My favorite female columnist brings the funk today....

O.J. in 1973.

 

I think it worked that she put her own story into the column. It is, after all, a column, and one of the main points it sounds like Hnida was trying to make was for women to not be afraid or ashamed to admit what happened to them. I think Hill took that opportunity and eloquently interspersed the two incidents. I am confused as to what elements of the column someone would disagree with: the way it was written or what was said?

 

Well, those of us that actually PLAYED football (yes, you know, running, hitting, blocking, tackling and in my case, catching the ball as well) for a D-I college football team don't agree with you that kickers are football players. Some are, but just putting on a uniform and lining up for an extra point or field goal by itself doesn't make you one in the eyes of your peers.

 

Fly with who, buck? You? Why the fuck would I care about you?

You sound like one of those idiotic soccer players who try to argue that you're tougher than football players because you don't wear pads. We don't even need to get into the flaws of that argument.

Oh my god, I'm trembling, buckweaver told me to grow up!!!

 

Do you drive a Dodge Stratus?

 

The writing was a little uneven, but the concept worked in this particular context. The back and forth was effective, for the most part, and served to break up an author-promotes-new-book profile.

 

Didn't like the approach.

Didn't work for me.

She's not interesting enough to draw me in by writing about her.

 

That is ridiculous. Besides everybody knows rugby players are tougher than football players.

 

I know you meant this sarcastically, and it made me laugh.

It was like three years ago when The Washington Post Style section ran a what's-in, what's out list for the coming year and put "fo' shizzle" on the out. So I have to smirk when I hear white, wannabe hipsters use the expression in the newsroom. Sometimes I out-and-out laugh at them.

 

I like the way Hill strings words together, very appealing. But her approach here is terrible. She comes off as narcissitic throughout the whole piece. I felt as though she were using Hnida as a way to talk about herself. I got the feeling of an interview in which Hill kept interrupting Hnida to tell her "I know you had a rough time at Colorado because THIS happened to ME. Hey, look everybody! THIS happened to ME!" I thought it came off as disrespectful to Hnida in a way. I'm not belittling what Hill went through at all, but her encounter doesn't come close to comparing to what Hnida went through, yet she speaks of the tales as though they're somehow interchangeable.

 

I don't think she disrespected Hnida at all, and perhaps, it made it easier for Hnida to open up because of the shared experience. I also don't see how someone could say fighting off a sexual attack at 13 years old "doesn't come close" to what Hnida went through. I think it took a lot for Hill to open up about her own experience, and, from what Hnida said in her interview, was one of her own goals in coming forward.

 

I fall in the same category as 21, Dangerously, others ... I just don't like the constant use of self. Maybe it's just personal taste. Whatever it is, I know I couldn't get past about the fourth paragraph of this column.
If it worked for others, that's fine. It didn't for me. At all. But I suppose, what column reaches 100 percent of readers? Probably not too many.