To Whom It My Concern;

Greetings from Minneapolis! My name is Janice Howser. I am a feminist and an activist for womyn's studies (yes, brothers and sisters, I've taken the "man" out of "woman"... free at last). I make my living giving lectures to high schools and community colleges about feminism and all its virtues. And in my free time I'm writing a novella about a forbidden love affair between two female pirates during the late 1700s.

Since I'm pouring over my novella every second I get, I spend a lot of time at my computer (a black macbook pro... I can overlook Apple's use of poor children in China because they're simply the only hardware company who cares about Womyn's issues). When procrastinating from my novel, I either spend my time on 2nd Life (in the amazing lesbian cross-stitching/Jam Band communities) or surfing the World Wide Web. And that's how I stumbled on your "interesting" site.

Let me state right off the bat, even though I'm a feminist and an activist for womyn's issues, I'd surprise you. I love a good dirty joke as much as the next feminist/womyn's activist... like did you ever hear the one about the three feminists and the ear of corn? They used it to have SEX!

But there's a line between a fun, dirty joke and bigotry. And it's my professional opinion (I AM a paid feminist after all) that Doubleviking.com has crossed this line.

Let me present my case. First, let's tackle something obvious... your "Hot or Not" feature. As I understand it, each day, use Google Image search and plug in the name of your favorite straight female celebrity (heaven forbid you featured a "Hot or Not" on a gay man or woman... but I digress). And then you place two pictures of said celebrity side by side... one where they are looking "hot" and one where they are looking "not."

Well, fellas, this is truly offensive. Oftentimes the "not hot" pictures are simply pictures of these celebrities without their makeup... perhaps even when they haven't showered and maybe have acne all over their cheek, like this picture of Cameron Diaz here.

 Well I'm sorry, but I think Ms. Diaz looks most beautiful when she bears her sweet, sweet imperfections. When she's done up with makeup and hair extensions she looks gift-wrapped for typical male domination. "Rape me and then ignore me!" her done up face is screaming. But in these "au natural" pictures, she looks like a caring mother type... someone more interested in cozying up at the hearth at the Minneapolis Women's Shelter and discussing Nigerian Female Circumcision over a warm glass of Chai.

 Let's move on, because I'm a little too moist right now and I'm writing this from work.

Anyways, the offensive nature of your site doesn't stop with the "Hot or Not" feature, guys!!! Don't get me started on "Hi-5"! I'm not EVEN gonna tell you what's so screwed up about that feature!

Wait, I just found out my "Great Female Inventions of the Dark Ages" lecture doesn't start for another 30 minutes... so, heck, I WILL tell you what's screwed up with the Hi-5 feature! The very nature of these articles--listing out 5 women who are the "hottest" of whatever category you "gentlemen" choose is textbook chavanism. It's very reminiscent of a Malaysian engagement practice that my Womyn's group is campaigning against... these Malaysian pigs visit a shaman who reads their charts and palms and list a single attribute he believes represents them... be it art, cooking, beating his children. Then the Malaysian men go back to their tribe and gather the five hottest girls who embody this attribute and marry all five of them.

Can't you see? Your "Hi-5" articles are tantamount to female slavery! You and your readers must at least admit that if you're not promoting female slavery with these articles, you are at least tacitly endorsing it. Have you no shame?

But I'm sorry... the most offensive feature on your site has to be the "International Babe of the Day" article you post every morning. Do you know where the word "Babe" comes from? It's a latin term that grew out of the Roman empire. Land owners would hire retired soldiers to protect their land (they were the rent-a-cops of  their era) and oftentimes these soldiers would take up residence on the land they were protecting. Of COURSE these soldiers had their manly needs... something that was denied to them while they were busy protecting the land. So "Babes" were brought in to take care of these" needs." 

Babes, basically, were women tossed into slavery and forced to sexually service these men, 24-7 (or XXIV-VII, as the Romans would say). I'm glad we as a society have come very far from these ancient, evil times... and yet, for some odd and rather evil reason, you see fit to glorify a time when an entire class of women's only goal in life was to finish up quick and try to not spill too much on their chins.

You people sicken me.

If you have any decency and respect womyn even the tiniest of amounts, I suggest you immediately remove your site from the internet. Now you'll excuse me... these panties won't change themselves.

If you don't like what I have to say, you can always email me, you cowards.

jhowserheartsgals@gmail.com