Why would a man ever get married?

[JSB]

I think this issue is more complex than most postings here seem to reflect, but I'll save that for later.

Just to stir things up more, read how a feminist icon criticizes some of the results of feminism (while praisng it as a whole). Note that her goal is social and legal equality, but she claims that certain aspects of the feminist movement have actually hindered this.

(BTW, this in no way support the "submission" of women).


From The Guardian 8/14/2001

The novelist Doris Lessing yesterday claimed that men were the new silent victims in the sex war, "continually demeaned and insulted" by women without a whimper of protest.
Lessing, who became a feminist icon with the books The Grass is Singing and The Golden Notebook, said a "lazy and insidious" culture had taken hold within feminism that revelled in flailing men.

Young boys were being weighed down with guilt about the crimes of their sex, she told the Edinburgh book festival, while energy which could be used to get proper child care was being dissipated in the pointless humiliation of men.

"I find myself increasingly shocked at the unthinking and automatic rubbishing of men which is now so part of our culture that it is hardly even noticed," the 81-year-old Persian-born writer said yesterday.

"Great things have been achieved through feminism. We now have pretty much equality at least on the pay and opportunities front, though almost nothing has been done on child care, the real liberation.

"We have many wonderful, clever, powerful women everywhere, but what is happening to men? Why did this have to be at the cost of men?

"I was in a class of nine- and 10-year-olds, girls and boys, and this young woman was telling these kids that the reason for wars was the innately violent nature of men.

"You could see the little girls, fat with complacency and conceit while the little boys sat there crumpled, apologising for their existence, thinking this was going to be the pattern of their lives."

Lessing said the teacher tried to "catch my eye, thinking I would approve of this rubbish".

She added: "This kind of thing is happening in schools all over the place and no one says a thing.

"It has become a kind of religion that you can't criticise because then you become a traitor to the great cause, which I am not.

"It is time we began to ask who are these women who continually rubbish men. The most stupid, ill-educated and nasty woman can rubbish the nicest, kindest and most intelligent man and no one protests.

"Men seem to be so cowed that they can't fight back, and it is time they did."

Lessing claimed that much of the "great energy" whipped up by feminism had "been lost in hot air and fine words when we should have been concentrating on changing laws.

"We have got the pay but only real equality comes when child care is sorted out and it hasn't been yet, well not for those who really need it anyway".

...

[yossarian]

Originally Posted by Indiana

Okay, so just to clarify, in future when you say 'all' or 'every', you actually mean 'some' or 'most'.

When I say "every little girl wants to be a princess" this is poetic language. Only an idiot would think that 100% of people are the same. The point is that the far far majority of little girls do infact want to be a princess and they like all the Disney princess, Princess Diaries, etc etc crap. The demographic speaks pretty clearly as to what they are interested in. A cursory evaluation of the best selling toys and movies attests to this.

Despite the feminist campaign to get girls to play with trucks, a huge proportion of girls are still born with a desire to be a princess, and only are educated out of this once they reach an age where their cognitive abilities are advanced enough to be vulnerable to intellectual propaganda.

[bluemoon]

I don't get it. Are you saying men are strong, or that they're weak, Yoss? They seem to be "silenced" quite easily.

I get the fundamentalist vibe because many of your argument patterns (even down to bringing out ol' Orwell! He would turn in his grave!) mirror those of fundies who try to argue various forms of bigotry, from anti-gay to anti evolution. Also the whole "women gain power from being submissive", is directly out of an epistle to Paul (which actually many Biblical historians believe was not written by Paul), otherwise known as a huge crock.

Indiana's right, Yoss, you continually make sweeping generalizations about womankind. How long till you're published in a reputable journal? And how is it that you know so much about women? Do you have friends? A long term relationship? Just curious, since you seem to know so much.

I didn't read several of your sources, but I do notice that many of them are at least 20 years old. Anything recent? Anything you care to link to that I can read? I'm a busy woman, I don't have time to dig around in old textbooks for dusty old information about dusty old gender roles. Plus, judging from your responses to me, you haven't read anything I've given you.

And yes, Cylon, actually I would expect my guy friends to speak up. Some are very close friends and we've had heated debates on other issues we differ on. One of them is my brother, who's a college football player and quite the ladies' man (but never feels the need to confine smart women to cleaning jobs). He was raised in the same house with the same equality minded parents. Maybe the difference with my guy friends and colleagues is that they genuinely respect women and the choices they make, rather than sermonize about how much damage they're causing by getting an education (Orwell definitely thought that education should be controlled and only given to a select few, of course).

