From Frances Downey

Re: A bride by any other name: I have just read your very interesting article about changing surnames when getting married and wanted to write to you for a few reasons.

I am getting married next year and will not be changing my name. My name is my name, I have had it all my life and I see absolutely no reason why I should change it. My boyfriend would prefer me to take his name but whenever he brings it up I always say "well why don't you change your name?", which generally shuts him up. His family are a bit dodgy about it but can't really say anything to me and I am not particularly bothered about what they think anyway.

But the real thing that struck me when I read your article was that you are obviously a young vocal woman and you have got married. When I announced I was getting married my mum went into total shock (she has never been married) and I think a lot of my other friends were quite shocked that I have decided to do this at a relatively young age (25). Also, the only other people who I know who have got/are getting married are quite traditional in their ideas of women in marriage.

So it was lovely to read your article about your husband and yourself having a completely equal perminent partnership.

From Irina Lester

I fully support the author on her and her husband decision for her not to change her name, but for husband to do it. That's what I want to see more often! I am also annoyed that it is easy for a woman to change her name during wedding but a man needs deed poll. So, i salute all brides sticking to their names and all grooms who adopt female ones.

However, all Eleanor's musings on the importance of name are totally lost on me. I think a name is nothing to be proud about, no more than blue eyes or height. It's just a name, for god's sake! It's arbitrary, it doesn't say anything about you, but a bit about pretentions (and silliness sometimes) of your parents.

I changed my surname by a deed poll when i came to live in UK. I always hated mine, and i dislike an idea of having a man's surname. Just to think, women NEVER have their own surnames. Your mother's surname is actually your maternal granddad's one.

So I had purely my own surname, out of blue, it's well pronounsable and not confusing to any English person. And also not too common (that would be too dull for my liking).

My husband reacted stupidly on it - he wondered if people are going to wonder and ask questions. They do, yes, and often are impressed by my unusual nonconformist attitude. Yes, you can change your name if you don't like it, just like hair colour, no big deal, just stick with the one you really like in order not to create too much hustle for yourself. I simply hate an idea that you "have" to live with something so arbitrary as name even if you don't like it.

However my husband wouldn't like it either if i wanted to have his surname for the reasons we as feminists understand well.

From Pam

I am so glad that women of Eleanor Turner's generation are thinking more deeply about such out-moded traditions as taking the man's name on marriage. I did not think of doing that when I married nearly forty years ago, and felt a sense of loss about my family name that I wasn't brave enough to confront. I am delighted that my son and his wife each retain their own surname. But what's the answer to the surname question for their children? Lots of hyphenated names ad infinitum? Oh, and Eleanor - you're thinking about your 'master's' degree???

From Lynne McLean-Brown

Fantastic article, Having recently got married and adopting a double barrled name (my husbands and my own) I have also received similar reactions. What about personal choice and what is right for both people entering the marriage? well done on a brilliant article!

From Peta Chow

Nice article Eleanor Turner (A Bride By Any Other Name), except is marriage really about "becoming one unit with one surname"? I don't intend to take my fiance's surname and he won't be taking mine. I don't see it as contradicting the "becoming one unit" part in any way. My name is my name and his name is his, part of our individual identities and nothing to do with our relationship.

From Sandra

When I got married a few years ago, I kept my surname and was surprised by the negative feedback. I'd assumed that nobody would really care one way or another - it was 2003 after all. I found, interestingly, that men seemed to accept it without a problem but older women felt the need to challenge me. One woman who had always called me by my first name suddenly started calling me Mrs C just to make a point. I still find it strange that a woman keeping her name is an issue. I thought we had moved on a long time ago.

From Girish Sethna

I agree with Eleanor Turner, but there are two issues it seems to me.

Firstly, her surname must inevitably have come from her father's side of the family, so how far back do we go? Mother, grandmother, great-grandmother...??? Of course there is the double-barrelled option, but while that works for you, what of your daughter or son?

Secondly, in the current age where, as Eleanor says women now own property and land, surely the idea of 'ownership' is out of date. Perhaps a mutual decision between the couple is best. As a man, if I were to marry, out of love, I would take my spouse's surname. She may want, for the same reason to take mine. But then it is about love, mutual decision rather than about the old reasons.

From eden smith

I just wanted to congratulate Ms Eleanor Turner on her article. I personally have no need to make the decision. however I strongly support any couple who at the very least think about what name they go by and even more those who challenge the assumption that a males name should be carried on. I read somewhere that in spain everyone has two legal last names: one from their father (his father's father's name etc) and one from their mother (her mother's mother's name etc). That way a person is able to trace their family back on their father's paternal side and also on their mother's maternal one. It makes a lot more sense then our system.

From Mark Kuramoto-Headey

Ah Ms Turner. I congratulate you both. To say it's a path less trod is the understatement of the century. Despite so many people complaining of the vast hoards of women keeping their own name, I don't see it. Even the non-romantic women in my office have eagerly changed their surnames on marriage.

