you're reading...
Pre-2008 Posts

Feminist Anti-Britney-Crotch-Shot Activism and Internet Search Engines

Willow Tree Crotch

Willow Tree Crotch

The author of the paragraphs below tracked back to me, but it took a while for me to approve the trackback and so his blog post might be missed, which would be a shame, because what he says about our anti-Britney-Crotch-Shot activism has some interesting implications and ramifications worth considering, particularly in light of Ampgate

My recent favourite attack is a ‘feminist’ attack on the proliferation of pornographic images on the Net. In particular, the internet has been aflutter with a group of photographs that were taken of Britney Spears’ crotch that revealed that she did not wear underwear to a variety of functions. A group of feminists who take offense at the objectification of female genitalia on the Internet are fighting back.

… I’m intrigued as to what all of this activity is slowly doing to our ability to find particular information on the Internet. And to how it documents social responses to particular events in time. In essence, it is taking the methods that people use to search and turning them against the people that are doing the searching. What that means is that we already understand how important titles and links are on the Internet. Matt Cutts, at Google, demonstrates how important titles, headings and naming are to improving visibility when it comes to search. But if we are slowly working out ways to reverse-engineer search methodology and we are using that knowledge to counter the productivity of search to a specific end, will we ever be able to undo the mess that we are making?

How incredibly great would it be, for example, if we were able to make it really, really difficult for people to find pornography.  Consider the possibilities!

 Heart

Discussion

104 thoughts on “Feminist Anti-Britney-Crotch-Shot Activism and Internet Search Engines

  1. Somebody tell me with a straight face that that tree crotch is not, in its own right, erotic.

    Hee.

    Heart

    Posted by womensspace | December 7, 2006, 4:35 pm
  2. Oh, my god. It’s the classic men-are-objective and women aren’t song and dance. Wow. I thought that had kind of died out a little.

    Posted by Q Grrl | December 7, 2006, 5:08 pm
  3. eh, they sell calendars and whatnot of pseudo-pornographic geographical and “natural” images. People find them cute for a variety of reasons, none of which are noble — it’s not just immaturity, but as you know, expressions like “food porn” are seldom helpful when it comes to taking pornography seriously as a feminist issue, and I think that’s exactly why those expressions are so freaking popular right now, pimp this and pimp that. Remember the “kiddie korn” jokes from the Ms. forum days?

    Personally, I think it’s highly possible for feminists to steal “hits” away from pornographers. Hell, it’s pretty illuminating that it’s so hard to make money off of pornography these days that you have to pay a man like Barry Deutsch at least $30K, maybe much more, just to have a chance at breaking even. OTOH, I’m not sure there’s anything to be gained from those hits.

    To me, one of the interesting things of the Amptoons fiasco is the genderizing of tech knowledge, how vagina=luddite was manifested, with all the internet dudes going on (completely wrongly!) about so-called SEO companies and what not, meanwhile Deutsch and his buddy Schwyzer, with their cocks, were able to play the “I don’t understand all this computer stuff” card (doubtful for Deutsch considering he admittedly stretched the deal out over months) and come out unscathed.

    What’s interesting here is last time something similar to your Britney Crotch Project (or whatever) was suggested, it was a scam designed to make feminists look like idiots when it came to technology: Getsomereal by some Swedish magazine (go to page 2 of article below).

    http://feminista.com/issues/article.php?type=essay&v=6&n=1&number=3&p=1

    They told women that they (the women) would be creating fake porn pages to redirect men searching google to, with the message that “hey, porn is fake, girls are real.” [with an implied “so act your pornographic fantasies out on US, we like it”; the magazine is their equivalent to Bust] But users of the website were doing nothing of the sort: basically, they were just playing around with virtual colorforms, like kids play with.

    Of course, Wired magazine covered this, using one of those female technology writers who is/has to be more of a guy than any of the guys to compensate, and she came up with an article that said, directly, that feminists like MacKinnon “blow hot air.” So instead she credited this dude, who worked for an ad company allied with the magazine of coming up with the first non-stupid antipornography action in the history of the world, even though all he came up with was colorforms. She had the tech-chops to know better but because of her politics, and that of her employer, she played dumb and went along with it.

    Posted by Rich | December 7, 2006, 5:29 pm
  4. Goddess, what a stunning reversal. Who made the internet a mess of woman-hating slop in the first place? Will WE (feminists with blogs, anyway) be able to undo the mess that YOU have made?

    “Help! The feminists are blogging and I can’t find my porn!”

    Posted by Melissa | December 7, 2006, 5:36 pm
  5. There’s a name for it which has temporarily escaped me. They did it to Rick Santorum.
    Google bombing? Is that the word?
    Heck, I’m gonna go do this on my own blog🙂

    Posted by Amananta | December 7, 2006, 5:45 pm
  6. Okay now I am giggling out loud at work! Go see!

    Posted by Amananta | December 7, 2006, 5:56 pm
  7. Melissa: “Help! The feminists are blogging and I can’t find my porn!”

    LOL, you got THAT right, Melissa! Damn these feminists coming into our highly systemized system and messing it up. A man should be able to type in the name of anyone’s crotch and get what he asked for, it’s our God-Google-Given Right.

    Posted by Ginny | December 7, 2006, 5:57 pm
  8. Amananta terrific post on your site. Wow you do come back with a blast don’t you. So good to see.

    Yes Heart I believe google images has a shot of a guy fucking a (tree) crotch.*

    Posted by Pony | December 7, 2006, 6:07 pm
  9. I’ll go with “variant of crutch” “used as a support by a lame person”

    crotch
    1539, original meaning “pitchfork,” from O.N.Fr. croche “shepherd’s crook,” var. of croc “hook” (see crochet); meaning “region where the body forks” is c.1592.

    crotch
    • noun 1 the part of the human body between the legs where they join the torso. 2 a fork in a tree, road, or river.
    — ORIGIN perhaps related to Old French croche ‘shepherd’s crook’; partly also a variant of CRUTCH.

    crutch
    • noun 1 a long stick with a crosspiece at the top, used as a support by a lame person. 2 something used for support or reassurance.

    Posted by Pony | December 7, 2006, 6:17 pm
  10. HA!! Amananta, that rocks. 🙂

    The first time I ever noticed something like this done was when I came across Big Bad Chinese Mama’s site a long time ago. She had an add up for something like “Lotus Blossoms,” like a mail order bride site, with a smiling demure Asian woman, and then when you clicked, you got this.😀

    Heart

    Posted by womensspace | December 7, 2006, 6:24 pm
  11. Amananta your new post has brought a cackle to my chops!