[Indiana]

Originally Posted by Dan.Linehan

Actually, Rihanna went back to him for the exact fairy-tale reason you endorse:

Ah yes, I can just imagine the happy scene - Rihanna and Chris surrounded by grandchildren, going through some old photo albums. "Oh, and look, kids... these clippings are from the time that Grandpa beat the cr@p out of Grandma, but she forgave him because she realised that her words had been hurting him far worse than his teeth and fists hurt her."

It's a dream come true for every little girl.

[bluemoon]

Also Yoss, responding to your assertion that girls are "born" with the desire to be princesses, you might want to actually read Myths of Gender, by Anne Fausto-Sterling. She finds a huge lack of scientific substance behind gender role claims. She's a professor at Brown, in case you were wondering. As far as intelligence goes, read The Mismeasure of Man, by Stephen Jay Gould. Gould states that as intelligence tests placed disadvantaged groups, such as women or Asians, above the group holding power, those tests were gotten rid of and replaced with a test that reinforced the status quo.

And just because I chastised you for not providing linkables, here's a report from the U.S. Department of Education, basically saying gender roles are bull. http://www.campbell-kibler.com/Stereo.pdf I'm sure you'll come up with a conspiracy theory about it, but there you are.

[Dan.Linehan]

Originally Posted by yossarian

The point is that the far far majority of little girls do infact want to be a princess and they like all the Disney princess, Princess Diaries, etc etc crap. The demographic speaks pretty clearly as to what they are interested in. A cursory evaluation of the best selling toys and movies attests to this.

Which is it?

Does the social narrative encourage girls to become princesses as you state here? Or masculine and dominant like Hillary Clinton as you stated earlier?

[carenkh]

How much time have you spent with real humans in their real lives, Yossarian? Because every single person I know is totally unique in terms of their balance of masculine/feminine traits. Every single one.

You keep bringing up Raymond as your example - but there is not a real man in any real family that I know that acts like he does. He's a fictional character. The men I know, who at this point in my life are mostly fathers, work with their wives to communicate and run the family effectively, together. How many married couples have you spent real time with? Or is all your data taken from sitcoms and conspiracy sites?

Your complete dismissal of the history of women's oppression further confirms my thoughts you've done very little living in the real world. How many older women do you know, who wanted to be doctors, but were only allowed to be nurses? Or who weren't allowed to work out of the home at all? Who weren't allowed to vote? Real women, not stories or studies?

Most people I hang out with - women included - are continually looking inside, to see what makes them a better person, what makes them more aligned with joy. For some, that looks like a traditional model of motherhood. For some, that looks like a fast-rising career path. For some, it means being a sensitive, loving stay-at-home Dad.

Get out of your head and into the world. A world you effectively keep at bay with your fears and proclamations about how things should be. People are beautiful and amazing and complicated and unpredictable; you can't put us in boxes, no matter how much more comfortable that might make you.

[Indiana]

Originally Posted by yossarian

When I say "every little girl wants to be a princess" this is poetic language. Only an idiot would think that 100% of people are the same. The point is that the far far majority of little girls do infact want to be a princess and they like all the Disney princess, Princess Diaries, etc etc crap. The demographic speaks pretty clearly as to what they are interested in. A cursory evaluation of the best selling toys and movies attests to this.

Despite the feminist campaign to get girls to play with trucks, a huge proportion of girls are still born with a desire to be a princess, and only are educated out of this once they reach an age where their cognitive abilities are advanced enough to be vulnerable to intellectual propaganda.

"The fog comes/on its little cat feet". This is poetic language.

"Every little girl wants to be a princess." "Every early feminist regrets what she has done and wishes she had spent her life looking after her family." This is not poetic language. They are bald statements and invite critique. Trying to change the game afterwards by redefining words (feminism, for example) and claiming things were meant 'poetically' is dishonest. Describing anyone who doesn't 'get it' as an idiot is rude, and does nothing to further the discussion.

[carenkh]

Originally Posted by yossarian

It's pretty telling that Rihanna went back to him. Society condemns her for it but maybe she recognizes that physical bruises are actually less damaging than emotional and psychological bruises.

Chris Brown himself was abused as a kid and so when he lashed out it was an involuntary response coming from deep psychological wounds. Should we crucify him for not being perfect? Rihanna seems to say no.