As you can see, when we got married, my wife and I hyphenated our names. Actually, I wanted my wife to keep her own name, but she wasn't that keen; she wanted to take my name. The joint name was a compromise. I confess, I haven't got my passport changed, but we have a bank account and bills in the joint name without the need for a Deed Poll. I'll be interested to see what the passport office will make of my request when it comes.

I think perhaps women do often object more strongly than men when meeting a woman who's kept her birth name. My own theory is that they think you're passing a critical judgment on their choice and react to justify it. In fact, I don't think very many women DO think seriously about it when they get married. There are still to many silly romantic notions floating around.

From LL

Not a new but a well written piece on the subject. I did not change my name r adopt the Mrs. prefix. Yet people do have problem and cards constantly arrive addressed to Mr and Mrs. I think it does challenge people's preconceived ideas of how it is. But more importantly it bucks the status quo and takes away people's safety structures. I think that provokes a bit of fear in them. They don't see that it is actually and insult to continue to call you by something you've rejected.

I wonder if the author would have kept her name if the concept of the name dying out had not arisen ?

Interesting point thought re the need to alter maiden name to previous name.

From Ida

In response to the article about changing a name on marriage: I recently got married and my husband and I have discussed at length what our family name shall be. Neither of us feel the need to change our names until children come along and then it looks now like we will have a double-barrelled name. We would make up a new name but are reticent to lose the history. I empathise with the author of the article as I too have had (and will continue to have, no doubt) varied and often negative reactions to our decision - not my decision, our decision. People really do seem to find it hard to believe that husbands may also feel the way some wives feel about the name-change.

The whole wedding setup is shockingly steered towards the disempowerment of women and the empowerment of men. When I was researching traditions for our wedding, the most shocking of all was that should the engagement be broken, that the implication should be made that it was the woman who called it off, not the man. Amazing, just amazing. I wore no engagement ring, I was not given away from one man to another, I did not cover myself in a veil... my husband and I walked up the aisle together, symbolising our arrival at this point in our lives together.

Weddings, marriage and family commitments appear to still have a some way to go before they are equally respectful of both sexes.

From Emma Hadfield

In response to the article 'A Bride by Any Other Name'. I have very similar views on this area. I come from a very close family and my name is therefore very important to me. I have had countless discussions/arguments with friends and family regarding the fact that should I choose to marry in the future I will be keeping my name as to lose it would, to me, feel like losing my strong identity and being forced to take on another. One friend's argument in response to mine was that it was tradition and therefore the woman should take on the man's name and I just couldn't make her understand that this was the same tradition where women don't work, have babies and are submissive to their husbands. However, I have a male friend who is due to get married in June and he is taking on his partner's name. He agrees with me in that his girlfriend comes from a close family and he on the otherhand does not get along with most of his family. He therefore feels no loyalty to his own name and understands how she would want to keep her family name going. Highly commended I thought as not many men think the same. I found it also interesting to read in your article the difficulty involved in a man changing his name. I was not aware this was the case and this angers me, highlighting just another case of inequality in our society today.

From Bea Valle

Re: Rape - is it our fault?: This article is spot-on, a very clever and accurate analysis of the assumptions on the thorny issue of rape in British society today. More and more misinformation about rape is being made available in the last couple of years on TV, radio and papers, however the focus always seems to be the wrong one. It is depressing that people only pay attention to things like men who are wrongly convicted for rape, a number which is statistically insignificant. But issues like the low conviction rate and this ill-advised campaigns are sidestepped.

From Violet Greaves

Exactly right. Women are being denied the right to live lives without fear and men are being portrayed as potential rapists/abusers/murderers unless women handle them by behaving appropriately. Men and women need to work together to address these attitudes that constrain both genders.

From Jaq Halogen

In response to your: "Rape - is it our fault?" feature, i'd have to say that in most of your points, i'm in complete agreement. however, when you mentioned domestic abuse i was a bit confused as to its relevance to the rest of the piece.

the issue with many cases of domestic abuse, as i understand it, is that many women are either afraid or unwilling to report/press charges against the offenders for a variety of reasons. that, as i understand it, is why there is so much information on how to protect yourself if you're a victim of domestic abuse.

i'd also like to add that while advice to women on how to protect themselves against rape, i.e. learning self-defense and not leaving drinks unattended, is good i feel, as it can help prevent some rapes, but i completely agree that all the blame should be placed upon the perpetrators of the rape and not upon the victims.

this idea that women can somehow be held accountable for their own rapes is such a ludicrous idea that it's proponents can hardly be taken seriously.

as a man myself, i've never believed that rape is something that can be forgiven, no matter what substances have been imbibed by either party. all my life i've had the belief that there is no drug, recreational of otherwise, that makes someone do anything they wouldn't, if they knew there wouldn't be consequences. all drugs will do is cause you to disregard any longterm damage your actions may cause. thus, a man who thinks rape is pretty okay, if only other people would shut up about it, once drunk or otherwise, would still be tha same man, and thus still completely responsible for his actions. anyway, sorry for rambling at you, but i really liked it.

