We were so sad when we read Brandon Holley's editor's letter in the famous boob-containing new issue of Jane. (They took pictures of ladies' boobs!) "Unfortunately, someone on the list (yes, we know who you are) decided to circulate the names of these women — which we intended to keep anonymous — to a Web site," Brandon wrote. We're just "a Web site!" Sad already. Also, we thought it was sort of shady (but admirably deft!) the way Brandon glossed over the whole "we accidentally sent out a list of everyone's contact info, complete with phone numbers, to all boob shoot participants" aspect of events. Anyway, she continued: "The blogger bragged about having the list and threatened to print it once our issue was out. The idea was to embarrass our volunteers and make them worry about being scrutinized." Bragged! Threatened! We so did not!

Except... wait. We sorta did.

"Tell you what—we'll just hold on to this list and play mix and match later. You know, when we see the goods," we wrote when the list originally leaked. To us, it seemed clear that we were kidding. But in retrospect, it's easy to see how a concerned boob shoot participant could have interpreted our joke as a sincere promise to match up breasts and identities, especially in light of rumors that "paparazzi" would be staking out the shoot location (gross!) Anyway, we called Brandon and asked whether she hated us.

"We were sensitive and just wanted to protect the women involved. Women should be able to show their breasts without worrying that people will make fun of them," she told us. [Ed Note: Where are we, Big Sur? Whatever, sister!] Also! She apologized for lumping us in with tawdrier gossips.

Still, though we're the ones who should be apologizing to the heroic ladies who took off their tops in spite of adversity—adversity that was partially our fault! Gawker should so totally be a safe space for womyn, and we mean that in the most ironically detached but sort of deep down 100% sincere way.

Earlier: Jane Boob Coverage