I don’t agree with this op-ed about the sexual revolution. But I was able to read to the end without feeling offended and aggravated.
This is how I aspire to write: in such a way that someone else might say “Nope, not my bag, and she’s inconsistent on X, Y and Z,” but still make it to the end of the piece and perhaps even think about it a little bit more after that.
So here it is: a somewhat illogical view on the sexual revolution, and one I can easily poke holes in. However, I won’t, and will instead applaud her light and airy writing style that seems to say to me that I could possibly have coffee with this woman and enjoy it.
by 
Good for you. Seemed like a rant from a high horse to me.
You know, I did read shades of that in there too. However, in her illogical piece, I note she did leave room for counter revolutions. That’s where we come in. 🙂 Also, I read so many rants from high horses that I may have become quite immune to them. (And I’ve been known to give a couple, too. :-))
Thanks for the response. I recognize that my skin is thin though that does not mean someone is not ranting. I appreciate your appreciation of ‘inconsistencies’ and the ‘somewhat illogical view on the sexual revolution’ as people always try to argue their case until they agree or become inconsistent..