i speak because i can

an old entry on belle de jour's infamous blog has inspired me to fire this old thing up after my unintentional hiatus of eight months... lucky i have no regular readership.
belle was discussing anonymity amongst female writers in response to a columnists claim that not using your own name was somehow anti-feminist.
it's an interesting point. i hadn't really thought about it but the female writers use of a nom de plume is a long and noble tradition, dating back even further than george eliot and the bronte/bells. In fact, there's really no way of knowing how many ancient authors were actually females in disguise. before the days of paparazzi, identity theft and the internet it would be pretty easy to get away with it. but as to why it's done...
originally, of course, it was because women had trouble getting published, or being taken seriously as writers. nowadays, however, in the "post-feminist" age, are nom de plumes used to disassociate oneself with potentially controversial ideas? or to avoid fame? perhaps the question should be why men are more likely to publish under their real name. might it not just be a matter of the stereotypical "male ego"? or a way to pick up...