Poor Ashley has no defenders in Broadsheet readers! Though I’ve never been a fan of hers—-or of what cosmetic surgery represents in our culture—-I can’t help but doubt the sincerity of anyone making an issue out of this. Or applauding MC readers for doing the same.

For one, the whole pleasure of celeb articles is so we can criticize them! Remember Jen vs. Angie?

And, two, it’s no secret that performers drastically alter their bodies, whether through surgery or fad diets (not to mention personality makeovers) to sell themselves into the proper marketing bracket. NOT that that’s an excuse, but, my point is, the only thing Ashley did differently from all our celeb BFFs was to become famous, but not popular. (Not to those who fall into the over-the-counter Plan B age-group, anyway.) Had Ashley not been the lip-syncing younger sister of Jessica Einstein-Simpson, I can’t believe ner nose would be much of a story. After all, Cher is practically a feminist icon in some circles. And, Jane Fonda actually IS.

I'm getting a little tired of hearing about all these phantom women who schedule c-sections because they are too busy and too vain to care about the welfare of their children (and their bodies). I've never known any and I'm a part of the Selfish Career Women demographic! What I have seen are women putting on brave faces about the cesareans that their doctors recommend, making the best of a less than ideal situation by discussing the benefits of a scheduled birth.

It's time someone conducted a study to kick that old myth out of our lexicon of social critique. (Could the headline be: "Women Are More Likely to Be Killed by Terrorists Than Have C-section Just Because"?)

I like your comparison to Google. But, you've opened the door to Google Book Search (which, I'll expect you meant to do). Correct me if I'm wrong, but, didn't book publishers argue that GBS was impeding their ability to develop and profit off of the same technology on behalf of the works for which they hold copyright? Which is exactly what HPL's book would do, especially since the author knows quite well that JKR plans to write her own encyclopedia. I think that might have been behind the Seinfeld books' case, too. Of course it goes against all logic that someone who was fan enough to buy this book wouldn't buy the official version, but, you can't prove that wouldn't happen ever.

Ugh--I have to disagree with a lot of posters here. I am not poly myself, but have known several people who are. And, from that limited experience, I'd say that signs you might be poly do NOT include using sexual relationships to experience your own attractiveness and sleeping with a friend's boyfriend. Being poly is about being able to handle multiple relationships and multiple people's interests well, with harmony. It sounds to me as if the LW is writing in with the exact opposite problem.

I hate to be one of the know-it-all, catty posters, but, I think the LW is disguising whatever her real reason for not wanting to be "a Mom" with mommy wars. So we can all stop discussing whether or not a man would call himself "a Dad" (unless you all just feel like discussing it...). Her alternative to describing herself in terms of family members is "I garden a bit in my backyard in Houston." Really? Unless that's preceded with "I'm a highly successful stock broker/crime writer and retired at 30," all anyone is going to hear in that sentence is "I'm a Mom with a full-time nanny and a housekeeper my husband/parents pay for." (Or, "I'm a minor character in a Jane Austen novel.") LW needs to meditate on this issue a little longer. Judging from this short letter, I'd say it has nothing to do with losing her personality to her heteronormative gender role.

Since we can all (most) agree that it's the atmosphere as a whole on MSNBC that's the problem, rather than anyone in particular (though, Chris Matthews certainly deserves the credit due him), what if instead of firing someone, MSBNC were to HIRE someone who doesn't have the world view of an overgrown frat boy? Like, for instance, someone who isn't white, or isn't male, or is an old white guy but is like Bill Moyers? Meaning, someone who has a brain in his or her head and will stand up to these turkeys. (And, I don't mean at four in the afternoon.)

It's our own fault for trusting a channel that spends half its airtime appealing to an audience that thinks there just aren’t enough pedophiles and prison inmates on TV. More and more, I get my election coverage from the BBC. How sad is that?!

If it's true that Chelsea wants to enter politics herself, as I've heard, she's not getting pimped out by her parents.

Honestly, this kind of stuff really pisses me off, and I see it pretty equally from both sides. Instead of speaking in support of one's candidate, or at least attacking the other, just call the candidate's supporters idiots. Politically, it's a useless argument that says nothing about the qualifications of one or the other for president. That it has figured so heavily in our current political discourse, I think, speaks to how little difference between the two candidates there really is to fight about.

I think it's most likely that LW and her boyfriend/ex-husband are acting out against each other because they're not completely secure in their current relationship--after all, they both know the other has left them once before. They're simultaneously trying to hurt each other while proving their value (via sexual desirability, in this case) to each other. Either both need to decide they're ready to really go to work on their relationship, or they both need to start over with someone new, imho.