Engines, thanks for sticking up for some of my colleagues. STOVL is something that will always be surrounded by misconceptions, woolly thinking and blatant lies. Obviously it is not unique in that regard, but I know something about STOVL so it's good to see that not everyone accepts the myths.
One minor point while I'm here re:
I freely admit that I preferred the Boeing X-32 design (simpler)
The X-32B was a pretty complicated beast in the end (did you ever count all the nozzles for lift, propulsion and control? Did you go back and count them again because between design reviews that I attended, sometimes the number changed? The F-35B has only four in total, rather fewer than the Harrier). The final Boeing PWSC submission, which I had a small part in assessing, was even worse. My view, and it is only my view, is that Boeing had to add more and more stuff to an over-simple original idea to try to make it work. LM started with a simple idea and stuck with it because basically it works. I'm not the world's greatest engineer and would not say I was better then those people at Boeing who tried so hard, but I do think there is some merit in the view that really good designs are marked by what can be designed out as they progress, not what has to be added in.