On the off-chance that you're not being rhetorical and you actually do want to know why people react badly to those...things...here's the thing. It's not the headset design or lack of that makes people react badly. It's the fact that the wearer is walking around having conversations to thin air in public places. This is considered either batshit insane or just plain rude by most people. Y'all look ridiculous, plain and simple, and you seem to forget one of the primary rules of public co-existence, which is that nobody wants to hear your phone conversations. We're not interested in your business transactions, or what your SO wants to watch tonight, or the details of your wife's latest operation.

Besides which, anyone talking on a headset just plain looks like a loony. Deal with it.

"It's hard not to imagine Portuguese women murmuring to their husbands that this British woman is -- yes -- much too skinny." WTF?

Actually, that's right. My family's in Spain, and that is exactly the attitude I'd expect them to take. I can just hear my cousins' voices now, in fact. You may not find it correct, Carol, but sometimes things like that are a fact.

I wonder if anyone has ever considered a legal challenge to this kind of draconian behavior on the basis of, I don't know, bad faith maybe? The problem I see here (besides the general asshat attitude one finds at those agencies) is the claim being made that these agencies find "homes" for the pets. But if they're contractually retaining ownership of the pets (for all intents and purposes - if you can take it back anytime then it pretty much belongs to you), then it seems clear to me that what these people are seeking are not "homes" but people to raise these animals for them. In that case, they're the ones who should be paying, not the "adopters". Either that or they should stop claiming to deal in homes and owners. Despite their sloganeering, "forever" is a concept they're clearly not interested in.

Still, I can't help feeling that the silliness of this symbolic offensive makes light of a dire situation

And that's exactly where you're wrong, Tracy, and why feminism has a name for dour humorlessness. Mocking, satire, comedy and irony have always been useful tools in combatting tyranny. As they say, laughter is the one weapon against which the devil has no defense.

If your self-image is too haughty and self-righteous to take part in a protest that's light-hearted instead of OMGSERIUS!!! then I will just quote Emma Goldman at you: If I can't dance, I don't want to be part of your revolution.

What she means by the way she presents herself?? How about she means, "This is how I'm comfortable." Why must you always thrust your problems and ideas into other people's mouths and minds? For a woman to dress comfortably and present herself so strikes you as "strange", yet you would have no questions about a woman who wrote this same letter yet was comfortable with makeup, frilly clothes and looking girly, I'll bet.

Not every straight woman is interested in being a fashion plate, or sucking up to men to get a date, or any other such socially-mandated silliness. Some of us just can't be bothered, plain and simple. Being a man, you might not understand just how TEDIOUS and IDIOTIC the whole girly culture can be to a woman, and you know, these days there's no law says we have to go along. Some of us just don't have the time or the attention to give to rituals that exist solely to make a lot of corporate assholes rich, thank you.

This LW writes in asking about a problem in the workplace, one which is definitely NOT about her but about her "nice" boss who is actually turning out to be an insensitive bitch, but you make it about the LW's psychology? What kind of advice do you call that? Sounds more like your usual "me me me my head is more important than a solution to your problem". I can't imagine what kind of conversationalist you must be.

I think your tendency to jump to criticism is getting the best of you here. Those comments didn't sound like blaming the women at all. Sounds to me like she's blaming the society that teaches women to swallow their words. That the women themselves should change their behavior is a given - you can't expect society to walk into your house and offer cures (especially these days).

That's not to say I necessarily believe the New-Age-speak, although it might be true. There's certainly no harm in advising women to speak up for themselves; in fact, I'm rather shocked to see someone who calls herself a feminist saying that such advice is bull. Isn't that what we've been telling women for decades now, that they have power in their voices and should be heard? The problem seems to be that medical advice is being shunted aside, and that is certainly not good.

The bottom line, though, is that you're off base here as far as the whole "blaming the victim" thing. Perhaps you're not very familiar with the whole New Age way of thinking, and that might be why you're jumping to the wrong conclusion. (I worked in a metaphysical bookstore for years and am conversant with this particular mode of thought. A lot of it is silly, but some of it is quite valid.)