    Wha’ the *hairy legged hags/dykes clit lickers have hijacked me porn? Lower lip hangs open, drool collects on keyboard while scratching alarmingly narrow forehead

    *actual words that I receive off the same troll on a boringly regular basis – his name is booboo

    Posted by sparklematrix | December 7, 2006, 6:30 pm
  12. i’m in. amananta, i hope you don’t mind if i just copy you. i mean, why mess with perfection, eh?

    xoxo, jared

    Posted by ms. jared | December 7, 2006, 6:31 pm
  13. Oh please do! Be careful of some of the links though! They won’t hurt your computer but some of them are VERY annoying and or completely NSFW (but not in the way that they would like, heh heh)

    Posted by Amananta | December 7, 2006, 6:58 pm
  14. Oh Heart – I’m so adding that one!

    Posted by Amananta | December 7, 2006, 6:59 pm
  15. Dude, Heart – you are on the top of the “hot posts today” for WordPress!

    Posted by Amananta | December 7, 2006, 7:05 pm
  16. Hee hee, Amananta. 15,033 views as of 12:08 PDT. Whoa.

    Heart

    Posted by womensspace | December 7, 2006, 8:08 pm
  17. W00t! It’s working, the search engine spiders just picked it up!

    Posted by Amananta | December 7, 2006, 8:28 pm
  18. LOL. The poor men, once again it’s all about them. Women talk about rape and DV, the men go, what about the men? They say, “Women lie”, we ask, what about men? Oh, no, they don’t lie, cite cases. I’m not saying these crimes don’t happen to men, but you can’t have a discussion about them that centers on women without having men crash it and try to derail it. OTOH, when men have discussions about male victims of these crimes, women don’t crash them and say, what about us?

    “Help! The feminists are blogging and I can’t find my porn!”

    What do they say, cry me a river?

    Posted by Radfem | December 7, 2006, 8:31 pm
  19. When men aren’t around (or aren’t allowed to post) you can guarantee there will be several women who say “but what about the nice men, like my husband/partner/son/brother/boyfriend/nephew/professor. Kack.

    Posted by Pony | December 7, 2006, 9:24 pm
  20. I’m on board Heart! Stormyblog available for pornie-search derailment😀
    Amananta, I love it, may I also follow Ms.J’s lead and swipe it verbatim?

    Posted by stormcloud | December 7, 2006, 9:45 pm
  21. I have just done a post entitled “Big Boobs~nipples~sexxxx~not Britney crotch shots,” just to vary it up somewhat. Within 5mins of posting it was the top viewed post!

    Posted by sparklematrix | December 7, 2006, 10:07 pm
  22. Oh My, I am having such a huge and real laugh right now.

    Thanks Everyone !

    Posted by uppitybiscuit | December 7, 2006, 10:32 pm
  23. Go, wimmin! 🙂

    These just in (and out) but I’m pasting them; the first is worth responding to (for the cause, whoever is up for it!); the second just, for some reason, cracked me up and had me laughing out loud!

    **************

    Bart Hinkle | bhinkle@timesdispatch.com | barticles.mytimesdispatch.com | IP: 72.232.131.22

    So, gay male pornography is indicative of — what, precisely? The fact that men hate men, too? (That would make them, er, androgynists?) Of course it’s about the desire. Believing otherwise is simply false consciousness.

    Not Spam — Dec 7, 9:43 PM — [ View Post ]

    ****************

    Bill W. | idontwannatellu@myob.com | IP: 68.252.163.19

    I think you are just upset that nobody is looking at your crotch. You seem to be a whiney libber.

    ************

    HA! I have no idea why that last one tickles my funny bone but it so does!

    Heart

    Posted by womensspace | December 7, 2006, 10:42 pm
  24. Please do! I’ve already seen two whiny male posts today about how terrible it is that us feminazis are googlebombing their precious porn! ZOMG they might have to click THREE OR FOUR TIMES before they find ACTUAL pictures of abused, impoverished naked women pretending they like servicing their ugly cocks!

    Posted by Amananta | December 7, 2006, 10:59 pm
  25. Cheers Amananta, consider it done within a milli-click!
    Thx!

    Posted by stormcloud | December 7, 2006, 11:02 pm
  26. (Actually, I’d just like to know why Rich thinks finding the erotic out and about in the living world is apparently immature.)

    And nice job, Heart & Co.🙂

    Posted by Heather | December 7, 2006, 11:37 pm
  27. I’m loving this! We’re absolutely the top hit on Google for the search terms at the moment.

    I did want to clarify that the classic google bombing is what happens when you search for the terms “miserable failure”: you get the official white house biography of George W. Bush.

    The top hit on google for the term “santorum” is a variation on this that, if it succeeds, could potentially affect the English language for generations to come.

    Posted by anonymom | December 7, 2006, 11:39 pm
  28. My whiny male visitors haven’t been complaining that I’m ruining their ability to access porn, but I’m sure they would if I did. LOL, on the google.

    Posted by Radfem | December 7, 2006, 11:48 pm
  29. Hee hee.

    ***********

    thor | IP: 142.161.248.154

    dang! you guys got me! I was pokin’ around the innernet for some sweet sweet britney cootch so I could jerk off and further enslave women all over the world, but instead I was met with….radical feminist literature? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! how could this happen? my beloved penis, which has led me to so many victories, has brought bitter defeat upon both of our heads. OH THE IRONY. how could you do this to me, great Purple Helmet Warrior?! after all the love I’ve given you… well, I guess like all men, ALL men, all MEN, ALL MEN EVERYONE WITH TESTICLES… I’m evil by nature and a rapist and I just wanna get laid, I just really really REALLY wanna get laid seriously

    ………ladies?

    peace and love,

    -thor

    Dec 7, 11:52 PM — [ Edit | Delete | View Post ] — Bulk action: Approve Spam Delete Defer until later
    **********

    Posted by womensspace | December 8, 2006, 12:09 am
  30. “I think you are just upset that nobody is looking at your crotch. You seem to be a whiney libber.”

    OK, this made me laugh my ass off, too. And the gay porn red herring, a classic.

    Ginny, this is spot on as well: “A man should be able to type in the name of anyone’s crotch and get what he asked for, it’s our God-Google-Given Right.” Seriously, just who the hell do we think we are??

    Cry me a freakin river, indeed.