From Girish Sethna

Dwysan Edwards is right (Rape - is it our fault?) there seems to be a widespread idea that if a woman is raped it's something she could have avoided. Rather than something the rapist could have avoided doing.

Rape is bullying. If bullying is unacceptable behaviour, then so is rape.

But there is still a distinct anti-women, sexist portrayal of women in both advertising and in such tv programmes as CSI: This is not an issue of women taking a stand tho'. It's an issue of society as a whole making the bullying and degradation of women BECAUSE of their gender, unacceptable. An issue for both men and women universally.

The de-sexualisation of images/words around women in the media is also necessary.

From Eighmie

I agree with you, women should be allowed to go anywhere, dressed anyway they please, at whatever time of day or night. I think that suggesting that a woman needs to keep her wits about her and maintain presence of mind because there are bad people in this world , and suggesting otherwise is foolish and simple-minded.

From varrie murray

It seems strange that so much emphasis is placed upon dress and alchohol consumtion when realisticly the majority of rape victims are just going around their day to day business,fully clothed and not under the influence of drugs or alcohol? should we maby also stop walking our dogs?

From Laura

Re: A hairy dilemma: I feel your pain, though not to your extent. I've written about the same subject in my online diaries over the years. I let my leg hair grow out for a few months this year, and then tried waxing for the second time to see if it worked any better this time around. It didn't. I'm back to the old routine of shaving and plucking. It really disturbs me that women are unsexy if they're hairy, even though hair is a sign of sexual maturity. It's like men secretly only want prepubescent girls, and women have all convinced themselves that they like it much better looking like one. The response to Julia Roberts hairy armpits was freakishly loud and critical. Even men, to a much MUCH smaller extent, are starting to feel self-conscious if they're too hairy. It makes me want to shout to everyone, why are we doing this to ourselves?! Why are we all as a society going mad over such an inconsequential thing? As if we don't have enough to worry about already!

From Rebecca Meakin

I am hairy and proud! I get mocked. Mostly by women at clubs. But truthfully my not shaving seems to actually be a male magnet in Hartford, CT. I get so many "not shaving is hot" comments that I really am not sure what the heck to think. I mean constantly being told by the media that it's gross but my real life experience definitely speaks differently to me anecdotally any way.

From Kitty Chronic

I really enjoyed this article, and must admit i also found it baffling.

Of course, like most other women, I started shaving leg and arm-pit hair off during my early teens, plucking my eyebrows in my late teens, and at one point became so obsessive (a general obsessive-compulsive characteristic that still lingers in some forms) I would even pluck the tiny invisible-to-all-but-me hairs out of the backs of my fingers.

But for a good few years now i have completely stopped removing body hair, using deodorant and hair products, and so on - and now can't for the life of me think why i ever bothered.

Ms Chaplin's description of the lengths to which women go to remove body hair, and the reaction of others to those who don't, struck me first as a funny joke; then i had a blimey-it's-true-but-why moment; and now i've remembered that, actually, i'm the odd one here and am therefore trying to remember how and why i stopped in the first place, not being a person of exceptional self-esteem or confidence.

From Adey

My Grrl fiend sent me a link to this 'cause she new i'd be interested. She also told me that she'd posted a comment but i've not looked at it yet. She is much hairier than me in various places and i don't find it in the least bit unattractive. She is mixed race, half Indian, so has more hair on her face than a white woman may have and i think it's lovely, she also has way hairier armpits than i have. hairy women of the world unite, not all us men need a hair fetish to know that hair is fine. great article by the way.

From Irina

I honestly have no idea what I could say to the author, I don't think I am in the position to advise. I detest the pressure to cause yourself pain by waxing and I never waxed. I say to anybody in a conversation about beauty treatments that I would never wax even if I was paid to go through it. Nobody ever called me a witch for that, though. But i agree, the pressure is there, but I still would urge you all to think: to which extent is it the inner pressure? Maybe you are afraid of your hair more than the rest of the world.

I may be hairless comparing to other women, true, but on several occasions in winter, when i NEVER remove hair on legs, i went to swimming pool and nobody said anything or sniggered. Or in the gym, when i exercise in shorts. They have other things to notice and think about, believe me. or try it yourself. And be prepared to say "none of your fucking business, do mind your own beer gut!" - the world won't collapse.

In my own dealings with those lanky fluff that I have got i draw the line at pain. Waxing is out, as I said. Depilatory cream is what i use, but again only in summer and I don't worry if there is some stubble. If they stop producing depilatory cream and try forcing "waxing virgins" into exciting world of pain and self-mutilation, I'd be the first to go aggressively hairy.

I thought for a while: is getting rid of my hair leg making me less of a feminist? I still don't have a clear answer, it's more like an opportunistic compromise :)

From Jon Lawrence

Re: 300 Spartans and one strong broad: I thought Rosamund Urwin's review of 300 was excellent. While I had heard negativity directed towards the film, this review highlighted this, and also some of the movies points more on the positive side. Its hasn't changed my mind entirely on the movie itself and whether to watch it or not. However it was still very enjoyable to read what I considered a very unbiased review. Good work.

