Catherine, why not update this article and run it BEFORE April 15, 2009? Get a CPA in to create a dialogue (no, not me, but I've got one who's used to writers).

Now that you've gotten yourself organized, give us lessons learned.

I can start you off with one: make certain that the accountant you choose understands intellectual property and the sorts of deductions that can accompany it. Some are more used to working with writers than others. Some -are- writers.

You know, you could make a book out of this, the way a former colleague did about her "Looking for Mr. Good-enough-bar," former ATLANTIC article, which just got its film rights optioned.

Do some more fieldwork during the campaign and see where it goes.

The volume of letters this article has generated indicates to me that the interest is there.

If you have a credit card for business use only and you're doing well enough, see if you can get one that will give you a printed annual report broken out by expense category.

The card will carry a fee (deductible), and you have camera-ready, printer-ready, accountant-ready text that reduces the accountant's fee.

I started to say that King Solomon himself couldn't judge this case, but then realized that he was, himself, the compleat polygamist.

Forget that.

I'm relieved I'm spared this, but if I were nearby, I'd see if I could volunteer to work with the kids. Or with their mothers, the ones who have fled.

I think I read that some of the people taken into custody are from those family lines.

It's already unspeakable.

So was finding a bed in that "temple."

And a document on cyanide.

We are damn lucky we didn't have another Branch Davidian disaster on our hands.

I'm sorry, but Rowling still owns the rights.

Is there a place where trolls post APBs?

Or Obamabots or MRAs?

Because I think this story's been posted. I'm not talking about the usual suspects. We seem to have sprouted a bumper crop.

As you imply, so much for the famous British stiff upper lip.

My own suspicion is that, after the hardship of her pre-Potter life, she has been very carefully and deferentially treated, and is no longer used to fighting.

For all I know, it may be triggering something.

But I'd be the first to say I don't know much along those lines.

I admit I'm surprised by the "decimation" comment: I'd think anyone who can triumph the way she has from where she began would have more pluck.

Is there something in the fanbase that I don't know about that's turned on her?

That's CRAZY.

If I had the kind of seats for the opera that she no doubt has, I'd dress en decolletege too.

It's completely appropriate, and she looks quite elegant.

OH NOES! PEOPL THAT HAIT SO MUCH AND WRITE FUNNY.

WTF?

I think this is a weird law. I read that the couture industry opposes it. Frankly, I think it's BECAUSE of the couture industry.

I was appalled by some of those pictures.

I believe there were more women, while a number of the older women remained on the YFZ Ranch.

But have you ever heard of the "quiverfull" movement? Or the Duggars? They're not FLDS, but they're something like a 16-poster-child family for "be fruitful and multiply."

I believe FLDS values large families of children too, so it's not impossible.

There's cultural relativism and there's bullshit relativism.

I suggest you consider the difference.

In fact, I suggest you do some non-Eurocentric research on male rites of passage and see if you'd like to go through being pierced and hoisted, having your penis pierced (or split), or various other rites of passage. For that matter, I wonder if you could go along with being excommunicated from the only community you've ever known into a wider world that laughs at you because the old bastards that brought you up as a potential abuser of your cousins decided that they wanted to screw them themselves. Or, for example, let's say you were bright young Byzantine youth of reasonably good family, but limited fortune. To help you make your way in the world, your family might have had you castrated.

Are you all right with any of those scenarios, or does the Great Big Tolerance apply only to the stuff that oppresses women, Saint Paul wisecrack notwithstanding?

I daresay I am being disgracefully Eurocentric and probably a whole lot of other adjectives that Very Special and Entitled Snowflakes who are Smart can think of.

You know what? I don't really give a damn.

I'm glad to see Sarah Hepola picking up on the article in NEW YORK magazine. In fact, I was delighted to see NEW YORK pick it up: it's been morphing from doing "hottest trend in town" to some seriously substantive reporting (e.g., its story on Horace Mann).

I'm not surprised. I'm not shocked. I'm not saddened. If anything, I'm relieved that this is out in the open and that the exultant "posties" realize that now that they've got the MBAs, the math, and the majority of students in undergraduate school, PLUS more than a chance to be the exception that proves the rule, the rest of their work consists of taking up the burden of "yes, me too."

I wasn't even surprised at the "post-feminists": there's only so much culture shock people can take without exhaustion. But people who attended to corporate politics while denying the experience of sexual politics were bound to find themselves caught up, at some point, by a bad economy and local/regional/national governments that made a devil's bargain with the "family values" crowd.

The post-feminists, as the first reply indicated, are now "post-perky." Post-perky becomes invisible and inaudible unless she stands the hell up for herself and others like her. Wake up and smell the coffee, or you'll be serving it again.