Naomi Wolf on Assange Victims

When I conjure up writing ideas, they often seem clever in theory but quickly dissolve into an illogical set of fragmented rants and mass generalizations. My response: immediate deletion. Controversial issues and driven opinions typically bring out the best in journalists. This, unfortunately, was not the case in Naomi Wolf's suggestion to name the women who filed sex-crime allegations against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange. The idea was interesting in principle, but lacked substance when applied to paper. The article drew from Oscar Wilde to Virginia Woolf without drawing connections necessary to form a compelling argument. Baldanza's assessment in class was spot on: Wolf focuses on how the custom of shielding accuser's identity is outdated, but never mentions the traumatizing affect a change may have on these women. However, given that Wolf is an avid feminist, the article is passionate and moving. Regardless of whether the reader agrees with the central premise or not, the seamless organization and the survey of "profound moral issues" evokes a strong response. Opinion-based columns are not designed to please the masses, but instead to solicit reaction- whether that involves approval or criticism. As a sucker for profound writing, I consider a particular section especially effective: "Can judicial decision-making be impartial when the accused is exposed to the glare of media scrutiny and attack by the US government, while his accusers remain hidden?" This is strong rhetorical question, but the reader is still left wishing Wolf supplemented it with a better answer.