    Posted by Melissa | December 8, 2006, 12:46 am
  31. You know, all those liberal cool dudes were oh so amused and thought it was so cool when they goggle bombed Senator Santorum’s name until it is irrevocably associated on the net with the byproducts of anal sex – but somehow now when it is done to something they are addicted to, it isn’t okay…
    Ah, the hypocrisy…

    Posted by Amananta | December 8, 2006, 1:00 am
  32. Pasted. 🙂

    ****

    Alan Fraser | myducksoup.com |

    Hmm…how to cash in on the crotch shots without actually posting a picture. How charmingly pedestrian to do it under the guise of feminism and protection of the world’s females against male terrorists. This is mildly amusing stuff. Please do keep it up.

    Dec 8, 1:10 AM — [ Edit | Delete | View Post ] — Bulk action: Approve Spam Delete Defer until later

    ***

    Why come these guys don’t bother to READ.

    Let’s review. These feminist activist posts are the result of my trying to figure out, last weekend, actually WHY an ancient blog post of mine, “Goddesses on Parade: The Britney Spears Birthing Statue,” was suddenly, randomly, getting a bajillion hits. The only clue I had was that people were typing into search engines, “Britney Spears crotch” and variations thereof. I don’t follow the stars, the starlets, Hollywood, bollywood, or any of the rags or rag-mouths who talk about them or photograph them without their consent, so I had no clue what Britney might be up to these days.

    So my radfem bud Sassafras broke it down to me; someone had taken pictures up Spears’ dress when she was out on the town and now everybody was trying to find the photos and was ending up here on my blog instead.

    I didn’t fricking start this. A photographer started it, and men and boys, primarily, have continued it, by clicking in “Britney crotch,” Peeping Tom-like, hoping to get an eyefull.

    If all of these men are going to sully the pristine woman-centeredness of my radical feminist blog with their feverish searches, I am going to have to respond in kind by delivering some of them thar “consequences” some of you all like to talk so much about if you’re conservatives, talk to you a bit about “taking responsibility” for your actions, and some of that karma you all like to talk about if you fancy yourself to be liberal or progressive, remind you that what goes around comes around yo. Hence, my current project, in which my radfem sisters are also enlisting. Yay. Almost 25,000 hits today. We will see what happens tomorrow, but at the moment, since 4:00 PDT, one hour and 38 minutes ago, I have had 4,240 hits. =:-O

    As to “cashing in,” here’s who’s cashing in: every man who goes looking for those photos is cashing in on the privilege afforded to men under male heterosupremacy. I’m cashing in on one thing only: my opportunity to call you all out. You are welcome.

    Heart

    Posted by womensspace | December 8, 2006, 1:29 am
  33. I love how they make a point of coming over here to tell you they don’t mind. Clearly they do or they wouldn’t bother to post a comment😛

    Posted by Amananta | December 8, 2006, 4:09 am
  34. Amananta, I just showed my daughter and her boyfriend your blog and we took time to look at all the links. OHMYGOD. I have to agree, you are BRILLIANT! We have been laughing ourselves sick! Oh, mygod, the “cock” and “pussies” one!!

    Dang, you’re good. 🙂

    Heart

    Posted by womensspace | December 8, 2006, 5:09 am
  35. OOOH OOOH this is BRILLIANT! *falls about laughing* Do you mind if I copy you? Like Ms. Jared said, why mess with perfection?😀

    Posted by Anji | December 8, 2006, 7:59 am
  36. I’m not having the overwhelming success that I expected, my hits are only slightly above a ‘regular’ post. But Stormyblog is a new kid on the block..

    Here is my proposal to raise the ranking of ALL the radfem Spear-otage sites.

    Firstly, those with Spear-otage (crotchgate??) posts, should put in a link to the others at the bottom of their posts (as I have done at the bottom of THIS). Google is a bit secretive about the actual rankings, but other sites linking directly to the page does raise the ranking.

    Secondly, for those without blogs who want to help, go to any of these radfem posts, and click on (preferably ALL) of the links listed under optimisation. (There is no need to click the rest of the links in the post, only the other radfem sites.)

    I know that clicking the same link will not raise its ranking, but you could cycle through them one by one. Perhaps do this once an hour, or every couple of hours or whatever.

    These are the links that I have so far in Spear-otage

    Optimisation:
    Heart , Amananta , AradhanaD , Sparkle , Puddlejumper , MsJared ,

    Posted by stormcloud | December 8, 2006, 11:27 am
  37. Oops! Forgot to list mine in the optimisation (the Americans can spell it with a Z if you prefer)🙂

    Optimisation:
    Heart , Amananta , AradhanaD , Sparkle , Puddlejumper , MsJared , Stormy ,

    Posted by stormcloud | December 8, 2006, 11:38 am
  38. “whiney libber.”

    *LOL* I like that one. I think it must mean “liberal” which of course then implies that the opposing side are a pack of porn addicts, but hey, I’m not going to disagree with that.

    Posted by veravenom | December 8, 2006, 2:10 pm
  39. Yup, I’m joining in. :o)

    Posted by ghostlove | December 8, 2006, 2:20 pm
  40. *naughty giggles*

    I’ve been laughing for two days now!

    Posted by Amananta | December 8, 2006, 3:17 pm
  41. I just searched for “Britney spears crotch” on google.
    This post was the first link.

    Posted by Amananta | December 8, 2006, 3:47 pm
  42. LOL.🙂

    Posted by Radfem | December 8, 2006, 4:16 pm
  43. Haaa that link of Amanata’s🙂

    Posted by sparklematrix | December 8, 2006, 4:37 pm
  44. I made a fake porn webpage. Feel free to link to it – http://www.geocities.com/kali_ma_156/rapepornlinks.htm

    Posted by Amananta | December 8, 2006, 5:05 pm
  45. HA~!!!

    Naughty kitty. 🙂

    You wimmin are the best. 😀

    Heart

    Posted by Heart | December 8, 2006, 5:08 pm
  46. Good one Amananta. We should perhaps flood the www with fake porn sites, esp like your heading with ‘violent’ – that should pick up the traffic.😦

    The flicker photo is v. funny!😀

    Posted by stormcloud | December 8, 2006, 5:28 pm
  47. So here’s a selection of comments I didn’t approve but will just paste so as to share. Imagine the hopelessness of discussion in here anywhere if I didn’t moderate this stuff out, and there’s a LOT of it and most if it is WAY worse than this. These are at least possible to respond to these (though it’s discouraging and aggravating to be reminded of the way so many people think.)

