Holy shit what

[Waffuru]

http://amaditalks.tumblr.com/post/181569...through-of

[King B]

Can't read the handwriting T.T

[Kaden]

Can't read the handwriting T.T

She retyped the letter as she quoted it.

[Jarka]

Ugh my brain

[Valora Crow]

She retyped the letter as she quoted it.

Totally missed that part, too, thanks.

Sig, look at which district he represents. :S

[King B]

Guy is a stud...

[Alura]

He was an idiot, but he didn't seem like he was trying to be a jerk. He was just stupid. She, on the other hand, was a total asshole.

[Pinky]

politics should be subtitled "WHEN TROLLS COLLIDE"

[Sophia]

I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and assume that he wasn't sitting behind a desk trying to pump as much sexist hate and bigotry into every word like the writer appears to believe. He might very well be naturally sexist and bigoted, but it's hard to really say anything when a person is trying to pick apart and spin your every word into something negative. She generalizes and spins a lot of quotes as well, almost as much as the politician does.

Having said that, the dude's a complete tool and she does have a right to be offended. He definitely is ignorant on the issue. I just don't think he's some woman-hating, AM-machine like she depicts.

[Super Buu]

Yeah this actually kind of annoyed me because while the guy is undeniably ignorant, responding to ignorance by flying into a fit of ineffectual rage is also dumb. The world is full of incredibly misinformed people, and the sooner you can stop being surprised and outraged, the better chance you have of showing them the error of their ways.

[Undrask]

I am a man that doesn't really give a shit about how "nice" or "likable" a rep is. I can about the bttom line, and the bttom line is that this man is incapable of the higher functions required to be making decisions about medical care. Wherever you stand on this issue you should at least be able to recognize that this man is not making these decisions for the right reasons. He has no logic, reasoning or vision to determine a responsible decisions, and should not be in charge of creating oucomes to these ends.

[Alura]

Oh yea. He's a moron. Shouldn't be in Congress. But I think Sophia said it best:

She generalizes and spins a lot of quotes as well, almost as much as the politician does.

I mean, right off the bat she's getting flustered over the fact he uses her first name. Yea, it's probably not the most appropriate way to start off a letter like that, but is it "I'm seething already" worthy?

[Jarka]

Oh yea. He's a moron. Shouldn't be in Congress. But I think Sophia said it best:
I mean, right off the bat she's getting flustered over the fact he uses her first name. Yea, it's probably not the most appropriate way to start off a letter like that, but is it "I'm seething already" worthy?

Must hold back... feminist diatribe...
don't make me.... rant... you wouldn't like me... [SIZE="5"]when I'm ranting...
[/SIZE]
GRAGGHH JARKA TIRADE!

The issue with using simply a first name when corresponding with a woman is one of those problems that is very steeped in both privilege and trivialization, and, as a result, often goes overlooked in discussion. In American society, it is a sign of respect to refer to somebody by their full title unless they are in a state of familiarity.

Picture a teenager trying to impress their date's parents. It's not first name basis, it's Mr. Lim or Mrs. Washington. Granted, once they reach a comfortable state of acquaintance (or, if one party attempts to make the other party comfortable), they will say, "Please, call me Dana." However, this is with the express permission of the party involved (and, in fact, can often make the individual the request is directed to even more uncomfortable, as it is disrupting a power balance).

There is also a bit of a transition state in American social politics: the use of the last name without titles. Commonly used in workplaces, the parties refer to one another as simply "Bukowski" or "Lopez". It is a subtle means of signifying familiarity without abandoning respect for their position.

As a result of the close ties between titles and respect within American society, it is unsurprising that using first names in situations that do not call for them has been used as a means to demean women in the past and continues to be used today. It is not always intentional, but neither is tucking your purse closer or checking for your wallet when a person of color sits near you on a bus - doesn't make it not bigoted.

Think about it from a professional versus familiar standpoint: during an debate, the degree of respect between a coworker or a boss prevents you from treating it like an argument with a friend. With a friend, you're able to say, "That's a fucking stupid idea, man, and you're stupid for thinking it" or a similar derivative. The familiar nature allows for frankness and a less biased analysis of where the argument is coming from. When discussing with coworkers, there is a much greater degree of tact involved - in order to avoid a poisonous workplace, one must learn to attack ideas without attacking the person presenting them. (Of course, this is in an ideal situation, as plenty of workplaces are poisonous as hell).

By the representative forgoing any sort of formal title (or greeting - remember, it wasn't Dear Firstname, it was just Firstname), he is immediately putting her at a level undeserving of respect without her express permission.

I really haven't gone much farther than the surface, but I hope you can get a glimmer of WHY it is an issue. This douche (notice the lack of respect for him by forgoing any sort of name and referring solely by a descriptor) is supposed to be a representative of the people. While he may not have intended to offend by calling her, a woman arguing a commonly feminist stance, by her first name, that would be like asking a black constituent where the nearest KFC is - you might have had a hankering for chicken and totes "don't even see color", but holy shit pay attention to context, you motherfucker. Granted, it is probably not the issue that deserves the most focus in the letter (I can't even pick one... releasing his daughter's medical information? Ominous voting records? Feelings versus facts? Fucking TRANSVAGINAL ULTRASOUNDS REQUIRED FOR ABORTIONS?"), but it is not trivial, either, especially not when combined with all the rest of it.

Honestly, had I gone through the process of writing to my representative and they had responded with a letter like that, I would have gone apeshit as well.

(NOTE: I just woke up so I'm not sure how much sense this made. Sorry!)

[Piper Juunanagou]

I hate Pennsylvania. We have dumb politicians. Just look at Rick Santorum and Arlen Specter, who are both just d-tards. Random aside, I met Rick Santorum when I was 11. He came to my schol and everyone had to pose for pictures with him. /nonsequitor

But srlsy, Pennsylvania makes terrible politicians. Our only President let the South secede and was like 'eh, I let the next dude deal with that, trololol.'

[Super Buu]

What Alura said. If that makes you seethe, you need to take some fucking valium. Annoyed? Okay.

[Alura]

@Jarka:

tl;dr

I skimmed over what you said and honestly, I realized very quickly there's no way that you can convince me that the 'first name' thing is a big deal. To me. It might be a big deal to this person, and that's fine. I just think it's silly, personally.

Yea, it's probably not appropriate, especially in a business-like situation, and I wouldn't have used the first name. But I don't think that should cause someone to go into the letter like she already was set to murder the dude. Like Rose just said: Annoyed, I can understand.

Agree to disagree?

[Josh]

Neither of these two were civil with each other, the initial letter is clearly hostile and in return the response was equally hostile.

tl;dr both of them are douches. The senator is an ignorant douche.