There isn't a war on boys. This is a phase society is going through right now and it probably won't last long. Boys will adjust and schools/curricula will adjust and things will even out. That's how it works. In the meantime, it provides a few people with a cottage industry for books and papers and articles and it gives boy-haters like Ms Pollitt and Ms Traister another excuse to get themselves worked up into a rage. That's the good news.

The fairly obvious delight people like Ms. Traister [though I don't intend to make it about her because she is certainly not alone] take in the prospect of boys failing academically en masse is likely to be short-lived. That's the bad news. Sorry.

There isn't a war on boys, though I think it's pretty clear a few people think there should be.

...that if not for the dead-giveaway names, Broadsheet would have taken those comments seriously and used them to hypothesize the beginning of a new front in the ever-constant war on women. [Good work on Kate O'Beirne, in any case. She deserves every bit of it.]

So don't read the magazine. Problem solved.

Why in the world was he even talking to that crackpot? Okay, she dazzled a lot of incredulous media types with her logic-free books, but Gore should have been smart enough to see a modern day huckster for what she was. God, when I think of the colossal screw-ups that allowed Mr Bush to take the White House from a far more qualified person, my head just swims.

The fact that eight previous female occupants of the Chrysanthemum Throne did not change the status of women in Japan might be a clue as to the social importance of it happening again. Of course, humans are arrogant creatures, always assuming that things will be different this time because...well, things are just different now. [As near as I can tell, it means 'I'm alive now and surely that's a huge development. Nothing will ever be the same now that I am in the world.']

Change like this never comes from the top down anyway. What makes anyone think a female empress would give a rat's ass about the average Japanese woman? Do we think all those emperors gave a rat's ass about the average Japanese man?

It reminds me of all that nonsense over permitting women into the Augusta country club. Sure, let 'em in. That's fine. But don't kid yourself into thinking it changes anything -- except for a few very rich women who, like their fathers, mothers, and husbands, wouldn't give you or your rights a second thought.

I don't claim to have any special insights into the ways of the world, except for this one little nugget: If you're sitting around waiting for some plutocrat or some empress to change your world, you're a very, very sad person who should become accustomed to disappointment.

Matriotism is just patriotism as practiced by liberals. Big deal. Cindy Sheehan didn't discover anything.

I think most of us already knew that. I guess it was nice of Ms Ivins to point it out to the few blinkered souls who still don't get it.

Discrimination, obviously.

"Nicholson is also an unabashed booster of older women. She recently scrapped a cover photo of a 20-something model and replaced it with one of 67-year-old Jane Fonda."

That should read "Nicholson is also an unabashed booster of older women who have had tons of cosmetic surgery. She recently..."

I'm sure there were other reasons my wonderful wife consented to marry me, but surely this was one of them. Find this thing, fellas, and you'll never be lonely.

First of all, dismissing the concern that Germans are not having enough children is not a slight issue, nor is it sexist. Germany, like most rich nations, faces a demographic time bomb and a generous welfare state that has helped to create a very civilized society. A society they may not be able to afford in 20 years [or less] due to demographic pressures.

Secondly, is there any evidence that providing more work leave for fathers will actually encourage additional births? I'm sure you could get a poll of women to say they'd favor more work leave for fathers, but would it actually make a difference in the demographics? Isn't it possible that German women who are not having children [or not having multiple children] are doing so simply because they don't want children [or any more children]? Isn't it very possible that work leave for the fathers is irrelevant to this equation and that what's really at work here is that millions of German women have decided that motherhood is not a priority? Of course, it should also be noted that fatherhood might not be a priority for millions of German men.

Not wishing to become a parent is a defensible position for any man or woman. The point is that creating another expensive entitlement program might not solve this problem. Sure, it would allow German men to spend more time with their young children [assuming they actually wish to do that], but would it encourage Germans to have more children? I don't see a good argument there.

Millions of Germans have just decided they don't want children or they don't want more than one child. Odds are there isn't much their government can do about that.

Do you have to be a lawyer to know how stupid that sentence is?

Madison Avenue is only interested in males to sell things. Why should females be any different?