    *****

    Mariane | IP:

    The problem is Britney Spears did not wear underwear in public, not an unreasonable thing to ask. Let’s not blame the men without first looking at who put the temptation on the table. She is no victim. She is the perp.

    — Dec 8, 3:22 PM — [ View Post ]

    *********
    [Note that this guy’s e-mail addy is “love4-you”. The male arrogance and misogyny boggle.]

    Responsible? | love4_you@(deleted) | IP:

    You Ding-a-Ling Women ! You build them…! Quit having babies as a way to get the love you seek and quit marketing yourself out as whores ! You create men as hungry dogs then blame them ? How dare you. Get some power women. Start eating healthy and exercising and quit reading all that garbage and watching trash TV. Get Empowered! Most men are not strong enough in character to be fathers.Quit thinking that you need a man to make life worth living. Quit building angry, frustrated and out-of control children. Grow up Women ! You keep buying make up to cover up your truth. You look better with make up then who ? OH, but it makes you feel good to look pretty ? Do you find this nonsense you are seeing in our society “PRETTY” ? Demand Equality, and do it without make-up,skirts and cleavage. Get a grip,women…have you noticed it is getting scarier out there ? More sluttiness for less payout and more angry men than ever ?
    Time to wake up. Make some changes. SOON ! With Love and Hope for you. Mitchell

    Dec 8, 4:01 PM — [ View Post ]

    ****

    [Edited out at the request of the commenter. Heart]

    ***

    OMG, I just have to laugh, again, at this last one. Geez. 😀

    Hey, veravenom! 🙂

    “libbers” actually is Rush-Limbaugh-coined/right-wing-speak for “Women’s Libbers,” i.e., we’re all a bunch of whiny women’s libbers. Hee. Still makes me laugh. 😀

    Heart

    Posted by womensspace | December 8, 2006, 5:31 pm
  48. Re, this post being the first link on the “Britney Spears crotch” google search: almost 24,000 views already this morning. Geez.

    Hee.
    😀

    Heart

    Posted by womensspace | December 8, 2006, 5:34 pm
  49. “we’re all a bunch of whiny women’s libbers.”

    That’s funny since the most whining on threads about porn come from boys desperately trying to defend it.

    Posted by veravenom | December 8, 2006, 5:35 pm
  50. I was looking at the crotch in the tree up there at the top– there is so a laughing Green Man in there! 🙂

    Heart

    Posted by womensspace | December 8, 2006, 5:35 pm
  51. “(Actually, I’d just like to know why Rich thinks finding the erotic out and about in the living world is apparently immature.)”

    Not sure if you were expecting an answer (or if anyone but you gives a damn), but:

    Crawling around in the desert until you find a crater that resembles an asshole or a mesa that’s vaguely nipple-like to take a picture you can sell to yuppie art fanciers doesn’t exactly strike me as a sensible preoccupation. From an artistic standpoint, it’s not so much metaphor as doctoring up representational art (something that’s not exactly held as meaningful by critics on its own, anymore, since representational art is so easily achieved given moden technology). Yeah, there’s skill behind seeking out the precise angle, or fabricating the “natural” scene wholesale through trickery, but cleverness isn’t the be all and end all of human expressionism. The pun might be the basest form of poetry, I’d say mountain boobs are the lowest form of visual art.

    Also, remember, that that sort of thing is nothing new, either: there’s a mountain out there in Canada (I think) called Squaw’s Teat. Now, the debate about whether or not the word “Squaw” itself originally meant “cunt” (in an indigenous language or in a white interpretation of it) notwithstanding, there was a long tradition of visualizing geography as feminine: it is something to conquer, measure, and divide up at man’s convenience. In the above example, the especially “Romantic” (capital R) idea was even as Indians were being driven to extinction, they lived on in the natural world that was bequeathed to white men. Those politics still exist today and erotic “naturalism” is intertwined with them, I’d say inextricably.

    Furthermore, it’s not so much erotic (love, emotion), as slapstick. “Hah, that tree stump has a vagina.” I mean, that’s actually less valid than finding the Virgin Mary on a side of grilled-cheese, something that is laughed up and down by liberal-types, and yet desert virtual-assholes or mesa boobs sell calendars to the same crowd? That’s not cynicism on their part but nihilism.

    And lastly, like I said before, it’s more pornographic than erotic (objectification, male gaze, you name it) and like hentai and whatnot, it both fuels the market (normalization) while defending that same market from detractors: “see, porn doesn’t hurt women, unless you’re saying that the tree stump was oppressed there!”

    Posted by Rich | December 8, 2006, 5:50 pm
  52. I do think we should all make fake porn sites. I really, really do. There are many places you can do it for free (tripod, yahoo geocities, or even a blog named something porn-like) and if it is worth it to you you can even buy a porny domain name for cheap and have it redirect there. Some services will watch for a domain name to lose its registration, so you can watch the names of particularly nasty sites and ask for an email when they lose their registration – people do it all the time. It’s perfectly legal.
    The robots crawling the web have no clue that your site is fake when they index it – I’ve already been put on a few link collections and am getting hits from there from nasty men looking for pictures of children being raped. Wouldn’t it be really, really cool if this were to become common? Men being redirected to sites on how to cure your porn addiction when they think they’re getting a “Lolita” link?

    Posted by Amananta | December 8, 2006, 6:02 pm
  53. This just in: Britney apparently signed a gazillion dollar contract with Victoria’s Secret some time before the two panty-less shots. I do still suspect this was part of the marketing strategy. All that free publicity.

    But I want to say, while I couldn’t sleep last night I spent time laffin my head off at all your sites, ladies. Thanks, except to the one (forget which) that trapped me and kept torturing me.

    In the meantime, I wanted to post something to Stormy, veravenom and a couple others who require registration, and I can’t register to your blogs because some other Pony has already taken that name.😦

    Posted by Pony | December 8, 2006, 6:40 pm
  54. Pony, we can’t have you locked out!! Oh no!

    Doesn’t matter that there is another pony at WP, your username is different to your display name.

    Example, you could sign up with the username ihateporniepervs (remember this will be your login) and once registered, you can change the display name to pony.

    Full instructions are here: http://stormcloud.wordpress.com/commenting/
    (A PDF of the instructions if you have a slow connection):
    https://stormcloud.wordpress.com/files/2006/10/still-having-problems-posting.pdf

    There is only one problem with WordPress, you have to go through the ‘create a blog’ system in order to change the display name. But I put plenty of pictures in the instructions.