From Nancy

Re: What women (don't) want: You guys seem to have missed something very simple as to the style and writing at Jezebel. It's funny, it's ironic and it is not meant to be taken so seriously. You simply have over-looked the fact that women should be able to laugh at the sterotypes as they prove them false. If it wasn't for humor and jest in this world life would not be worth living. Perhaps you should consider taking things more lightly before you blast a site that is at once entertaining and relevant in this day and age.

From Doug Henwood

Just read your comments on Jezebel. Holy shit, some feminists really don't have a sense of humor. I always thought that was a cheap slur appropriate to the likes of Katie Roiphe, but I might have to reconsider now.

From Eliza Mulcahy

If Kate Smurthwaite had taken the time to read the "Jezebel Manifesto," she might not have taken such a ridiculous stance on the new blog.

From the "Manifesto": "Jezebel is a blog for women that will attempt to take all the essentially meaningless but sweet stuff directed our way and give it a little more meaning, while taking more the serious stuff and making it more fun, or more personal, or at the very least the subject of our highly sophisticated brand of sex joke."

They're not interested in providing in-depth analysis on Ann Heche's divorce, and I don't think readers are going to Jezebel to hear it. Smurthwaite seems to assume that any feminism-inspired blog has to stick to her own brand of feminism, one which not everyone may enjoy. Celebrity gossip is a large part of our culture, and as such, we have many blogs about it. We do not, however, have many humorous feminist outlooks on the matter. I enjoy Jezebel because of it's subtle sass. I'm saddened that Smurthwaite cannot understand the humor in "We thought feminism was supposed to be straightforward," or "Guess those fake breasts paid off!"

Her responses to the quotes (which are, of course, taken out of context) are generally summaries of the ideas Jezebel was trying to get across ("Since when was cosmetic surgery a business plan?"). Smurthwaite's final response, however, was the most hysterical. In reference [ t o ] : "We thought feminism was supposed to be straightforward," she replied, "Who told you that? It's as diverse as, erm, the women who definitely WON'T be reading your stupid website!" This one sentence is dripping with so much irony and hypocrisy, I found myself laughing aloud. It's apparent she missed the sarcasm in Jezebel's remark, but to angrily reply that feminism is diverse - oh, that takes the cake. Your entire piece was raving about how wrong Jezebel's take on feminism is, yet you decide to lecture them on the complexity of feminism.

I quite enjoy reading feminist analyses of the cultural affect celebrity relationships have on society, but I get plenty of that. I read Jezebel for the intelligent sarcasm and subtle humor. It's too bad that Jezebel is just too clever for Kate Smurthwaite.

From Katie

I just read the blog jezebel for the first time today after having tracked gawker for several months. The article one of your writers posted on jezebel fails to understand both blogs. The point of these sites is to consistently and without exception put comedy first. They sacrifice any and everything for a joke; every cause is subject to "the funny". That's what makes them such great readers of culture. Comedy may not show us what we like and it certainly may not show us the world the way we would like it to be, but it shows us the truth that had previously been left unsaid. Sure, it is politics job to imagine or show us a possible and desirable world, but not all writing need or should fulfill politic's task (that's ITS job). Jezebel reveals through comedy the ugly truth about women, females and femininity in American culture today. That said, it is not written for readers who unproblematically identify with those roles. I think your writer underestimates or is naive of the massive subculture of Americans (of all genders, sexualities, races, classes, etc.) that identify ironically and only ironically. This subculture along with many of gawker and jezebel's readers reside in metropolitan areas where individualism, self-importance, literacy, ironic detachment, performativity and that charming brand of youthful irresponsibility that passes as "carefree", are encouraged. Hence, the Nebraska joke--"Nebraska (a state.)"--does not poke fun at stupidity or geographic illiteracy as your writer implied, but at the ironic "knowledge" of many middle class metropolitan Americans that the world doesn't exist between the Manhattan and Santa Monica (save some oases like Las Vegas and Austin,TX etc.). If feminism is to survive itself in an era increasingly and worryingly accepted to be "post-feminist", its champions will have to be able to distinguish the nuances in these sorts of dialogue across cultural differences. Your writer seemed to be reading a language s/he did not speak whilst thinking her/himself to be fluent.

From Amanda

Are you entirely without a sense of humor? The excerpts from the blog Jezebel were very clearly meant as ironic commentary. It strikes me as absurd that anyone of reasonable intelligence who has actually read the blog (or Gawker, for that matter) with any sort of care would understand the comments in any sense other than this.

From maria

Why don't you get a sense of humor, and then go back to the blog. Maybe then you'll realize it's supposed to be satirical.

Feminists who can never see the sense of humor in anything give other feminists a bad reputation. It's OK to laugh!

