As always people are entitled to infer whatever they please from my articles – and I will neither confirm nor deny assumptions. You may be right, you may be wrong – but it doesn’t matter.

As you’ve said, there are many ways to flip convention and I chose to stick as close to the original language as possible – not because what the writer was saying wasn’t valid. It was – but simply an angry cry of rage, whilst cathartic, doesn’t forward the discussion. I have no idea why it was curated. I fully understand the desire to write rage fuelled articles about whole subsections of society – I just don’t see the point of endorsing them and rewarding them financially.

Your wider point about the imbalance of power is definitely a good one. No reversal of a power imbalance will ever have the same effect – but it does show up the quality of the ideas being presented. As with the Avengers Booty Assemble and reversed historical adverts I’ve seen. Such a parody is always worthwhile when it makes light of the flimsy concepts used by advertisers to entice men to purchase things.

This article wasn’t curated – despite having a point to make. The first half is decidedly unpleasant and unjustified and that’s probably what sealed its fate…. the original was unpleasant and justified but shouldn’t have been promoted. The unpleasantness is what Penguins object to – whether we’re male, female or other. Thanks for your comment and forwarding the discussion, and you are not the first commenter to presume maleness. I think It’s currently 50/50 :o)