I mostly brush off Ann Coulter as some bizarre sideshow - freaky and weird, but good at turning a profit. But I found particular irony in something noted by Michael Strasser ("Coulter's claims based in truth," Letters, March 4): "As Ann Coulter will testify, as a young, female conservative with unwavering and uncompromising points of view, nobody would publish her work for almost a decade until she began writing her books."
I have little sympathy for Ms. Coulter pointing to her status as a young, opinionated conservative woman as what held her back for so long. For one, she hasn't been hindered in the slightest. If she wanted to, I'm sure she could wallpaper her house with money. And beyond that, the very fact that she's leggy and blonde and loud and conservative is why she gets booked on so many cable television shows. I can think of tons of conservative men who are similarly shrill (G. Gordon Liddy, for one), but get on television far less.
The ultimate irony, however, is that Coulter has made her career (and, presumably, her mountains of money) out of attacking feminism and feminists. In fact, saying she "attacks" is an understatement, considering how completely divorced from reality she appears to be. I find it perplexing that an unmarried, childless 43-year old woman who makes her career out of being "unwavering and uncompromising" can attack the feminist movement when she has reaped so many of its benefits. Before second-wave feminism, would she have gone to Cornell and on to law school? Moreover, would she be speaking at UB next week?
For me, I don't think she's for real, but has just caught on to a lucrative marketing tool and rode it to the bank. But if I'm wrong, and she means what she says, she should really stop being so loud and act like a proper lady.
Photo: Breadchastick / Wikimedia Commons