From lizzie

Um, your author completely missed the sarcasm. The phrase, "Nebraska (a state)" and a reference to "his vagina" and "where it is coming from" where two fo the funniest things I have read ina while. The whole website is a completely sarcastic and wonderfully twisted look at celebrity culture for women who, like me, are way too interested, realize the interest is unhealthy, indulge it anyway, but laugh at the whole thing.

You missed the joke. Which is funny in itself, in a post-modern way. Actually, the first time I read it, I thought you were doign some sort of ironic commentary, especially given that you picked the best quotes. But I have been assured that you were, in fact, serious. So, in all seriousness, maybe give it another read, recognizing that the entire thing is sarcasm. K' bai ;) (see, see what I did there, more sarcasm. It was funny, right? Right? You know you looove me :)

From Tony

Re: Pass the bucket...: "Is it easier to "be a feminist" when you're doing well financially? Definitely. For starters there is a poverty line below which idealism simply doesn't exist, there's a point where all a person cares about or can care about is how to get enough food, water, shelter and medicine to survive the next 24 hours. People below that line may be feminists but they certainly can't afford to be activists. By the same token you'd need to be above that line to be an activist for any cause -- socialism, environmentalism or even the anti-women's movement. If you can't afford pens and paper, you can't write your manifesto."

Sounds as though "feminism" here is being defined in a middle class way. But why should feminism be about idealism? Why can't it be about the pragmatic issues like "how to get enough food, water, shelter and medicine to survive the next 24 hours". Aren't these feminist issues? Or do you rule out the majority of women by suggesting that you have to be a middle class idealist activist? And what here constitutes "activism"? Writing a manifesto? Sounds again as though you're writing for a minority.

From Gloria

Re: Johnson goes ahead with books for boys plan: Many 'typical' boys books were ones I loved as a child - Just William, Robinson Crusoe, Dahl's 'Boy' featured in your blog article. But I am pretty shocked at the inclusion of H Ridder Haggard - King Solomon's Mines is not only misogynist, it is also deeply problematic in racial terms. There's also a really terrible bit where the Explorer penetrates the heart of the diamond country by going between two hills called 'Sheba's Breasts' and down to a cave.... *rants on in Freudian-inflected English student way*....

From Emily Baeza Chavez

Re: An unlikely anti-depressant?: I found your response to the report into the link between low levels of depression and exposure to semen, a little disingenuous. The report was based on scientific findings it is not for Gallup to put a social twist on them. I have read other similar reports and another interpretation is that women are not a monogamous as they are often portrayed to be . Alternatively that women in a happy and settled exclusive relationship (in which they use a non-barrier method of contraception) are less depressed? Neither of which is exactly damming is it?

From Heather Corinna

Re: Scarleteen sex book: Just wanted to send Laura a thank you for the mention of S.E.X. today. So, thanks!

I also thought I'd let her know that the section on pornography is a good deal more involved in the book. Hanne Blank penned the article at scarleteen.com, and while in general, our opinions are pretty in-line, I draw a bit of a harder line when it comes to presenting porn, and did give some airtime to discussion on the exploitation of the industry, as well as how -- particularly violent -- porn can have ill effects for people.

Again, though, just a thanks. It's exceptionally nice when people really start responding to the need for feminist sexual education, so it was a day-maker.

From Amanda Chorley

Re: The best way to beat objectification - do it yourself...: I actually own the "petite salope" necklace and was wearing it while reading your comment on the website. I knew the little slut part but I actually prefer the translation as "little bitch" so I might use that instead! While you may say I can't be feminist by using these terms about myself, I say I have reclaimed these terms and thus they no longer have the power to hurt me. I stand up for myself, am not afraid to give my opinion - however unpopular it may be-, and I'm not worried about offending male sensibilites. Many people would therefore consider me a bitch. Oh I also love fucking and I'm not afraid to talk about it. Slut? A lot of people would say yes. Do I care? Not really. And I am most definitely a feminist.

While I wouldn't wear some of the items ("will fuck for shoes", "i love porn") I do appreciate the asthetic. I absolutely love kitsch, especially when it is mixed with "unfeminine" ideals. In my eyes this is just the same as SubversiveCrossStitch.com (which I love). A lot of traditionally feminine crafts are looked down upon, for no reason other than they are what women have traditionally done. This is about taking them back, and simultaneously rejecting what it means to be feminine (sweet, chaste, pure etc).

From Jack Pandemian

I agree with your post about Locher's, but in their defence they do have a quite splendid t-shirt saying 'I hate children' which I covet with all my heart.

From Padmalatha

My comment on the post - Israel's segregated buses

I am from Bangalore, India. We have been fighting for our space in public transports for ages! Even though the state governments had allocated a certain number of seats for women they were always occupied by men. I remember as a child my mother fighting with the men for the seats. These days it is better because the authorities are actually on your side in this. I personally find this very relieving since this keeps the women away from groping and staring men (well mostly atleast) These days we also have ladies' special buses too. We have long had separate compartments for women on trains. I find the system in favour of women and not against.

