First of all, I would like to thank you very much for the information on your page concerning rape. As a loved one of a survivor, it is encouraging to know that there are people like you (collectively) willing to make a difference. The information you have posted is both educational and almost therapeutic. However, as pleased as I was about that portion, your political page disgusted me.

I'm a republican political consultant in New Mexico. I deplore the religious right far more than you ever could. During a recent campaign opposing the liberal, democrat speaker of the house, we took him to task for blocking the passage of Megan's Law (public notification of sex offenders). New Mexico is the only state currently not in compliance. His response was, "I see no reason to sentence people to life after they have served their full sentences." What does he think the survivors are sentenced to?? The feminist groups all endorsed him, despite the fact that his opponent was a woman who champions women's issues.

To further advocate my position against your political page I will use your own words: "I actually think that Clinton purposely didn't have sex with Monica Lewinsky so she wouldn't get pregnant and, therefore, she wouldn't have to "kill" her baby." While I won't even discuss the Clinton-scandal or the issue of abortion (I'm pro-choice), I do think that comment reflects your very tortured logic. You are defending a man who obviously has no respect for women. You defend people who believe that criminals should not be held accountable for their actions. You defend the left. What would your response be to Newt Gingrich sexually exploiting a young intern in his office?

My sister majored in women's studies at CU and was as liberal as they come. While her advocacy towards women's issues have not changed, her political affiliation has. She is now a republican because she has realized that being a feminist means standing up for what is right and condemning what is wrong. Until this group has the courage to be consistent in opposing issues and lobbying for what is right, you will forever be called "hypocritical". A fearless inventory should reveal the truthfullness of that label.

Thanks again for your rape information. It was very helpful. Best of luck. J

Thank you for your note to FEMINIST.COM--and for your "thanks." Besides sending thanks, I did want to clarify a few things from your note.

First, I don't know enough about the New Mexico case to add my own opinion. However, I do know something about political researh, including that even though some candidates appear to be "champions of women's rights" their voting records don't reflect this. Also, I do know that when other people, such as you, says things like "all the feminist groups endorsed him" this usually means the National Organization for Women and Political PACS such as pro-choice organizations. In doing political research, I know that there are many other groups who get overlooked as feminist groups because these aren't "household names," such as those working on mental health, those working on incest, etc.... Similar when PACS endorse candidates they only go after one-bottom line--i.e. their voting record on the environment--without giving attention to the interconnectedness of issues. This leaves us with a lot of confusion. So although I don't know about the New Mexico case, I do know that similar cases can be somewhat described by the above.

Second, when you refer to my words: "I actually think that Clinton purposely didn't have sex with Monica Lewinsky so she wouldn't get pregnant and, therefore, she wouldn't have to "kill" her baby." You have very much taken my words out of context as I was only responding to the absurdity and illogic of the question asker. I suggest you go back to the question and not just take this answer, which is more the questioner's words than my own. That aside, I don't "defend the left"--but am personally trying to ensure that I can make choices in my own life that are based on my own morality. And in response to you question, "[if] Newt Gingrich [was] sexually exploiting a young intern in his office?"--and assuming the intern described it as such, I would be outspoken against this situation. The intern in this case, Lewinsky, has not said that she was exploited. To the contrary, she has said that she had an affair with a man she cared deeply for and did her best to prolong that affair.

Third, I want to clarify that this is not a democratic site as you seem to allude to. I personally don't believe that "democrats are inherintly good" and "republicans bad." Working in feminism is the biggest indication that "sexism falls across party lines."

Thanks again for your note.

—Amy