Any Indian and definitely any person who is a Hindu, I feel, should give this atleast a cursory read.

I quote a few lines from the article, which themselves are lines from an undergraduate textbook written by Paul Courtright, a Yale and Princeton educated Professor, quoted by the author, Rajiv Malhotra, an "Indian-American public intellectual"(as it says on the blog):

[F]rom a psychoanalytic perspective, there is meaning in the selection of the elephant head. Its trunk is the displaced phallus, a caricature of Siva's linga. It poses no threat because it is too large, flaccid, and in the wrong place to be useful for sexual purposes. … So Ganesa takes on the attributes of his father but in an inverted form, with an exaggerated limp phallus – ascetic and benign – whereas Siva is "hard", erotic, and destructive."[xlvi]

He [Ganesa] remains celibate so as not to compete erotically with his father, a notorious womanizer, either incestuously for his mother or for any other woman for that matter."[xlvii]

Ganesa is like a eunuch guarding the women of the harem. In Indian folklore and practice, eunuchs have served as trusted guardians of the antahpura, the seraglio. "They have the reputation of being homosexuals, with a penchant for oral sex, and are looked upon as the very dregs of society.” (Hiltebeitel 1980, p. 162). … Like the eunuch, Ganesa has the power to bless and curse; that is, to place and remove obstacles. Although there seem to be no myths or folktales in which Ganesa explicitly performs oral sex, his insatiable appetite for sweets may be interpreted as an effort to satisfy a hunger that seems inappropriate in an otherwise ascetic disposition, a hunger having clear erotic overtones. Ganesa's broken tusk, his guardian staff, and displaced head can be interpreted as symbols of castration…. This combination of child-ascetic-eunuch in the symbolism of Ganesa – each an explicit denial of adult male sexuality – appears to embody a primal Indian male longing: to remain close to the mother and to do so in a way that will both protect her and yet be acceptable to the father. This means that the son must retain access to the mother but not attempt to possess her sexually."[xlviii]

This is how I see it: I dont care if it is an attack on Hinduism or not since I myself question the very concept of religion and God but any interpretation of Hinduism inadvertently but definitely becomes an interpretation of India, of all its people, even the poor atheists and agnostics (like me :p).

Hindu mythology, sometimes, is really funny. I am ready to accept all this if it were the outcome of sincere, openminded, unbiased scholarly work. But that doesnt seem to be the case. Sankrant Sanu explores how studies on Hinduism may be biased in the West and how "it has become fashionable for elitist (i.e. Westernized) Indians to denigrate their own Indian Classics".

This sort of work is dangerous because it is the same work that finds its way into American school textbooks. Today, the world is full of religious hatred with horrible outcomes such as terrorism. If the kids are taught "unscholarly" nonsense like this, then you're not helping the situation.