As I read the letters that imply negativity towards Ms. Dowd (rightly or wrongly), I am reminded of my own experiences. At 27, I know that I do not know everything, and will offend anyone older than me that has learned and experienced much more than me, but I have learned that a woman will always be questioned about her choices. Everything a woman chooses regarding relationships or a career will be met with, �why?� regardless of the choice made. Feminism hasn�t died, it�s just that life is complex, and our social norms, education, and cultural biases clash. If you choose career first, you are questioned as being selfish, thought of as not loving your kids, and thought of as seriously, personally flawed if you are single. If you choose marriage and family, you are questioned as not being independent, allowing yourself to do the bidding of a man, and never wanting anything for your own life. You�re damned if you do, damned if you don�t.

I think the resulting discussion illuminates the fact that we, as a society, need to re-evaluate gender roles. Why is there so much hatred and pity for a woman who is single? I would go as far as to say that, this negativity towards the article has primarily come from men. Is it because they don�t understand what it�s like to be a woman?

Finally, is a single, educated, professional woman out of touch? Probably not more so than any other category of a woman you can make. We all have our own experiences and several factors that influence our decisions. As humans, we experience stereotype that encompass our gender, race, and sexual orientation. All of these play into our �worth� as a human, as perceived by society. What matters is what each of us does to break out of the stereotypes and find worth in ourselves. Feminism hasn�t died. It can�t, because women still must overcome so much, and we still want what we know we deserve-- respect.

Oddly enough, I am most disturbed by how fake the cats and their hairy designs look. I can't get those green eyes out of my mind!

Readers should know that sex-change in fishes is extremely common. The latest published work about blue-headed wrasses follows decades of research in this area, demonstrating how fish change sex in response to social and environmental cues.

I find this work interesting because I study fish, but if this was posted in Broadsheet due to some sort of implications of gender in our society, I would suggest to the readers to check out Joan Roughgarden's book, Evolution's Rainbow. Roughgarden discusses animal behavior and biology and how it relates to our perceptions of gender identity.

The article highlights the issue that ethical committees at hospitals do not have a universal governing law. In scientific research on humans and animals, committees rigorously review proposed methods of research, and decisions are guided by scientific precedence and federal law, written based on a code of ethics. I am surprised that there lacks a similar system for new, unique, or controversial medical procedures. In a sense, aren't these medical techniques that are being applied to unique circumstances experimental procedures?