'T let that go) and I look a decade younger than her, and prettier too. How can she even get her shoes on in the am, with those mountains poking out under her chin???? She looks like she's pregnant, in the wrong part of her body. Odd.

> I still thinks she's pretty.

Yes, Peterson's pretty. Maybe not electrifying... Maybe not the most alluring personality to flit through our lives in the last 72 hours... Certainly not the most attractive figure we know in that age group... But she's kinda cute.

And not only that... I've concluded that all the ninnies who are clucking at Amy (Hi Karen! Hi "Elementary"!) are playing in exactly the same sports contest... They've just picked the other team.

Years ago Amy had this friend with a blog named Cathy Seipp who went through a round of silliness like this. What was different –if I remember correctly, and maybe I don't– was that the person who'd written a private email to Cathy was sharing some professional gossip, rather than a personal critique as in this case. Cathy's friend was similarly annoyed when Seipp posted it on her blog. But there'd been no agreement theretofore that the discussion was private. Similarly, this insult about grooming seems to be Amy's first contact with Peterson.

Bullet Point #1:

• There's no expectation of privacy in unsolicited communications.

So this woman writes to Amy and says a bunch of snotty things, and Amy calls her bluff. (The most interesting part of this may be that it's on Facebook, which to my way of thinking is still part of the internet's Wild West: No law in the Saloon, babe... Keep a six-shooter on your hip.)

But when you read what Peterson's thoughts are like –and we've all been making fun of them for two days– it feels like we're talking to a teenager.

Maybe she's a child of divorce, maybe not. Doesn't matter. For being over 30, this woman has an undercooked personality. Peterson worries about attracting people as a movie star does, which is not how grown women think about pairing.

So when I see her writing to someone like Amy, using that tone to discuss those topics, we get Bullet Point #2:

• Peterson's original, melodramatic message to Amy was more of a desperate cry for help than a personal assault.

Peterson's overdue for some growth in her understanding of intimate human relationships. She's on the cusp of a breakthrough. It's as likely to come during a bitchslap from Amy as any other time.

Again, I think Amy was a little naughty for being a PDF hardass about it, just as I was naughty for talking about her rack and her gams that way.

But no harm, no foul. Peterson approached a stranger (Amy) exactly as she wanted to. Amy had no responsibility to respond as some sort of omniscient, benevolent therapist, nor did the rest of us.

Peterson's probably getting these kinds of responses from a people a lot nowadays.
__________________________________

PS— Thou Shalt Not Cluck, you dorkweeds....

Ginger P could have written a letter to the editor, but she chose to send a snotty email to Amy. Okay. If she didn't do enough research to find Amy's blog, then she's too dumb to be in any PhD program,. If she didn't consider that Amy might publish the email on her own blog, she's not terribly perceptive, and that's kind of a problem for some one studying clinical psych.

I don't really care about her observable bad taste in presentation.

We are all missing one very simple reason that she did all this. Raise you hand if you just spent part of two days talking about and gawking at Ms. Peterson. So if this young lady wanted to be the center of it she got her wish. She's a bit too seasoned to get the hot coed attention and dress a bit too provocative to get the serious scholar attention. She could be easily reading this blog and laughing at all of us.

"She looks like she's pregnant, in the wrong part of her body." Which means she has big tits and not a fat gut. Most of us see this as a good thing.

No, I"m talking 9 months pregnant, only the baby is in her chest. I get men like boobs, but do ya'll REALLY like them THAT grotesque? Wow. It'd be like women wanting a 3 ft penis. Really, what would one DO with all that?

She seems obsessed with my FB page-she won't stop leaving messages. Apparently, my polar-opposite-of-her looks offend her very sensibilities.

Um...

There are a couple of industries in Nevada that employ women until they are 35 or 40 and start to lose the youthful shine... many of those ladies lie about their age, older when young, younger when old, so they often don't remember their real birth date... and men have tolerated their senseless prattle due to the happy ending they knew was in the cards, so they think people actually care about what they think and that men respect them for their minds...

Meh...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fK6NbGhMw4w

I am so glad to see this! Recently this "Dr" was on a BPD page that I am part of & called one of the others a sociopath! We are all outraged! Something needs to be done about this woman!