Thanks for clearing that up, Dick Johnson.

No pun intended.

He first mentions she is married, so I don't think his later comment is suggesting she is a lesbian. You are projecting your own issues onto them -- they just hate each other.

After she uses the sexually charged word "emasculating" it is not beyond bounds for him to humorously deflect the charge by saying, let's go see.

And it's just a parry of her sexual attack on him for him to attack her personally too. I don't know what she looks like, but if she is a total babe his claim she has a mustache wouldn't hurt.

Shouldn't you be wanking some more?

Isn't it his first name that's a synonym for "dick?"

And you may be reading the lesbian crack into his comment, distasteful as it already is.

Both Richard and Johnson are synonymous with dick.

since women want to make men obsolete and take both male and female roles for themselves leaving average men with the NEUTERED SLAVE role.

Or if you do not want this, as you women claim, explain how it is that the practical application of feminism in society IS causing this. Are you women not in charge of your feminism jihad? Who is then? The Patriarchy? Is one hand not knowing what the other is doing?

Me, I'm just shocked that the editor of a major daily newspaper would say ""As for US being 'emasculated'" rather than "as for OUR being emasculated." Do you no longer need to pass high school English to write for the Post?

It must be a really slow news day. Nor can I quite put together what the hell Price is talking about. I'm not sure if she knows either.

Sounds like you've experienced a shocker, Catherine...

It is sad that people react to other people wanting autonomy and power in such hateful ways. Treating a woman like another person without first looking at her gender should be the height of equality. It isn't about making women into men. It is about looking at women as individuals who have varied strengths and weaknesses just as men do.

since women want to make men obsolete and take both male and female roles for themselves leaving average men with the NEUTERED SLAVE role.

Not average men. Just you. You personally. We, the womyn of the United States of Amerika are plotting to enslave Brightstar. We have secret handshakes. And a Web site. And t-shirts. However, consensus has not been reached about precisely what we're going to do with you once we've made you a NEUTERED SLAVE. Maybe you'll be a magazine rack.

Or if you do not want this, as you women claim ....

Oh, but we DO want this, Brightstar. We are sitting here, plotting the demise of all men, in Jimmy Choos and NO BRA!!!!

Has anyone checked?. Maybe she does have a mustache.

(some women do, regardless of sexual preference)

I don't like women with mustaches either, maybe he's just calling her ugly.

I hope that doesn't make me a johnson too.

Broadsheet is really tackling the tough issues today. You go, girl!

Dollhouses, masturbation and "shockers" about girls with mustaches. Feminism is taking a hit today.

Here is a molehill -> .

Not quite a mountain. And yet...

It has nothing to do with her sexual orientation.

Not that that makes it any better.

-- Mediterranean area woman

Oh good grief, Ms. Price, you've gone wayyyy overboard here. How is what he wrote a rape joke? She referred to the staff as "emasculated" (obviously in the metaphorical sense) and he responded with a joke by using the word in its literal sense and pointing out that half the staff is female, and that the male half would be willing to drop trou for her in private to prove that they're still "intact". He certainly wasn't saying, "Well, we could all just take you to a room and gang rape you, if you'd like" or whatever the hell else you thought he was implying.

Yeah, it was a lame joke. So? It wasn't about rape.

And perhaps she opened the door to it in the first place by using a word that means "castrated" to describe his staff? If one uses terms that reference sexual matters and genitalia in a broadside, perhaps one should expect a retort that employs some suggestive language too?

Anyway, is there something actually important and meaningful to talk about, or are you content to "entertain" us with a silly rant about trivial bullshit?

Richard isn't synonymous with dick. A nickname for Richard is Dick, which I suppose is equivalent to dick.

Richard isn't synonymous with dick. A nickname for Richard is Dick, which I suppose is equivalent to dick.

I think she meant "Johnson", which makes an even more unfortunate name combo, "Dick Johnson".

I know the article was referring to the surname Johnson. Another letter writer commented that Richard was synonymous with dick. I should have quoted them in my letter.

To all.

(Double DICK) Richard Johnson's threat of gang rape earned him Keith Olbermann's "Worst Person In The World" dishonor today, beating out Bill O who was not tough enough on Ann coultergist when he interviewed her about her anti-semitic remark, and Rush Sleazebag who threaten to invade the past and privacy of one of his critics.

Altogether now... gang rape threats are never acceptable. And if you publicly make a gang rape threat you will earn "Worst Person In The World" dishonors.

You, and Ms. Price, and Mr. Olbermann are all just assuming it was a rape joke or threat, when the simpler and more likely explanation was what I offered--he was responding to the charge that he and his staff had no balls by saying, "Yeah, we still have our balls, do you want us to drop trou and show you?"

Was it a lame joke? Yes. Was it maladroit and poorly expressed and vague enough to allow for misinterpretation? Clearly. But that doesn't mean that it was a veiled rape threat.

This is a perfect case of people seeing what they want to see, and automatically assuming the worst in others.