Women get away with the most heinous emotional abuse of their husbands. In reality, the physical component of any abuse is less than the emotional damage. If Rihanna is emotionally comfortable enough to return to Chris, then that is a sign that the emotional damage was not nearly as severe as the physical damage made it look. We have no idea what kind of abuse Chris was inflicted with because the media considers it impossible for men to be abused by women.

Domestic Abuse Myths

[yossarian]

Originally Posted by carenkh

How much time have you spent with real humans in their real lives, Yossarian? Because every single person I know is totally unique in terms of their balance of masculine/feminine traits. Every single one.

You keep bringing up Raymond as your example - but there is not a real man in any real family that I know that acts like he does. He's a fictional character. The men I know, who at this point in my life are mostly fathers, work with their wives to communicate and run the family effectively, together. How many married couples have you spent real time with? Or is all your data taken from sitcoms and conspiracy sites?

Your complete dismissal of the history of women's oppression further confirms my thoughts you've done very little living in the real world. How many older women do you know, who wanted to be doctors, but were only allowed to be nurses? Or who weren't allowed to work out of the home at all? Who weren't allowed to vote? Real women, not stories or studies?

Most people I hang out with - women included - are continually looking inside, to see what makes them a better person, what makes them more aligned with joy. For some, that looks like a traditional model of motherhood. For some, that looks like a fast-rising career path. For some, it means being a sensitive, loving stay-at-home Dad.

Get out of your head and into the world. A world you effectively keep at bay with your fears and proclamations about how things should be. People are beautiful and amazing and complicated and unpredictable; you can't put us in boxes, no matter how much more comfortable that might make you.

I agree that people are unique in terms of their balance of yin/yang traits. The statistics confirm this. I fully agree that people are trying to improve themselves, to find satisfaction in the world. I am doing this myself.

You can easily change your yin/yang balance. People have control over it. For me personally, the question is not, "what is my yin/yang balance?" the question is "what is the optimal yin/yang balance?"

I ask "what is optimal" because I know I can change it because I do it all the time. I can change my yin/yang balance at will with a short meditation. It's not a fixed thing, it's something I consciously choose.

There is nothing wrong with being a stay at home dad, or a working woman, and I have no problem with these things. The question is what produces a successful, happy society, and in particular what produces satisfying relationships. That's what this thread is about.

Most relationships end in divorce. This isn't just a statistic, I see this in countless people I know. I see this in countless unhappy marriages, countless fighting couples, etc. I still think all of these humans are beautiful humans, I full well see the beauty in a human being who is striving to find a place in the world, and so on. I have nothing against anyone no matter how much they think I'm an idiot or whatever.

This thread was started because someone was displeased with his life. You are telling him, "Don't change anything." I disagree, and I think the person who says "Why would a man want to get married" disagrees as well.

Yes, the earth is a nice place, and I really don't mind it. Just because I'm working to change something does not mean I'm miserable. I have no fear of the world. If feminism didn't exist, what would I rail against? Feminism gives me the opportunity to do the stuff I'm doing, so in a way I have to be grateful. If sorrow didn't exist, there would be no joy.

Anyway, once again, you are a person who would suffice to tell someone who is suffering, "Things aren't so bad. Cheer up!" and expect that these empty words will help. People are dissatisfied with the modern world because the modern world has major negative distortions. This is a healthy reaction.

It is no measure of health to be sane in an insane world.

[yossarian]

Originally Posted by carenkh

Domestic Abuse Myths

I completely disagree with that article, and the arguments made aren't really arguments, they are just statements with no elaboration.

People make mistakes, but it doesn't count as a mistake to punch someone? What? Of course it does.

Chris said he was sorry but it doesn't count? What? If a murderer can apologize for a murder, and mean it, then Chris can apologize for this and mean it. He probably feels really terrible.

Victims become perpetrators. This is the cycle of violence. Forgiveness ends the cycle.

[Dan.Linehan]

Originally Posted by yossarian

Chris said he was sorry but it doesn't count? What? If a murderer can apologize for a murder, and mean it, then Chris can apologize for this and mean it. He probably feels really terrible.

It amazes me you can be this naive about domestic violence.

The cycle of abuse is to apologize for the abuse, then do it again. See domestic violence recidivism rates.

[Dan.Linehan]

Originally Posted by yossarian

Most relationships end in divorce. This isn't just a statistic, I see this in countless people I know. I see this in countless unhappy marriages, countless fighting couples, etc.

