Your Letters
17:59 UK time, Tuesday, 10 July 2007
I found your piece, astoundingly sexist, poorly researched and deeply offensive. What next? A light-hearted piece on "Why women can't park" or "Why most women are vain and shallow" perhaps? I think not! It really was pathetic!
Jason Datt, Bracknell Barkshire
To those who emailed on the "Words that men don't use" article claiming that it was sexist, can I suggest they stick to serious news, rather than wandering into the fun Magazine section of the site and annoying me.
basil Long, Newark Notts
Ok, after the reaction to the "What women talk about" article, I'm slightly reluctant to proffer a comment on .
Stig, London, UK
I was wondering what the baby mammoth had found in the story - . Another disappointing headline.
Sue, Lufbra, UK
would indeed be simple if we all pronounced the words the same. Your example of butiful for instance, surely Bernard Matthews would spell it bootiful? Which is one of the reasons for having consistent spelling if at times it does not make sense.
Sue Dove, Solihull
Why do I feel like an atheist at a happy, clappy revivalist meeting when I look at the members of Facebook. Dammit, they've mostly got all their own hair and teeth! Where's their world weary cynicism and grumpiness? Perhaps it says more about Facebook than about the MM?
Simon Rooke, Nottingham UK
I'm getting tired of hearing that the 21/7 , as if it's in some way different from any other high-protein flour, such as bread flour. When I make chapattis at home, guess what? I use bread flour from a supermarket.
Carol Moores, Hyde, UK
Re . I suspect it will be called "Springfield".
Johnny, York, England
Re Owen Mcmanus' letter about whether cigarettes should carry a "for outdoor use only" warning – no, they shouldn't. I can still smoke cigarettes in my own home. Until the health fascists find a way to ban that at least for "my own good".
Graham, London
The 