From Padmalatha

That I agree with. Here too we've had men shout at women for sitting in men's seats. And he believes he is right by doing so since women did the same years ago!

While this segregation can be a good starting point it cannot be the solution since it will only lead to situations like you mentioned.

I just stumbled upon your website. And I must say it is very interesting and exciting to see feminist thoughts from across the world in one place.

From edi

Regarding mini-skirt ban. To clarify something: 'Spiegel reports that prostitution is actually legal in Poland'. It is simply a nonsense. Prostitution in contrast to Germany is illegal i Poland. That's the case!

From Sarah

Re: Any lawyers out there?: I was delighted to see comment on today's comments by the Scottish Cardinal. As a Catholic woman I have serious issues with the church on a number of matters relating to the treatment of women. I also believe, as the author of this piece, that the church and the government are separate and MPs ultimately represents the people who elected them - on the messages they gave out at the time of election.

I was disappointed however with the final paragraph of the item, particularly the following:

"Why are we taking advice on morality issues from a man who eats what he genuinely believes to be human flesh at least once a week? And why are we giving any media coverage or prestige at all to a man who dresses like an extra from Harry Potter World?"

The first sentence either shows a basic lack of understanding of Catholic doctrine or the author does understand it and chooses to ignore it - either way I find it insulting to my religion for this to be quoted as a morality issue.

And the second comment I find frankly ridiculous - it smacks of 'if you can't think of anything sensible to say then a cheap laugh will do'. I believe it is comments like this which allow those against the feminist movement to then disregard the rest of the piece which was intelligent, well argued and relevant.

From Sarah

I think that the role of women in religion is important and should be openly discussed more - many people are afraid to tackle this subject.

I just wanted to say that with regards to doctrine there is a clear difference between the 'God / faith' aspects of Catholicism - i.e. that which makes us Catholic, including the beliefs about communion - and the 'Church' aspects. Catholics do not have to accept anything that any priest says to them. I feel quite comfortable questioning many aspects of church teachings - including attitudes to women, homosexuality, family planning etc.

Over my life time I have been told what I believe more by non-Catholics than by the Catholic church. People can be very quick to say 'because you're a Catholic you think that....'. If I believed everything the church told me I would not be a feminist - but I am - and I choose to challenge the church and remain a Catholic. I believe women should be encouraged to embrace, question or reject any faith they choose to - and then be supported in addressing oppressive aspects of that faith.

And on your last point - you are very funny and I love reading your work - keep up the good work!!

From sian

Re: Could Britney Spears be the feminist icon of our generation?i like this article. i agree with a lot of it. the same thing kind of happened to kate moss, whre male stars are heroes for drug use, women are vilified. and the haircut thing is totally true, there is nothing crazy about short hair! but perhaps we should be careful in suggesting that getting pissed with no pants on and sleeping around is an empowering feminist experience. women should be able to do as they choose, sleep with who they want to and not be shouted at as a slut for it, if there is one thing i hate it is sexual double standards, but perhaps sometimes that behaviour is self destructive. it is a tricky balance.

From Eldridge cleaver

There is nothing the least bit empowering about cracking under the strain of a career in which sleazy record execs make you into an object.

From Jan Hunt

Britney is a product of LA advertising and marketing. It is hard to know who "Britney" is as a human being. I am sure that she has her issues like most human beings. Her issues, however, are distorted and commercialised for her financial benefit as well as that of many investers.

Don't get too excited about trying to unravel, understand, decompose or dissect "Britney".

From Kavn

This is in response to the article Hair today, mad tomorrow by Nichi Hodgson

Great work. Nice to see new perspectives on female baldness... In the Indian context, a widow is supposed to shave her head (as one of her many distinguishing marks) and this is to prevent her from seeming attractive as traditions oppose widow remarriage here (but not for widowers). Men (who are not naturally bald) are also to do the same on the death of a parent...

From Omar Iturbe

I have met many women who feel offended by sin city, an i found your article very interesting. However, i believe all that comes precisely from all that "tit and ass" on display that you mention. It makes woen very uncomfortable and keeps them from having a centered judgement. I believe the whole movie is about tough guys who give everything they have to help women, and the only characters with real power in the movie (other than corrupt politicians) are specifically women. Two of the most important characters get killed for helping a woman and the most deadly killer is indeed a woman. The women in "old town" are so organised that even cops fear them, so the only problem here is the distinctive portrayal of sexual roles and of course the vast exposure of the female body. That generates an emotional disgust in many feminist oriented women, and keeps them from being able to watch the movie from a centered, sensible point of view.

From Rachael Halemor

Re: Taboo for who?: Although I think Karen Allen's article 'Taboo For Who' is very intelligent and well-thought out - she actually hasn't got the original origins of the term 'cunt' quite right.

