I'm not saying it's a good idea or a bad idea. I am offering an observation.

I have been a section 8 landlord for many many years. I own 4 properties that I rent to section 8 voucher holders. 2 of those properties are rented out to elderly widows. The other 2 are rented out to single mothers. One has 4 kids on her voucher, ranging in age from 14 to 2. She's 26, so do the math on that 14 year old. The other one has 5 kids on her voucher, but every time I go over there, there are literally swarms of kids.

Where are the fathers? Why does the taxpayer have to prop these women up? They have zero incentive to get married, because then they would lose their benefits; however, there is always a man around. He gets a free place to crash in exchange for providing cash for things like a plasma TV, a nice car, meals out, etc.

A prior tenant had custody of her nephew. Her 2 daughters were grown, and she told me that she needed to keep her voucher because she's never paid for rent and doesn't ever plan on it.

The system is broken. For the moment, since I am benefitting from this broken system, I'm not too upset about it. But it IS broken and the taxpayer should be mad. Is forcing these women to have their tubes tied the answer? Probably not, but there has to be some solution.

I am a woman who is actually good at math, despite a mother who showed lilttle interest and a father who is to this day completely intimidated by anything other than basic math.

My parents were visiting me when I was in grad school and my father espied my calculus book. "How are you ever going to pass that class?!", he exclaimed.

Somehow, despite the overwhelming "support", I managed to ace the course!

That's what really got me. I'm with Toni Michael and CeliainSF on this one. My GYN refuses to sterilize me and won't refer me to someone who will. So I'm stuck calling doctors that accept my insurance and asking if they'll do it. No one will. WTF?! If I accidentally get pregnant, I'm not having it... don't they want to prevent abortions?!

I have zero libido and I LOVE it! I'm totally in control of myself at all times and I have so much more free time to do stuff I really want to do. So, while I applaud the researchers for turning their attention to something that apparently bothers some women (or perhaps more realistically the men they are involved with?!), I am not interested.

Kind of interesting that the story that follows is about doctors being able to refuse abortions and sterilization though.

Sign me up! Equal opportunities for all!

Had an AWESOME response to a letter from a reader. The reader wanted to know why the clothing, liquor, and other toys that they featured in the mag were so darn expensive? How about a fashion spread with stuff that the average guy could afford? Playboy wrote back that they featured that stuff for the same reason they featured smoking hot naked models... BECAUSE IT'S A FANTASY! Just as the Average Joe has no chance of affording a $350k Ferrari, he doesn't have a chance with the centerfold either, but it's nice to fantasize.

Two things that have me shaking my head over this article:

First - we are up in arms over FGM but willingly perform cosmetic surgery on genitals? I don't see a lot of difference, in theory, at least.

Second - I have been trying to have my tubes tied for years and every doctor I have seen refuses me. It seems it would be easier for me to have vaginoplasty than to attend to my reproductive health.

Do we live in a f*cked up world, or what?!

Thanks, KitchenGirl. Detachable Penis.....

As a flat chested woman who LOVES it, I say "GO KEIRA"! I live in South Beach where nary a boob is un-reconstructed. It's refreshing to see a natural chest from time to time.

I was imagining something MUCH worse! But I totally understand where you are coming from. My hubby's given name is Larry, and he's always felt (reinforced by Freakonomics) that nicknames as given names are low class. He goes by Lawrence professionally, even though that's not really his name.

This is Broadsheet, a column about women's issues. The medical community often overlooks women's issues in research, so now that there is a study done about a women-specific problem, Broadsheet is complaining?

I think it's great, and so what if P&G sponsored the study? First of all, this is not a life and death type of product - it's totally optional! Second, why would they spend the R&D to develop it if there was no interest in it? Shouldn't they find out if this is a product that women would want and use before they get going with R&D and marketing?!

While I feel for your plight, I'm now very curious about your name! Care to share?

"Chiquita" was the name on the tag of a cashier at Toys R Us once.

Freakonomics has a whole chapter on names and how they effect people's fates....

OK, it took only, what? 9 posts? I had to do it.

What if they put an ad to stop male genital mutilation on condom wrappers? Or bottles of Manischewitz?