    Posted by stormcloud | December 8, 2006, 7:04 pm
  55. It means woman Rich. “Squaw” is close to the correct pronunciation. This word that merely means “woman” (approximately) took on the derogatory meaning because white men thought of native women as nothing but cunts, fuckholes and any other negative meaning you can think of related to sex. Nothing but something to use. This is an example of the appropriation of a good word. It’s a good word, properly spelled and properly used.

    Here’s the proper spelling. Reclaimed words:
    http://www.firstnationsdrum.com/Summer2006/WomAwards.htm

    http://www.iaaw.ca/recognition-and-advocacy.htm

    Posted by Pony | December 8, 2006, 7:13 pm
  56. Heart, your latest selection of comments, funny – oh so funny! ROTFLMAO

    How *could* we forget that men are the ones responsible for populating the planet? Without their uncontrollable sex drive, no more humans would exist! How could we forget that we women are merely uncovered meat???
    Trust bloody men to lay claim to everything – five minute’s of humping and they claim all the credit for populating the earth – sheesh! Glosses over the whole pregnancy thing just a tad… (as well as women’s sex drives)

    But this one was classic:
    “Demand Equality, and do it without make-up,skirts and cleavage.”
    The moron posts this to a radfem blog? FFS, it’s the feminists and radfems that are more likely NOT to be wearing skirts, make-up and showing cleavage.

    Hey trolls, nice to know you took your stupid pills today. I was getting worried! LOL

    Posted by stormcloud | December 8, 2006, 7:13 pm
  57. “It means woman Rich.”

    I’m not entirely sure anyone really knows for sure, without a shadow of a doubt. It’s more what people want to believe (what word or even what language the “english” was supposedly derived from is debated even among indigenous peoples, who have competing interests at stake). I generally distrust those who believe themselves to possess the objective, final truth on the matter, as even if they were right, they’d still be intentionally marginalizing someone. For example, if one claims an Algonquin origin (something that is believed at least partially as the result of what white men have researched) without leaving *any* room for Suzan Harjo and her work, then how much harder is it to be in her shoes, having stepped out and made her stand, only to be standing by herself with her allies now positioning her as a fraud? That said, I respect your beliefs on the matter.

    Posted by Rich | December 8, 2006, 8:37 pm
  58. Rich, very well thought-out points in this thread – good!

    Posted by AradhanaD | December 8, 2006, 8:47 pm
  59. ***Thanks, except to the one (forget which) that trapped me and kept torturing me.***

    I finally did an improper shutdown of my computer to get away from that one!

    Posted by Branjor | December 8, 2006, 9:20 pm
  60. What about MySpace, speaking of proliferation of porn…even the photo’s people use for their profiles are porn.

    Posted by businessgolf | December 8, 2006, 9:37 pm
  61. It’s a Cree word Rich. Did you look at the link, where Cree/Metis people use it. How it was used by Anglos is different. I don’t know the person you reference.

    Posted by Pony | December 8, 2006, 10:34 pm
  62. “Esquao” is the proper word Rich.

    Thanks Stormy I’ll try again. I did spend some time with THREE WordPress techies at around 3 a.m. (I’m shameless) but they just told me, sorry, there’s another Pony registered here. I huffed off to bed.

    See ya.

    Posted by Pony | December 8, 2006, 10:38 pm
  63. “How incredibly great would it be, for example, if we were able to make it really, really difficult for people to find pornography. Consider the possibilities!”
    If people don’t know where Internet porn is by now they deserve to be left to the top shelf at the corner store. I don’t think this is the issue, however. Mis-connecting one-handed surfers is one thing, and a funny thing it is, but the theoretical future problem lies in people/groups muddying the waters so that if I put “manic depression” into Google I end up getting 300,000 pages of porn instead. Or, perhaps, I type in “feminist movement” and the first gazillion pages are for “viagra”, “Major League Basebal” and “all 18 all the time.”

    Posted by feartheseeds | December 8, 2006, 10:41 pm
  64. There’s a variety of words from different languages that look or sound like “squaw.” Who gets to decide which of those is the one (if it was even one) that white people picked up on as a pejorative, if that was indeed how it was arrived at? I’m not going to debate this with you here (or anywhere else really). I only say this so that other people reading know that it’s not so simple as saying “it’s a XYZ word, period,” as you’ve stated, because no amount of links, in my opinion, can demonstrate that — in fact, the more links that are posted, the less confident one would certainly be on the matter!

    And that’s it from me on that subject.

    Posted by Rich | December 8, 2006, 10:44 pm
  65. I have not read this site before, used to read Alas but that porn thing totally made him one of the biggest hypocrites online imo.

    I found this via it being a top post on wordpress too.

    It sounds like a good plan.

    I have a post on my blog from November 2005, and granted I do not get 15,000 hits a day, but the title is “If I were your Blow Job Queen”, and it continually has a high search and hit rate, and I’m sure a high disappointment rate for those searching.

    Posted by cooper | December 8, 2006, 11:18 pm
  66. There is a conversation going on here…
    http://barticles.mytimesdispatch.com/index.php/barticles/comments/britney_spears_bits/

    surrounding this post.

    Heart I wasn’t sure if you wanted a live link or not. It’s the TimesDispatch – Richmond. Go see🙂

    Posted by sparklematrix | December 8, 2006, 11:59 pm
  67. Have added two more ‘optimisers’ to the list:
    * VeraVenom * Grace *

    Posted by stormcloud | December 9, 2006, 1:03 am
  68. Right you are Rich. After all you’re the man. The *WHITE* man I might add.

    Posted by Pony | December 9, 2006, 1:04 am
  69. Pony, damn right – good thorough analysis of the subject… *end sarcasm*

    Posted by AradhanaD | December 9, 2006, 1:12 am
  70. Branjor: “I finally did an improper shutdown of my computer to get away from that one!”

    No need to do that, just press control alt delete (once only!) to bring up the Task Manager, and end the task. It will close all of you browser windows.

    Posted by stormcloud | December 9, 2006, 1:17 am
  71. Squaw {skwa} n. {

    Posted by Pony | December 9, 2006, 1:19 am
  72. Squaw skwa n. {Algonk:cf. Cree iskwao woman}
    1.an Indian woman, especially a wife.
    Although squaw is the normal and acceptable English term for an Indian woman, it is used in some contexts, especially by white men, with derogatory connotations. Moreover, the term is often resented by Indians who are not Algonkian-speaking, for it is to them an English word, one having no significance in their own languages.

