Jezebel 
Enter your username and password.
New York, 2:35 AM
Mon Nov 30
18 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip your editors:
tips@jezebel.com
Editor-in-Chief:
Anna Holmes
Email | Twitter
Deputy Editor:
Dodai Stewart
Email | Twitter
Senior Contributing Editor:
Tracie Egan
Email | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Anna North
Email | Twitter
Sadie Stein
Email | Twitter
Reporter:
Irin Carmon
Email | Twitter
Editorial Assistant:
Margaret Hartmann
Email | Twitter
Contributors:
Rich Juzwiak
Email | Twitter
Latoya Peterson
Email
Jenna Sauers
Email
Lizzie Skurnick
Email
Interns:
Katy Kelleher
Twitter
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
08/12/09
I assume that she gave appropriate credit to any writers whose work she cites, avoiding the problem she had with the P.L. Travers piece in The New Yorker -- the one that led to the big negotiated correction and was her last bylined piece for that magazine.
If you have time for this woman's bizarre, hypocritical preoccupations, good on you.
08/12/09
08/12/09
i read this and i picture women, wives and concubines, holding on desperately to men, clutching at them like life rafts, floating downstream.
so these dolt men with their lack of agency are anchors. without them, women have no identity, or value, and are meant to be mocked and are defective in some way. without a dude, we're pissing in the wind (or on the street, as it were), and you gotta use whatever madonna-or-whore qualities you got.
we can arbitrarily assign one higher value than the other, but either way you're fucked, because if the dude leaves you, or doesn't leave his wife for you, you don't even exist. maybe you're too fat. maybe you're too desperate. maybe you're a shrew. maybe you shop at J.C. Penny.
I know very few women who want to be with any dude just for the sake of being with any dude, but it breaks my heart when society tells us that we should compete over men because they are all the same: silent, incapable blobs that have nothing to offer us except a false sense of worth.
08/12/09
08/12/09
08/12/09
Maybe there are nuances and levels of wrong between the two, but I think saying Hunter has no blame/responsibility/accountability for Elizabeth's pain takes things too far. We can't control men, but we're certainly capable of controlling ourselves. Edwards made the choice to cheat on his wife, violating a promise he made to her; but Hunter made the choice to help him along, which I think violates an implied social contract. The brunt of the blame is certainly on his shoulders, but I don't think it's unfair to say Hunter's choices were less than stellar and that her actions had a negative effect on Elizabeth.
08/12/09
08/12/09
08/12/09
Goodness, that's a concise analysis of the American class distinctions in Ms. Flanagan's head.
08/12/09
08/12/09
08/12/09
08/12/09
so wait, HGB is related to Jaime Pressly?! nice
08/12/09
08/12/09
A marriage is the responsibility of the people in it. Sure, one should probably not pursue a married person, but it remains the responsibility of the married person to keep their commitment, tell the other person to get lost, and maintain their own marriage.
08/12/09
this is so true, but it flies in the face of every scientific study made that tries to throw a biological reason behind adultery.
again, it also seems to go back to this foreign, exotic and startling concept of self control. we are just NOT supposed to have ANY self control at all anymore. who thought of this...this "self control" idea? it's just an idea, right?
as for rielle, y'know it's one thing to date somebody who you do not know is already married, but it's quite another to knowingly go after a public figure who is very much married. i've always considered that kind of behavior as the worst girl-on-girl crime ever. the onus is always on the married person to say no, but one would hope that both men and women would respect people's marriages a lot more than they do.
08/12/09
08/12/09
08/12/09
08/12/09
08/12/09
08/12/09
08/12/09
Also, couldn't agree more with the final paragraph. John Edwards knew what he was doing, he's not the victim of Rielle Hunter. And the "evil worthless temptress vs. saintly perfect wife" narrative is bullshit.
08/12/09
08/12/09
08/12/09
08/12/09
Jesus. Project much? I know she was going for feminist enpowerment but it comes off as really unbalanced and terrified.
08/12/09
08/12/09
08/12/09