The Dartmouth Observer |
|
|
Commentary on politics, history, culture, and literature by two Dartmouth graduates and their buddies
WHO WE ARE Chien Wen Kung graduated from Dartmouth College in 2004 and majored in History and English. He is currently a civil servant in Singapore. Someday, he hopes to pursue a PhD in History. John Stevenson graduated from Dartmouth College in 2005 with a BA in Government and War and Peace Studies. He is currently a PhD candidate in the Department of Political Science at the University of Chicago. He hopes to pursue a career in teaching and research. Kwame A. Holmes did not graduate from Dartmouth. However, after graduating from Florida A+M University in 2003, he began a doctorate in history at the University of Illinois--Urbana Champaign. Having moved to Chicago to write a dissertation on Black-Gay-Urban life in Washington D.C., he attached himself to the leg of John Stevenson and is thrilled to sporadically blog on the Dartmouth Observer. Feel free to email him comments, criticisms, spelling/grammar suggestions. BLOGS/WEBSITES WE READ The American Scene Arts & Letters Daily Agenda Gap Stephen Bainbridge Jack Balkin Becker and Posner Belgravia Dispatch Black Prof The Corner Demosthenes Daniel Drezner Five Rupees Free Dartmouth Galley Slaves Instapundit Mickey Kaus The Little Green Blog Left2Right Joe Malchow Josh Marshall OxBlog Bradford Plumer Political Theory Daily Info Andrew Samwick Right Reason Andrew Seal Andrew Sullivan Supreme Court Blog Tapped Tech Central Station UChicago Law Faculty Blog Volokh Conspiracy Washington Monthly Winds of Change Matthew Yglesias ARCHIVES BOOKS WE'RE READING CW's Books John's Books STUFF Site Feed    |
Tuesday, October 15, 2002
John Eisenman asks "Why does only one woman write for the Observer? Food for thought." I find myself in an interesting state of mind. I haven't followed the Observer as much as I would like in recent weeks, mainly because of my classes. So, I haven't read that much of Mr. Eisenman's work, and haven't yet pigeonholed him into my political spectrum. So I can't quite figure how this food for thought should taste. On one hand, perhaps he is accusing the Observer of alienating women, either by its political leanings or its debate style. Or perhaps he wants to suggest that the Observer really provides an excellent forum for women to discuss the issues of our years, and we should try to attract more woman writers. Or, quite possibly, he writes in the context of some ongoing Observer debate that I've missed. In that case, my yammering about what he could mean merely distract from the debate. So, can I have a hint? Is this a rotten tomato or a tasty burger? |