Cunt originally was the technical - and quite proper - term used for the female genitalia since before the Romans invaded Britain. In those times, the main religion in this country was paganism/wicca. Since these religions were as much about worship of the female as the male - the word cunt's true meaning was in fact 'goddess' or 'high priestess'. These were the names used for women in the highest ranks of the pagan/wiccian religions - they still are today.

This means that the only true meaning of the word 'cunt' is the highest honour for a woman and I enjoy explaining this to women who cringe at the word, in the hope that I will empower them. Women who feel this word to be a slur clearly don't know about their heritage (in fact - where are the women's heritage lessons on the national curriculum?!).

The Romans at this time were mainly all Christians and patriarchal - they actually invaded Britain and brought Christianity with them. Since they were a male-oriented society they did not like the 'free-thinking' women of Britain and so began a campaign of extreme force to ensure that Christianity took hold - and any dissenting men or women were considered 'witches' - hence this beagn what later became the witch hunts and the burning of witches.

They also downgraded anything female by demonising such terms as 'cunt' - and as the centuries have passed, patriarchy has taken over to do the rest.

Please be assured that I do not wish to offend anyone who is a Christian - I am merely trying to explain where the term cunt really comes from.

And not to be simplistic about men (or women) who call women cunts in a defamatory way - because I realize for many women that this is a horrible experience - but every time a man tries to use this most ultimate of "insults" on me, I now say "Wow! Good grief - THANKS"!!! It's very nice to be called a goddess!!!

From Jan Hunt

The impact of words depends upon the social context within which the word is constructed. Whether Cunt, Fuck, Dick etc are taboo or passe depends upon the iconography and the social context surrounding the words. Cunt may have been a well accepted social descriptor 1500 years ago but may be a derogatory term in current times. The power of the word is part personal choice and part historical context. Perhaps in the future the word "nose" will be derogatory. It depends upon how society, norms and language develops.

In the meantime, best wishes and best fun with the use or application of your favoured word "fuck" which I understand derives from the Latin "fukare".

From Tanya Moir

Re: Dysfunctional, moi? The myth of female sexual dysfunction and its medicalisation: Jennifer Drew, THANK YOU. I have been waiting for someone to write this article.

From Rebecca

Words of Encourgement and Praise:
Dear Author of 'Dsyfunctional, Moi...?' What a brave and wonderful article, I admire your strength and focus on this incredibly important and relevant topic. I wonder though, how 'modern life' filled with stress and 'time' impacts upon your argument?

From Anastasia Filippova

Re: Don't cha wish pop was more empowering?: Hello! I'm a singer/songwriter, and I'm completely against this image that women represent in music...and let's be honest - most music stars dress skanky!! But it's always women - do you ever see men running around in underwear in their music videos? Ok..maybe once! Women act like they 'love' music, but really they are willing to do anything for fame, and that's what they love. I almost fell off my chair when I found out there was a 'Pussycat Doll Search" for member #6 - one of my co-workers came up to me and asked me if I'd like to participate in the competition. Of course I refused, and I had so many people say: IT's such a good opportunity, just go and get famous with it....aaa...no thanks! So anyway:). Thanks for writing the article - you're only 21, and the article was sooo good!

From Guy List

Re: Hairy Women: Having just read the hairy women article commented by Lindsay i just had to write in and say Bravo! You summed people's attitudes towards this subject up to a T and i fully endorse what you had to say. I would consider myself a real mans man by most people's standards having been a Soldier,Doorman and now having been a Stuntman for the last 15 yrs in the Film Industry. I feel todays obsession with body hair removal for Women has just gone to far and is inherantly un-healthy-my friends think im sick because i prefer the natural look-how wrong is that!! Liking a Bald Vagina that looks like a 10 year old girl is ok though(not). What's the world becoming when natural is considered un-natural. Keep growing it ladys, you have my full support and admiration and there are some REAL MEN out there that actually like it.

From John Burridge

I'd like to applaud Abbey O'Reilly for her article Flicking the bean. This was positive feminism, promoting women's sexual needs instead of condemning men's. A breath of fresh air after all those articles/comments moaning about 'sexual objectification' etc.

From God

My contribution to your insane male excluding forum is simply this; today with pregnancy it is possible to determine the gender of your child - please, for the sake of a male offspring and his life of guilt and feminazi indoctrination DO NOT have a boy!

From Bloke

From what I can see feminism is a pathetic need for attention. Well here\\\'s mine: you\\\'re all sad wenches with nothing better to do with your time than attempt to belittle men and somehow define yourselves as morally superior. You should be ashamed of your right-wing hypocritical views on life and actually do something constructive with your time than try and post the blame for all of society\\\'s problems on the male populous.

From Jillian Smith

I'm having real problems with the fact that there doesn't seem to be a UK based organisation like the US NOW. Why is it that british feminists cannot seem to organise themsleves to be a real political influence? Am I missing something or are the Brits too comsumed by our differences to stand together for what we all believe in?

From Tyrone

Re: The Pursuit of Happyness: read the book. I didn't like the movie either, but not for the reasons you suggest. You would get a lot more insight into the life of Chris Gardner and the sruggles he faced growing up. The Movie is grossly inacurate.