    1743 (1949) ISHAM Observations 8: a Woman Es’qu’ u

    Dictionary of Canadian English
    WJ Gage Limited

    Posted by Pony | December 9, 2006, 1:20 am
  73. Hey, stormcloud, make sure you add Sour Duck, whose post is also on Blogher. 🙂

    What’s with feminists and others calling us “hit whores”? Yeah, RIGHT. There is one “hit whore” and that is the asshole who snapped and posted the photos in the first place, to get everybody going to HIS place to check them out. That meant a bunch of pornhounds ended up at MY BLOG, and why? Because of an ancient post I have about that statue of Britney Spears. When pornhounds come here it is not by my invitation, but sometimes they behave like assholes and I have to DEAL with all of their misogynist comments because they ended up here. THAT’s why I got the bright idea to give them a DIFFERENT kind of eyefull.

    But if we’re going to making fricking accusations, let’s make the right kind.

    Also: the Britney Spears boondoggle is not about “pornography,” though Amananta’s good idea began with this boondoggle. The Britney Spears boondoggle is about perps shooting photos and posting them to the internet and more and more perps wanting an eyefull.

    Yeesh. Those photos are NOT pornographic, they are also not erotic, and why? Because they are of Britney just being herself. That’s why a bunch of you men say you are “disappointed.” You were hoping for full nudal frontity and a come hither view, don’t forget the airbrushing. That’s not what real women look like, even beautiful women like Britney Spears.

    Anyway. Don’t point any fingers at me. Point them at the asshole who started this debacle.

    Heart

    Posted by womensspace | December 9, 2006, 1:24 am
  74. Huh. I’m blogging that.

    Heart

    Posted by womensspace | December 9, 2006, 1:24 am
  75. Sourduck added !
    I thought I had tracked them all…

    Don’t forget to raise the ranking of all the blogs in the loop, just cycle through them one by one. Consecutive hits don’t count.

    Posted by stormcloud | December 9, 2006, 1:40 am
  76. ‘Hit whores’

    It always comes down to calling women whores. bah!

    Posted by stormcloud | December 9, 2006, 1:40 am
  77. Yeah, I’ve got a problem here. I invited my wee bro’ in as a guest blogger, and he’s gone and turned my site into a pornfest! here and here (hoping the html works) – warning, that second one is the real thing, exactly what it says.

    Great idea, and awesome links.

    Posted by sophie | December 9, 2006, 1:41 am
  78. # AradhanaD Says:
    December 9th, 2006 at 1:12 am

    Pony, damn right – good thorough analysis of the subject… *end sarcasm*

    I don’t know what your meaning is here, Aradhana [name edited], but I find it completely astounding that you and Rich, neither of whom is aboriginal, would attempt to shout me down over the meaning of this word. This word is from Cree, an Algonkian language. I am aboriginal. My father was Cree.

    Posted by Pony | December 9, 2006, 1:59 am
  79. Pony, I commented specifically to your comment of shooting down Rich’s argument by stating he’s a “white man”… It’s quite a disingenuous tactic in an argument.

    I’ve never claimed to argue against you or that I know anything of the subject matter. I do know that words and meanings are debated and change through time. Again, I do not know the meaning of squaw nor do I claim to.

    Posted by AradhanaD | December 9, 2006, 2:25 am
  80. I am esquoa, I am Cree. The topic of discussion was a word that describes me AND women of my race, a word derived from my language, a word WHITE men (mis)appropriated, and now a WHITE man is telling me what it means, in a dissmissive manner, and YOU, a woman who was not in the conversation, jumps in and grabs this opportunity to attempt to ridicule me.

    There is something you’ve said that applies, though not to me. It is the word DISENGENUOUS.

    Posted by Pony | December 9, 2006, 2:43 am
  81. With no intention of pissing anyone off, what about the original topic? It’s an important issue that we should be looking at.
    So…:
    womensspace: “How incredibly great would it be, for example, if we were able to make it really, really difficult for people to find pornography. Consider the possibilities!”

    Me: “…Mis-connecting one-handed surfers is one thing, and a funny thing it is, but the theoretical future problem lies in people/groups muddying the waters so that if I put “manic depression” into Google I end up getting 300,000 pages of porn instead.”

    Posted by feartheseeds | December 9, 2006, 3:39 am
  82. I’m very sorry for the disruption feartheseeds. I apologize. The original topic is very important to me too.

    Posted by Pony | December 9, 2006, 3:46 am
  83. I don’t want to alienate anybody here, but I do feel as though indigenous women are the experts as to the language of their own people and that if and when there is some dispute, the benefit of the doubt must be given to the indigenous woman. I do not mean to take sides and I hope I don’t come across that way. I think all of you rock in so many ways and I want to continue to read your good writings and ideas.

    Heart

    Posted by womensspace | December 9, 2006, 6:47 am
  84. Heart
    On second thoughts, I have removed the sourduck link – because it is merely commentary on the event, not exactly participating in the spirit of it (faux pornie links linking to feminist/fun pages).

    However, I have added 2bSophora’s.

    Posted by stormcloud | December 9, 2006, 10:59 am
  85. Responsible? | love4_you@(deleted) | IP:

    “You Ding-a-Ling Women ! You build them…! Quit having babies as a way to get the love you seek and quit marketing yourself out as whores ! You create men as hungry dogs then blame them ? How dare you. Get some power women….”

    Fascinating how it’s always us “Ding-a-Ling Women” who are responsible for male irresponsibility and their sex drives.

    On a side note…I think I’m going to join in the porn fun.😉

    Posted by breatheinspirit | December 9, 2006, 1:38 pm
  86. LMAO!!!

    Some guy running a porn site just linked to one of my posts!

    He thinks the links are real!

    Toooo funny.

    I haven’t had this much fun in weeks.

    Blessings.

    Posted by breatheinspirit | December 9, 2006, 3:36 pm
  87. I stumbled on your blog from th wordpress main page, and I’ve found it pretty interesting and well done. But I think you’ve missed the problem this guy is foreseeing, though. Your objective is laudable, and I agree with you, but what are you going to do if some one (or group of some ones) decides they don’t like your site, and apply this tactic to you? Granted, there is no way to prevent this, so I suppose we have no choice but to live with the possibility that some one may knock us off the top of the search engines – not because they want to be on top, but because they want us not to be.

