<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/1.5.1-alpha" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Feminist catfight my patoot</title>
	<link>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/02/01/feminist-catfight-my-patoot/</link>
	<description>Just another WordPress weblog</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 30 Nov 2009 18:57:14 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1-alpha</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: Amanda Marcotte</title>
		<link>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/02/01/feminist-catfight-my-patoot/#comment-486800</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 Feb 2008 16:55:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/02/01/feminist-catfight-my-patoot/#comment-486800</guid>
					<description>Elayne, most of the older feminists who have the logo explained to them get it, though.  I've not heard too much anger about it.  Mostly it's clear it's a joke.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Elayne, most of the older feminists who have the logo explained to them get it, though.  I&#8217;ve not heard too much anger about it.  Mostly it&#8217;s clear it&#8217;s a joke.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Margaret</title>
		<link>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/02/01/feminist-catfight-my-patoot/#comment-486782</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 Feb 2008 15:44:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/02/01/feminist-catfight-my-patoot/#comment-486782</guid>
					<description>The New York Times still uses &quot;Mrs.&quot; frequently, as in &quot;Mrs. Clinton.&quot;  (In fairness to the Times, however, Senator Clinton apparently chose the &quot;Mrs.&quot; honorific rather than &quot;Ms.&quot; for the purposes of the Senate Roll Call, and the Times never uses &quot;Senator&quot; as an honorific.)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>The New York Times still uses &#8220;Mrs.&#8221; frequently, as in &#8220;Mrs. Clinton.&#8221;  (In fairness to the Times, however, Senator Clinton apparently chose the &#8220;Mrs.&#8221; honorific rather than &#8220;Ms.&#8221; for the purposes of the Senate Roll Call, and the Times never uses &#8220;Senator&#8221; as an honorific.)
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Rose</title>
		<link>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/02/01/feminist-catfight-my-patoot/#comment-486735</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 Feb 2008 10:08:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/02/01/feminist-catfight-my-patoot/#comment-486735</guid>
					<description>I agree with Roxie- male politicians are usually given only a last name, and it looks weird and overly formal when you see them referred to as &quot;Mr.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>I agree with Roxie- male politicians are usually given only a last name, and it looks weird and overly formal when you see them referred to as &#8220;Mr.&#8221;
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Roxie</title>
		<link>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/02/01/feminist-catfight-my-patoot/#comment-486727</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 Feb 2008 08:32:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/02/01/feminist-catfight-my-patoot/#comment-486727</guid>
					<description>I have never, &lt;i&gt;ever&lt;/i&gt; heard of that Doug. What &quot;writers of style manuals&quot; of 1857?

Maybe it's another &quot;generational&quot; thing, but since AT LEAST 2001 (and I know it started much earlier) they teach that it is last name &lt;b&gt;only&lt;/b&gt; (not counting titles and degrees).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>I have never, <i>ever</i> heard of that Doug. What &#8220;writers of style manuals&#8221; of 1857?</p>
	<p>Maybe it&#8217;s another &#8220;generational&#8221; thing, but since AT LEAST 2001 (and I know it started much earlier) they teach that it is last name <b>only</b> (not counting titles and degrees).
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Samantha Vimes</title>
		<link>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/02/01/feminist-catfight-my-patoot/#comment-486726</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 Feb 2008 08:32:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/02/01/feminist-catfight-my-patoot/#comment-486726</guid>
					<description>I'm all in favor of honorifics, used consistently. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>I&#8217;m all in favor of honorifics, used consistently.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Doug</title>
		<link>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/02/01/feminist-catfight-my-patoot/#comment-486686</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Feb 2008 20:32:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/02/01/feminist-catfight-my-patoot/#comment-486686</guid>
					<description>Roxie, 
What would you prefer over &quot;Ms.&quot; Wasn't that advanced as a more modern alternative to Miss, Mrs., not to mention the old &quot;(Mrs.)&quot; Wonder how many readers ever even saw that one. [It was at one time used on letters by married women, particularly in the South.] 

If not &quot;Ms.&quot; then what on second ref? Just the last name? Some writers of style manuals contend that last-name only refs should be used only for notorious individuals, such as criminals, in order to avoid the honorary title. 

</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Roxie,<br />
What would you prefer over &#8220;Ms.&#8221; Wasn&#8217;t that advanced as a more modern alternative to Miss, Mrs., not to mention the old &#8220;(Mrs.)&#8221; Wonder how many readers ever even saw that one. [It was at one time used on letters by married women, particularly in the South.] </p>
	<p>If not &#8220;Ms.&#8221; then what on second ref? Just the last name? Some writers of style manuals contend that last-name only refs should be used only for notorious individuals, such as criminals, in order to avoid the honorary title.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Mirabile Dictu</title>
		<link>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/02/01/feminist-catfight-my-patoot/#comment-486682</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Feb 2008 20:03:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/02/01/feminist-catfight-my-patoot/#comment-486682</guid>
					<description>or i should say *during* boobiegate, which was about jessica's picture. i don't think Ann's a second-wave feminist, though. isn't she more like CWA?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>or i should say *during* boobiegate, which was about jessica&#8217;s picture. i don&#8217;t think Ann&#8217;s a second-wave feminist, though. isn&#8217;t she more like CWA?
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Mirabile Dictu</title>
		<link>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/02/01/feminist-catfight-my-patoot/#comment-486680</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Feb 2008 19:59:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/02/01/feminist-catfight-my-patoot/#comment-486680</guid>
					<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;On the other hand, there’s a kernel of truth there, as witnessed by the discussions about Feministing’s logo and the reactions to it from second-wave v. third-wave-and-beyond feminists.&lt;/blockquote&gt;Do you mean Ann Althouse and &quot;boobiegate&quot;?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<blockquote><p>On the other hand, there’s a kernel of truth there, as witnessed by the discussions about Feministing’s logo and the reactions to it from second-wave v. third-wave-and-beyond feminists.</blockquote>
Do you mean Ann Althouse and &#8220;boobiegate&#8221;?
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Eric, Rejector of Memes</title>
		<link>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/02/01/feminist-catfight-my-patoot/#comment-486672</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Feb 2008 19:18:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/02/01/feminist-catfight-my-patoot/#comment-486672</guid>
					<description>I prefer the honorific.  It's not like American culture is overly formal, in case you haven't noticed.

(In fact, we need MORE honorifics: in some countries, &quot;Engineer&quot; is a title like &quot;Doctor&quot;.)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>I prefer the honorific.  It&#8217;s not like American culture is overly formal, in case you haven&#8217;t noticed.</p>
	<p>(In fact, we need MORE honorifics: in some countries, &#8220;Engineer&#8221; is a title like &#8220;Doctor&#8221;.)
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: signthelist</title>
		<link>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/02/01/feminist-catfight-my-patoot/#comment-486666</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Feb 2008 18:18:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/02/01/feminist-catfight-my-patoot/#comment-486666</guid>
					<description>Although, articles referring to Mr. Loaf, Mr. Diddy, and Mr. Dogg are kind of awesome. I can get behind that stylistic choice.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Although, articles referring to Mr. Loaf, Mr. Diddy, and Mr. Dogg are kind of awesome. I can get behind that stylistic choice.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