And you think these couples would be happier if.... what exactly?

[Indiana]

Originally Posted by yossarian

I completely disagree with that article, and the arguments made aren't really arguments, they are just statements with no elaboration.

People make mistakes, but it doesn't count as a mistake to punch someone? What? Of course it does.

Chris said he was sorry but it doesn't count? What? If a murderer can apologize for a murder, and mean it, then Chris can apologize for this and mean it. He probably feels really terrible.

Victims become perpetrators. This is the cycle of violence. Forgiveness ends the cycle.

Um, no. Forgiveness in quite a few cases of domestic violence actually only results in the cycle continuing to be perpetrated over and over until the victim gets out for good, or ends up dead.

Not going back to the guy who gave you two black eyes and bite marks on your hand - now THAT is an effective way to break the cycle.

[yossarian]

Originally Posted by Indiana

"The fog comes/on its little cat feet". This is poetic language.

"Every little girl wants to be a princess." "Every early feminist regrets what she has done and wishes she had spent her life looking after her family." This is not poetic language. They are bald statements and invite critique. Trying to change the game afterwards by redefining words (feminism, for example) and claiming things were meant 'poetically' is dishonest. Describing anyone who doesn't 'get it' as an idiot is rude, and does nothing to further the discussion.

You misread my statement. I was saying that anyone who thinks "everyone" is something, is an idiot. So if I were to say "everyone is the same" this is obviously false.

"Every little girl wants to be a princess"

I can see how this would be confusing if you're reading my words with the assumption that I'm a complete idiot. But if you give me the slightest amount of credit, you wouldn't assume I literally mean everyone.

So yes, literally speaking, which is not a good way to speak, when I say "every" or "all" I don't actually mean literally 100%. If I wrote in some kind of incredibly verbose and dry prose no one would read the crap anyway.

This is nitpicking. The meaning is very clear, the spirit of "every little girl wants to be a princess" is very clear. I don't literally mean princess either. I don't literally mean that girls want to be born of a royal family and marry the heir of some throne in a monarchy. It's a poetic way of speaking. I'm using the symbol of the princess to represent the feminine archetype that all children instantly and instinctually recognize.

And by "all children" i mean "some very high proportion well above 50%, I don't have the exact number, you pedant"

[yossarian]

Originally Posted by Indiana

Um, no. Forgiveness in quite a few cases of domestic violence actually only results in the cycle continuing to be perpetrated over and over until the victim gets out for good, or ends up dead.

Not going back to the guy who gave you two black eyes and bite marks on your hand - now THAT is an effective way to break the cycle.

Well what I can say. I disagree with the feminist line your towing. I think men are human too and they can change, I think men can make mistakes and be sorry for their actions. And since Chris Brown is now in therapy, I think he will probably make progress.

I think Rihanna is an intelligent human being who can make her own decisions, and in this case she seems to agree with me. You seem to want to take away her power by denying her the right to be with this guy.

[Dan.Linehan]

Originally Posted by yossarian

I think Rihanna is an intelligent human being who can make her own decisions,

As long as that decision is for her to be submissive to her husband, even if he tries to kill her.

[Indiana]

Originally Posted by yossarian

You misread my statement. I was saying that anyone who thinks "everyone" is something, is an idiot. So if I were to say "everyone is the same" this is obviously false.

"Every little girl wants to be a princess"

I can see how this would be confusing if you're reading my words with the assumption that I'm a complete idiot. But if you give me the slightest amount of credit, you wouldn't assume I literally mean everyone.

So yes, literally speaking, which is not a good way to speak, when I say "every" or "all" I don't actually mean literally 100%. If I wrote in some kind of incredibly verbose and dry prose no one would read the crap anyway.

This is nitpicking. The meaning is very clear, the spirit of "every little girl wants to be a princess" is very clear. I don't literally mean princess either. I don't literally mean that girls want to be born of a royal family and marry the heir of some throne in a monarchy. It's a poetic way of speaking. I'm using the symbol of the princess to represent the feminine archetype that all children instantly and instinctually recognize.

And by "all children" i mean "some very high proportion well above 50%, I don't have the exact number, you pedant"

Ah, I see I did misread your statement, and for that I apologise.

But I don't think this is nitpicking. You continually use all/every language when some/most is more accurate. Accurate language doesn't have to be dry or verbose - in fact, clear writing is far more readable and less frustrating for most people.

