I now see that Glenn Reynolds' New York Times Op-Ed "A Rifle in Every Pot" (which I first heard read over the air yesterday by G. Gordon Liddy) has now made it to the number two position in the New York Times. (Last night it was at Number Three.)

Number Two position places it just behind "51% of Women Are Now Living Without Spouse," still at Number One.

Hmmm.....

I understand that modern women don't need husbands, and I'm aware of that old feminist analogy, "A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle."

But I think this is a guns 'n' butter issue for all women, especially unmarried women. If roughly half of all women need can be said to not need men as much as much as fish need bicycles, don't those in other half need a rifle in every pot?

And why limit it to that half? From either a feminist or a non-feminist perspective, I think both halves need guns -- and much more than fish need bicycles!

But what would it take to convince the activists who think married women are like fish on bicycles?

MORE: If I hadn't read James Lileks' analysis of the 51 percent husbandless class, I'd have never known that it took a total of five reporters to write that one article:

The real story reflects on the newspaper industry, and it comes after the story's conclusion.

Ariel Sabar, Brenda Goodman and Maureen Balleza contributed reporting.

It took four people to write and report that piece. Keep that in mind the next time you hear a tale about ruthless cutbacks in the newsroom.

Hey wait a second. With five reporters, why didn't it occurr to one of them that single women might be interested in safety?