This image was lost some time after publication.

The media's collective recent obsession with Maureen Dowd, that vixenish redheaded flame-thrower at the Times, continued unabated this weekend, with further fluffery in The Washington Post and the inevitable (and entirely reasonably) blowback in The Boston Globe. (There was also a reader Q&A with The Dowd published on the Times site Friday — TimesSelect membership, apparently, allows you, too, to become part of her book-launch blitz.)

We're all tiring of this Dowdy explosion, of course. But none is as tired as our own vixenish red-headed flame-thrower, Wonkette. She has really had enough:

If there's one thing we've realized thanks to the Maureen Down mediagasm it's this: Thank God we aren't as smart as she is or else we'd never have found a husband. Saturday's Washington Post elaborated on Maureen's scary brilliance; except — bear with us — she does get some. Wha? As she told Howie Kurtz: "Any woman who criticizes men for a living — which I do because politics is still male-dominated — may have a harder time getting dates. I get plenty."

It's a fair question. All we keep hearing is about Dowd's terminal singledom, the price of her intelligence and power and persona. But it's not true. And now li'l Wonkie wants to know why.

So go take Wonkette's "Maureen Gets Plenty Because..." poll, and help us all figure out how the poor woman can be so smart and still so laid. If we're following all this hype correctly, the future of feminism depends on it.

Is Maureen Dowd Necessary? [Wonkette]
Sex & the Single Stiletto [WP]
Feminism Ain't Dead Yet [Boston Globe]