I understand your intention behind the 'every little girl wants to be a princess' but I disagree with your extrapolations from it. Yes, princesses are icons that are held up for little girls to aspire to. How far back this goes I don't know, but I imagine such tales have been around for centuries. More than a female archetype that should be generally aspired to, I'm sure they represent a fantasy version of a life of privilege, beauty and leisure. It's essentially the same as dreaming of winning the lottery, or finding a genie in a bottle.

But childhood stories don't by any means paint a useful picture of adult aspirations. As those little girls grow up, they find many other things to aspire to. Personally, I'd find sitting around in a drafty castle, wearing a frilly dress and sparkly headgear, waiting for my prince to come rather dull. No wonder little girls go out and find other things to do that interest them!

You may think I'm nitpicky and pedantic, but it's hard not to take issue when you claim to speak for most (if not all, as you have actually written) women when you're a) not a woman yourself and b) you don't appear to have any solid evidence for your claims.

It occurs to me that you've decided you want a very traditional relationship, with a submissive stay-at-home wife. That's all well and good and I'm sure there are women out there who want that too. But today there are far fewer of them than there used to be. Perhaps you're not having a very good strike rate finding your idealised woman, and your solution is to try to convince women at large that they should want what you want - nay, even that they DO want what you want - they just don't realise it.

[Indiana]

Originally Posted by yossarian

Well what I can say. I disagree with the feminist line your towing. I think men are human too and they can change, I think men can make mistakes and be sorry for their actions. And since Chris Brown is now in therapy, I think he will probably make progress.

I think Rihanna is an intelligent human being who can make her own decisions, and in this case she seems to agree with me. You seem to want to take away her power by denying her the right to be with this guy.

I don't want to deny anyone the right to make their own decisions, and I'm not denying the possibility that Chris Brown is repentant and will reform.

But I feel totally entitled to express my opinion that going back to someone who beat you badly enough for you to call the police doesn't, on the face of it, seem like a great decision. This appears to be an opinion shared by many people a lot closer to the situation than I am, if not the direct participants.

I (probably like most people) have hung around in relationships that weren't working (none involving abuse of any kind) far longer than I should have out of guilt or reluctance to hurt the other person or fear of change, so I can understand how emotions can lead you to do things that aren't necessarily in your best interests. Only time will tell whether this is the case with Rihanna and Chris.

[Indiana]

Originally Posted by yossarian

Well what I can say. I disagree with the feminist line your towing. I think men are human too and they can change, I think men can make mistakes and be sorry for their actions. And since Chris Brown is now in therapy, I think he will probably make progress.

I think Rihanna is an intelligent human being who can make her own decisions, and in this case she seems to agree with me. You seem to want to take away her power by denying her the right to be with this guy.

Wait, how is 'do not indulge people who abuse you' a feminist line? If this was a woman-beats-man case, or a case of emotional abuse, I would be saying the same thing.

[cylon]

Originally Posted by Indiana

As for the tank top.... do you realise that those singlets are traditionally known as 'wife-beaters'? The slogan was an ironic statement.

Yeah, I was aware of the irony. It's saying implied violence against men is "cute" and fun, it's ok when a girl says stuff like that. It's empowering.

[yossarian]

There's really no reason to make it so personal. The truth is that in my own life, I've tried both ways, and it's so incredibly different and much happier when I create a relationship with gender polarity.

With one girl, we were together for about 14 months, and it started off as a typical feminist relationship because at the time I was basically a feminist. I treated her like a male sex partner, in the same way that gays probably treat their sex partners. I treated her like my best friend, but with the added benefit of sex, lol.

About 4-5 months later I started to consider the idea of gender polarity, and so I experimented. All I did was change myself, I didn't tell her a whiff of all this theorizing. I just changed myself by acting more masculine and assuming she would act feminine. Not only did I change, she completely changed, and the relationship was transformed seemingly overnight. When I saw the power of this approach that was very strong evidence that what I'm dealing with is biologically rooted - not social conditioning. She was much happier after this change, whereas before she was very moody and seemed kind of rudderless. All I did was change my own masculine/feminine balance to have more yang, and it created a totally different relationship dynamic that was much more satisfying to both of us.

That was almost 8 years ago.

