Most of the time, Prudie says the same sort of thing I would. Occasionally I disagree...and those are generally the cases where she later amends her statement, interestingly enough.

My only issues with this particular column are not anything Ms. Yoffe said--rather, some of the comments she reportedly received.

First, on perfume: "...men...wondered why a woman would apply an expensive pheromonal signal if she didn't want someone to answer it: 'What is this world coming to! Women wear perfume to ATTRACT men!'" WRONG. I wear some kind of scent nearly all the time...because I like it. It pleases me and my own senses when I smell nice, and whether or not men also do is irrelevant to my enjoyment of perfume. The suggestion that smelling good is an open invitation to the sort of creepiness the letter-writer describes shows the same sort of attitude (to a lesser degree) as the "she was asking for it" defense from which more serious sexual harassment complaints often stem. Guys, this may be hard for you to hear, but it needs to be said: women frequently do, say, and wear things for reasons that have nothing to do with attracting or holding male attention. Yes, this includes straight women. Also...when did "feminist" become a slur?

I agree that perhaps foregoing the perfume at work (or switching scents) might be the simplest solution--and probably the one I would have tried first, were I the letter-writer--but that doesn't excuse the creepy co-worker. There's always the chance that Mr. Charming might find something else to annoy her with, however, so that may only be a short-term fix.

The masturbating four-year-old: I remember being pleasantly surprised by Prudence's sensitivity and sex-positive reply to that letter, but, sadly, less so by the nasty reactions which some people apparently had to her accepting and realistic attitude. This is a country where, unfortunately, masturbation (especially when females do it) is still widely considered to be something you just don't do instead of the healthy expression of sexuality that it really is. While it's true that conscious masturbation in young children can be a sign of sexual abuse, it isn't always...so, barring that, I think telling the child to do it in private for others' comfort instead of punishing her for her natural curiosity is going to create a better-adjusted adult who will have much more fulfilling sexual relationships than those of her parent-shamed contemporaries.

(It makes me sad that our society says that people with healthy sexual attitudes are the ones in the wrong...but I digress)

The disabled mother: I disagreed with Prudie's original advice, but the revision is good. I'm disappointed by how nasty people were to her over it, though--this may be the internet, and "Dear Prudence" may be a commercial product, but this isn't a cartoon. Emily Yoffe is a person with feelings that are just as valid as your own, and so are all her letter-writers and their families. Being online doesn't give you the right to be cruel. How would you feel if they were equally mean to you?

I'm glad to hear about "Wondering", though...I had been "wondering," myself, if she'd taken the (good) advice and what might have happened after. It's got to be nice seeing someone have such a positive result from something you suggested :)

"...men...wondered why a woman would apply an expensive pheromonal signal if she didn't want someone to answer it: 'What is this world coming to! Women wear perfume to ATTRACT men!'" WRONG. I wear some kind of scent nearly all the time...because I like it. It pleases me and my own senses when I smell nice, and whether or not men also do is irrelevant to my enjoyment of perfume."

You're kidding, right? Unless your nose is remarkably different than what the rest of us have, you don't smell your own perfume at all after a few minutes. You can kid yourself with the "smell nice" story, but the chemistry is there and for a good reason. Foregoing the "smell nice" stuff at work would be a blessing to your co-workers, male and female. If you are older and you are pouring the stronger stuff on, some of your coworkers have burning eyes and noses all day because of you.

"The disabled mother: I disagreed with Prudie's original advice, but the revision is good. ... this isn't a cartoon. Emily Yoffe is a person with feelings ...."

You're kidding again, right? Emily Yoffe and her staff get paid good money to write the stuff they put out here, and when they put a real stinker out there, they deserve to hear about it. It's not professional advice they ar selling here, it's entertainment.

No, I'm not kidding, on either point.

I don't wear scent to excess, and I never wear strong perfumes (I avoid florals, for instance), but I do wear just enough that I can sniff my wrist or neckline of my shirt throughout the day and get a faint whiff of whichever one I've chosen to wear. I often use alcohol-free scents, as well, so I doubt anyone's eyes are burning. My own sense of smell is fairly acute, and I'm prone to headaches, myself, so I'm not about to become the moving cloud of flowery powder that you seem to assume.

Incidentally, I'm 29.

I agree that the writers should get feedback on their work--I never disputed that. If I didn't think people should speak up, I wouldn't have done so myself. You've missed my point. What I was talking about was the nastiness of the replies. Is it really necessary to call someone names to show disagreement with them? You disagree with me, and haven't stooped to attacks on my character, so, clearly, it's possible to let someone know what one thinks and to get one's point across clearly without being cruel about it. It seems to me that it would be a lot more effective (and mature) to say, "Hey, I think that's bad advice, and here's why..." than to call someone names, and was disappointed that so many people apparently forgot (or never learned) that. The fact that this is entertainment doesn't negate the humanity of the people behind it, nor does it absolve commenters of responsibility for their words and actions.