    Posted by Bert | December 10, 2006, 2:27 am
  88. “But suddenly, Google Bombing has become a controversial issue with wide-reaching implications for the integrity of the sacred net, because it might ZOMG affect The Sacred Precious Porn… Why has it become controversial all of a sudden? Why, because feminists are doing it, that’s why. Feminists can do no right, didn’t you know that? Everything a feminist does is wrong, even more so than the truism that everything a woman does is wrong.”

    Sorry to bring one post to another, but this is just paranoid. I’ll admit I hadn’t connected “Google-Bombing” to sites using WordPress Tags to confuse people looking for Spears’ Crotch, but just because the issue has surfaced again, only this time associated with a “feminist” website, does not automatically mean it’s an issue *because* the sites doing the misdirestion are “feminist”. Misdirecting, or “Google-Bombing” should be a concern for anyone with an activist website along with those who have nothing but naked eighteen-year old’s on theirs.

    Posted by feartheseeds | December 11, 2006, 12:05 am
  89. Amananta has got it spot on! Google bombing was great, fantastic, brilliant… until feminists started doing it!!! Now it’s the work of the devil.

    Posted by chibi-hannah-chan | December 11, 2006, 8:28 pm
  90. Soooo…. by that logic if every feminist became a fan of the NFL the league would fold? If feminists started wearing NFL jerseys in public men would throw rotten vegetables? Oooooookaaay. So ‘everything’ is enjoyed by everyone except feminists, then when feminists get involved that ‘everything’ becomes taboo and wrong. Alright. So, have I found the heart of the discussion now?

    Posted by feartheseeds | December 12, 2006, 3:15 am
  91. Nooo. Women are allowed, actually *required*, to be fans of men and cheerlead them as much as they want. The problem would come if women became the STARS of the NFL.

    Posted by Branjor | December 12, 2006, 3:46 am
  92. In order to play there has to be some involvement other than the standard cheerleader role. First women fans, second women leagues, then comes women playing professionally. Like the WNBA.

    But this was the point that was made by Chibi and Stormcloud and a few others: “Google bombing was great, fantastic, brilliant… until feminists started doing it!!! Now it’s the work of the devil.”
    So. Men and non-feminist women do it, everything’s great. Feminists use the technology against said men and it’s suddenly evil. Is that the point that is being made?

    Posted by feartheseeds | December 12, 2006, 4:00 am
  93. Fear the seeds, nobody is talking about football or random other kinds of whatever here. Amananta’s post was about what happens when google bombing begins to ZOMG, as Amananta writes, oh-so-remotely challenge men’s Sacred Holy Porn or their unfettered access to materials which display women’s nude bodies or nude body parts. Google bombing for other purposes? Eh. Google bombing around the pornography/objectification of women issue? No way! It is radical feminist women who are porn’s most outspoken and committed opponents and so no matter what we do, many to most men aren’t going to like it, even if they can get behind the same thing done by all sorts of other people, but which stays severely away from that one issue.

    So. This is Women’s Space. Here, the issues, topics, discussion are woman centered and women’s voices are given top priority. Men are guests and expected to conduct themselves respectfully or leave. Baiting, trolling, useless diversion, is not going to work for me, so please, don’t engage in it or I will ban you.

    Heart

    Posted by womensspace | December 12, 2006, 5:02 am
  94. This is what you wrote:
    “How incredibly great would it be, for example, if we were able to make it really, really difficult for people to find pornography. Consider the possibilities!”

    This is what I wrote:
    “Mis-connecting one-handed surfers is one thing, and a funny thing it is, but the theoretical future problem lies in people/groups muddying the waters so that if I put “manic depression” into Google I end up getting 300,000 pages of porn instead.”

    This was the response:
    “…Google bombing was great, fantastic, brilliant… until feminists started doing it!!! Now it’s the work of the devil.”

    I haven’t diverted, I’ve tried to refocus to your original point. Porn is not the issue, it’s a subplot. I didn’t immediately connect Google Bombing to your stunt-tagging. Okay. Now, do we discuss Google Bombing, or not?

    Posted by feartheseeds | December 12, 2006, 7:48 am
  95. Actually, no. Ban me. This is boring and you don’t need my input. I wish you all the best.

    Posted by feartheseeds | December 12, 2006, 7:54 am
  96. There ARE differences in how people perceive things according to their gender, if only because society raises us differently.

    Women still aren’t represented fully within the world’s power systems and until such time I think we have the right to claim some spaces as our own.

    And I think it’s important we involve men in the debate, though I agree that here, it has to be on women’s terms. Purely because so much in the world is framed within men’s perception already.

    I think its sometimes difficult for men to understand where women are coming from but equally difficult for women to know where men are coming from. It just is sometimes.

    But I get your point. You worry about being able to find important stuff (not porn)

    But the problem (as I see it) is that no matter what you try looking for on the internet you get bombarded by porn anyway. Look at the spam you receive. Look at how much important information is already clogged up by porn.

    Yeah some porn-king may try to out-do us by google-bombing back but quite frankly many of them do already. It’s pretty hard to find stuff on the net about women’s issues, sexuality, gynaecological stuff without finding porn on the first google page anyway.

    Whereas a man looking for information on vasectomies -say- is unlikely to find porn till way later in the search process.

    That’s been the reality since the net became a commercial possibility.

    I hesitate to actually post how you do it but there are already (unfortunately) quite simple ways to search for porn and avoid the protests and most smart men will probably have done so already.

    But would be nice to think most smart men have better things to do.

    Posted by puddlejumper | December 12, 2006, 9:03 am
  97. “I think its sometimes difficult for men to understand where women are coming from but equally difficult for women to know where men are coming from. It just is sometimes.”
    Agreed.

    “Women still aren’t represented fully within the world’s power systems and until such time I think we have the right to claim some spaces as our own.”
    Most definitely.

    If the idea is that being exposed to pornography or nudity when not expecting or wanting to see it constitutes sexual assault, there may be a convincing argument to that in specific situations… if a ‘spammer’ becomes a cyber-stalker for example. But there are spam filters and defences. It’s like walking at night through an unfamiliar neighbourhood, arm yourself accordingly. I’ve had the same Yahoo! account for five years, three years ago I stopped getting spam. I’ve never received porn-spam or any other spam at my home account, which has been active for six months or so. And, just now, I typed “vasectomies” into Google and went twenty pages without seeing any pornography before giving up. The same thing for “hysterectomy”.
    If Cheryl really doesn’t want to read me again she can bar me from the site and treat my posts as spam, and she can stay away from my site (again, if).
    The technology behind search engines and spam filters has changed dramatically in the past two years, and average surfing has become much safer.
    I just think we’re dealing with several different issues at the same time. There’s spam; Google Bombing; redirecting traffic; pornography; leaving spaces on the Internet for women to feel comfortable… is it pornography itself which is the problem, or the potential of being exposed to it?

