Robin Givhan owes Harriet Miers, women in general and every single reader of The Post an apology [Style, Oct. 28]. Her insulting, superficial, poorly written collection of thoughts about Miers's appearance says more about Givhan's lack of style than it says about Miers. The article is sexist, vapid and mean. A similar piece would never have been written about a male nominee for the Supreme Court. It adds nothing to our understanding of this accomplished executive. Its appearance on the day after Miers withdrew her nomination belittled her dignity.
-- Meg Hardon
Do all of you at The Post feel proud that you published that nasty little indulgence about Harriet Miers's eyeliner and business-like business suits? And what was the journalistic justification for that, anyway? Oh, I know. "We did it because we could."
She didn't deserve a seat on the Supreme Court, but she didn't deserve that article, either.
-- Elizabeth L. Nilson
Why is a 60-year-old woman fair game for Aaron McGruder [comics, Oct. 30]? Because she has wrinkles? I did not agree with her nomination, either, but I was appalled at McGruder's shallow and sexist "comic" strip. This strip was not "edgy," it was plain dumb. I have never seen a 60-year-old man's appearance discussed in the comics.
McGruder owes Harriet Miers an apology.
-- Katherine Drew