From Jay

How you seem to critisize the actual plot of the film, makes me think how seriously you took that it was based on a true story. I just want to remind you that it was, the only difference from the true experience to the film is the time scale. Apparantly the real Chris went through the hardships over a longer time period. So just dont hate the film because of the story, because, well.. It's true.

From Sam

Re: The mechanics of femininity: seriously, why get bothered by this? this guy is a car mechanic, a manual form of employment rather than academic. Men only act this way because really they have their own insecurities and wouldn't want them to be undermined by a woman, making them feel worse. Additionally, I don't know about the USA but in the UK where I am from, we have insurance companies for women only because it is proven they are safer drivers. Educated people do not judge others equally as educated; ignorant men judge women and ignorant women allow themselves to be judged. This is not meant to be judgmental I just think its more important to rise above such ignorant people. If they are narrow minded enough to say such things, then they will not have the intelligence to be anywhere other than in the car garage... we have many other opportunities on front of us.

From Julio Emprema

Re: Why men suck (and the women who have to): Men use (ostensibly young) prostitutes because they don't want to have sex with middle-aged or older women. There really is nothiing more to it than that. Also, you don't pay prostitutes for sex. You pay them to go away.

From me, myself, I

Re: Men in feminism: I'm an American man. I make the distinction only because I've never been abroad and have no idea what it's like across the pond. In my experience, men shy away from feminism because more often than not we are not allowed to disagree on anything without being labeled as threatened, dismissive, or chauvinistic and sent packing. It seems that unless a man is submissive, he's overbearing. I've attempted to dialogue with feminists about this and only had my questions and point of view evaded with the tactics previously mentioned.

Both sides must be willing to listen and consider the other's argument as a starting point from which we move forward to understanding, and eventually, hopefully, to consensus. Peace, Love, Rock n' Roll

From caitlin o'sullivan

Re: Fairy tales are Grimm: there are a few points that i would like to make with regards to this. She discusses the 'prince charming' effect of fairy tales though i would like to point out that initially some of those well known fairy tales (including cinderella) were written in france in the 17th century in salons (high class womens living rooms) where women, and men sympathetic to their cause, would meet and discuss the politics of the day. The creation of these stories were a type of parlor game where old folk tales were remastered. These were used as a way of criticising the society they grew up in, where women were opressed and forced into arranged marriages etc, and were commonly about bright women becoming powerful etc. (www.endicott.studio.com/rdrm/forconte.html) She also discusses the use of step-mothers causeing children psychological damage by making them see their own parents as evil. In 'the uses of enchatment: the meaning and importance of fairy tales' Bettelheim argues that the idea of step parents allows children to hate see their parents as someone else while they are being told off, for example. This means that they do not feel guilty for these feelings, which would create more conflict within the child. So that instead of creatng psychological damage the fairy tales in fact helps to ease the damage done by such conflicts. I would also like to point out that when fairy tales were first published the stories were about the beauty underneath. There are tales of princes falling in love with a princess who was disguished as a bear. He falls in love with her because of her inteligence and understanding not her looks. A good well known example would be beauty and the beast, where she falls in love with the beast not the prince. I do not believe that fairy tales should be irradicated i strongly belive that they have a possitive effect on children.

From ur-mums-boobs

Re: Page 3 - ban it!: i think they should nit ban it because it is good and it makes me hard!:)

From Joe

In response to your article about banning page 3 girls, Why? This country is becoming a laughing stock over these politically correct issues. These girls pose voluntarily, the people buy the paper voluntarily. Why do you have an issue over this? May I remind you that God created humans naked, man created clothes. I can only assume that you are questioning God's judgement because you are unhappy with what you have, and need to cover yourself up and therefore are jealous of others? Am I right?

From Jenn

Re: 'Feminists are sexist': Another good response to men who claim that women should do the job of fighting male stereotyping is to look confused and ask "are you asking me to do it because you don't think you're capable of it? I think you are - and I think that assuming women should do it is itself stereotyped. Do you want me to do your ironing too?"

From Girish Sethna

Re: The farmer wants a wife, the wife wants a wife: JC Sutcliffe, (The farmer wants a wife, the wife wants a wife) leaves out one solution. Why don't more mums train boys to do the housework?

When my mother came to Britain from India she got a shock. No servants to do the housework for her. She decided that when she had kids, they would learn how to do the housework so that they would be able to be fully independent. As a result, I learned early on to do the housework. I had to take my turn in doing the ironing, hoovering, dusting and such as a kid. She always had us helping her in the kitchen so that we would learn to cook as well.

There is a homo-paranoia, mainly among men, but also backed up by some women that sees men as being 'unmanly' if they do housework. It's as if men are expected to be untidy scruffy vulgarians, because somehow only women 'worry' about such things as housework.

But men who live alone have to think about housework at some point. That many of them do it until they have a female partner when it's left to her is unacceptable. But how many women say that and demand it be shared?