Since then I have discovered a lot of data that supports the biological basis for gender roles. In my opinion, the princess archetype is spiritually rooted and something we are familiar with on a soul-level. Yes, I'm a religious nut sort of. Not Christian or anything, but just like Erin Pavlina I am fully convinced of the reality of the spirit, reincarnation, and other stuff. All mystical teachings teach about gender polarity, whether it is Eastern, Western, or whatever.

Lots of science points towards a biological basis for gender polarity, not just a social basis. I posted some of this evidence already. [edit: I removed "all" and replaced with "lots of". See! Men can change!]

I still believe in freedom, I think people should be able to do what they want and the government should not stop them. But I also sincerely believe, based on evidence and study, that most women would be happier if she added more yin to herself in the context of her relationships. Why not give it a 30 day trial and see what happens?

[bluemoon]

Originally Posted by yossarian

I completely disagree with that article, and the arguments made aren't really arguments, they are just statements with no elaboration.

People make mistakes, but it doesn't count as a mistake to punch someone? What? Of course it does.

Chris said he was sorry but it doesn't count? What? If a murderer can apologize for a murder, and mean it, then Chris can apologize for this and mean it. He probably feels really terrible.

Victims become perpetrators. This is the cycle of violence. Forgiveness ends the cycle.

I'm currently representing a woman who was the victim of domestic violence. I have to respect our confidentiality, otherwise there's a whole lot I could tell you about her life that flies in the face of what you're saying. I will say, though, that gender roles are very pronounced in her country of origin.

Of course people can apologize. That doesn't mean they won't do it again. An imbalance of power within a relationship- which is what you're suggesting, no matter how you want to clothe it- can lead to a feeling of entitlement by the more powerful partner. Power corrupts.

I get that there are some guys here that want domestic "princess" types to be in relationships with. And if you find those women, and y'all are happy, then knock yourself out. In fact, feminism really makes that easier for you: clearly, you wouldn't want to be in a relationship with a free thinking, educated lady like myself, and I wouldn't want to be in one with a man who needs to keep a woman in the kitchen in order to feel like a man. Now that all women aren't forced to toe the line, you can find your uneducated princesses much more easily. But don't complain because women are choosing not to be that way now.

[Plato]

Originally Posted by yossarian

Victims become perpetrators. This is the cycle of violence. Forgiveness ends the cycle.

So when are you going to forgive the (self-proclaimed-but-not-actually) feminists and their defenders?

And when are those arguing against you going to forgive you for your views?

Violence takes many forms, and the veiled hatred in this thread is a type.

Does anybody here actually think they are going to persuade anyone?! If you believe something strongly enough to need to convince others, there are better means than a futile internet debate.

[yossarian]

I've already forgiven the feminists. I don't have any hatred towards feminists. I used to be one!

But now that I'm not one anymore, I feel called to spread these surreptitious ideas

Just because I've forgiven feminists doesn't mean I'm not going to call them out on the stuff they've been doing. I'm not going to pretend that it isn't ongoing.

I don't feel anger though, or hate, but I do understand those who feel this, and I forgive them too. I mean forgiveness is a personal thing isn't it? It's not really something that other people can measure.

Forgive Bush, but vote against him.

[Dan.Linehan]

With cases like this still pending, I don't believe that feminism has reached its goal of equality just yet.

But thanks for forgiving people who seek equal rights there Yossarian.

[yossarian]

Originally Posted by Dan.Linehan

With cases like this still pending, I don't believe that feminism has reached its goal of equality just yet.

That has nothing to do with feminism. That is more along the lines of war crimes. Just because a female is involved doesn't mean it relates to "women's rights"

The US government has caused the death of 1.5 million Iraqi civilians. This is an evil act. Are we going to say that women who died are victims of the patriarchy, rather than victims of the USA voters?

[Dan.Linehan]

Originally Posted by yossarian

That has nothing to do with feminism. That is more along the lines of war crimes.

Prosecution of rape isn't a woman's rights issue? I believe it is.

[Michael Chui]

See, yossarian?

I told you so. No one understands you because you're more interested in attacking a tangential topic rather than focusing on your actual point.

You guys have made 8 pages of ridiculous tail-chasing simply because yossarian and cylon are more interested in slamming feminists than actually inducing change and getting people to feel less ashamed of "traditional gender roles". Who needs positive thought and personal development, when you can point at someone, call them an enemy, and invade Iraq?

[cylon]

I haven't slammed any feminists.

For someone on a personal development site Michael, you are probably one of the angriest posters I've ever seen.