    “There ARE differences in how people perceive things according to their gender, if only because society raises us differently.”
    Yes. And it also depends on which society you’re in…

    None of this is what I wanted to talk about tonight. All I wanted, from the beginning, was to discuss “google-bombing” or redirection. I am very tired and I will now redirect myself accordingly to a tech-centred blog.

    Posted by feartheseeds | December 12, 2006, 9:40 am
  98. Argh, somehow I just lost a huge comment I made and will have to wait til I get to work to rewrite it.

    Feartheseeds, for me the issue is, people looking for Spears’ crotch shots affects my blogging. They come here because I wrote a post six months ago, get pissed because this is an anti-pornography, radical feminist blog, leave nasty commentary, clog up my available search engine searches slots on my dashboard with “Britney Spears crotch,” elevate my daily hits to over 30,000, looking for something that isn’t here. When I type in something about Britney Spears, I’m writing about an actual flesh-and-blood woman, or issues her existence in the world raises (as with my old post). When they type in Britney Spears, they are writing about a crotch. Somewhere along the line there was a bait and switch, all right, but it wasn’t me, or radical feminists. It was those who turned human beings like Britney Spears into objects for their personal gratification, exploitation, whatever.

    My posts were in response to that original bait and swith that had nothing to do with me, which caused me only aggravation. Now it gets turned around and I get accused of all sorts of stuff, when you know what? I have every right in the world to blog intelligently about Britney Spears and the statue depicting her and all of that, without having to deal with hordes of people who, when they think about “Britney Spears” think no further than of her crotch, her body, or her as a sex object. But I DO have to think about that, I am forced to, by all of these millions of people who have made her and other women to *be* that. When I respond as I have, I am responding as an activist who is protesting what has been done to women like Britney Spears, and to all women. I am saying I have an equal right to define the words which pertain to me and to all women and I am going to enjoy my equal right right now by blogging MY thoughts about this whole fiasco which has brought all of these many people to my site.

    When women look at all the descriptive terms which pornographers use to lure people to their sites, we don’t see what the people lured see. We see real human beings, men, women, children, animals, being hurt. We don’t get the titillation factor, we get the grief factor, the rage factor, the “ohmygod this is so wrong factor.” Those terms are positive for the people who create and use them to find things; they are horribly negative for us, and not only negative, truly, truly destructive. I have tons of that stuff languishing in my Akismet spam queue, those horrifying horrifying links, which I have to look at every single day because I have to find out whether something legit was spammed and sent to the spam queue by accident. This stuff *rains down on our heads* as women opposed to it. We cannot escape it. And for this reason all of this outrage about us posting photos of little squirrels or kitties or whatever, all of this fear of google bombing seems preposterous and absurd to us. You’re worried about radical feminists luring people to photos of kitties, roosters, squirrels and trees in the forest? How about you worry about people being lured to all of the absolutely sick and perverse crap that bombards all of us every single day by those who traffic in pornography and in human lives?

    Well, I am going to think about this and say much more. I never conceived any plan to create false pornography links. That simply grew out of the absurdity we all saw here, where thousands of people just had to see this photograph, to the point that the whole blogosphere in terms of hits and other kinds of activity is totally skewed. You should be us, as radical feminist women, wanting to do a legitimate, intelligent, scholarly search that involves terms like “lesbian” or “rape” or “incest.” Dear goddess on high, there is the google bombing!! Because we go looking for these words in articles as activists working for women and girls and what we get is link after link after link of disgusting link to PORN. That’s, again, where the bait and switch is.

    Well, gotta go to work. I’ll be back.

    Heart

    Posted by womensspace | December 12, 2006, 1:54 pm
  99. Right on Heart!
    My posts were partly in response to you but also to this: in my blog I speak quite frankly about sexual abuse, both as it has affected me personally and as to how it affects other women. Men come there all the time under search terms which clearly show they are looking for pictures of little girls being violated. It makes me want to puke.
    And as I said in my post – pornographers ALREADY GOOGLE BOMB EVERYTHING. There is no topic you can do a search on without occasionally being unwittingly linked to a page full of porn links. Again, if you want to say this kind of thing is bad, start with the worst perpetrators of it, who are by all methods of measurement, pornographers.
    During my first few ventures onto the ‘net back in 1999 I tried to find information on healing from sexual assault and encountered in my fledgling searches many pages on how women who claimed they were raped are all liars or porn sites devoted to adoring descriptions of child rape, both of which traumatized me further at a very delicate time. I figure my page of links guaranteed to disappoint some people searching for ILLEGAL PORN is the turnabout that is fair play.

    Posted by Amananta | December 12, 2006, 7:48 pm
  100. Hey folks! Happy blogging to everyone. My email address is visible while the email address of others is not, even though the instructions to Leave a Reply indicate the email will not be published, but is required.

    The first post I submitted, which I admit was kind of rambling, is up even though it wasn’t “approved”, while the post wherein I modified my opinion, which WAS approved, is no longer visible.

    That doesn’t seem fair. Could you do me a favor then and remove all of it? I promise not to submit any comments for discussion here again.

    Posted by Stan | January 10, 2007, 8:41 pm
  101. Stan, sorry, I didn’t mean to leave your e-mail address in there and have deleted it. I apologize. I don’t normally delete posts once they’re approved so I’m not sure what might have happened with your modified post. Again, I apologize. And now that I’m re-reading, I see that you want me to remove the post you wrote which I pasted. I will do that.

    Heart

    Posted by womensspace | January 11, 2007, 12:09 am
  102. Just wanted to reply to say thank you, very much. Please continue the effort with your blog; the comments are all interesting, and many are thoughtful. Thank you for moderating it.

    Posted by Stan | January 11, 2007, 12:52 am

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Pingback: Feminist Law Professors » Blog Archive » Interesting Things To Read - December 8, 2006

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog Stats

  • 2,563,403 hits

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Archives

The Farm at Huge Creek, Michigan Womyn's Music Festival, The Feminist Hullaballoo

206672_10150156355071024_736021023_6757674_7143952_n

59143_424598116023_736021023_5026689_8235073_n

Afia Walking Tree

More Photos