Ok, so sex is something for men to "take" from women? To accept, like a gift?
How is that better? It puts control in women's hands only as much as she is the "gatekeeper"...he's ready to go anytime. She doesn't really *want* it necessarily, but we don't even question that he does.

I'm glad you have that expectation. But it's not universal. There's still this lingering view that if a woman gets pregnant, it's her fault.

But what's wrong with him wanting sex. How does that make sex his right? My point was that a man cannot have sex without a willing woman. He can't "take" it. I don't know any man who sees sex as a right and expects a woman to service him. They're just happy when it happens! But isn't that the nature of sex? You want to have it with someone, and you're happy if they agree to it. Just a man doesn't think of sex as a right, women don't either. I don't go out with someone and expect them to sleep with me when I want. It's not a right.[/quote]In this I do agree. What I disagree with is the notion that only the woman is responsible for contraception.

Saying tha sex, and conception takes two. But, barring some accident, I do sometimes think women need to take responsibility for their own protection. If you don't want to get pregnant, don't have unprotected sex. It may be a two way thing, but just like no one is going to stop you damaging your body with cigarettes, no one will stop you from having sex the way you want, including unprotected..

Um, rape. But I realize you were speaking in terms of consent. In that case, there is manipulation. Again, I hope it doesn't happen to you, but it does happen.

I agree. Not a right. But some people view it that way. And there is still a double-standard. A woman who sleeps with many men is...slutty. A man who sleeps with many women? A *real* man.

I disagree with the premise too, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist, that people don't feel that way. Marital rape is still difficult to prove; the notion is that if you let him into your life in the first place, consent is a given.

See, the last point is where I have a hiccup. Sure, no one necessarily will stop you from unprotected sex. But if a man is offered unprotected sex, do you think he is more likely to stop and say "look, no, I really feel like we need protection"?
In general, no. If she agrees to the sex, then the pregnancy is her problem...even though a man had to contribute. He could have said no, too.

Number 44...



I hate this. I can't even describe how frustrating, annoying and disarming this is. Aside from just ignoring the demand, In my 28 years I still haven't found the proper response to this. I don't even know why anybody would say this.

Please, plimates, never, ever, say this to a stranger.

I see this going back and forth between Lynx and Gammerus agreeing with all this, and please don't take offense ladies, but I think it's sad.

That one would feel like such second class citizens, that you think guys have it so much better than you do. It is so not the truth.
But no matter what I, or anyone else says, you won't believe it.

You need to get the chip off your shoulders about the crappy gender hand you think you were dealt.

I, for one, think I'm lucky it be female.

Why? I ask totally without judgment. I'm curious what makes you feel that way.

A secondary question: Why do you think gams and I don't think we are lucky to be women?

Mostly because I am a female.

Until women's lib came along, women were the first class citizens. Men went out and worked for their women and children. Men opened doors for women and carried things in reverence to women. Women were put on pedestals.

But some women got it into their heads that men did this because they thought we were weak, unable. They were looking at it backwards.

Women's lib has really messed things up. Because of women demanding to work, the economy has risen to that. Now to get by comfortably you need to have a 2 income family, women's lib did that.
A single income home has a very hard time, generally.
Chivalry is dead. Why? Because men are afraid to be nice to a woman and hold a door. They get hollered at for it.

There are lots more examples but that enough. You get my point.

I know this isn't about women's lib, but it is.

I don't think you feel lucky to be women because you two constantly b***h about it, and everything it entails, from periods on up.

I'm really sorry that those are the reasons you feel that way.

You think being unable to do things without a husband's consent is "on a pedestal?" Unable to leave an abusive marriage? Unable (and thought incapable of) participating in intellectual/political discourse?

A husband could beat his wife, legally, for longer than he could beat his mule. That doesn't give you pause at all?

A woman could not ever have sex outside of marriage; even the suspicion of an affair in a marriage (only on the woman's part, mind) could lead to social exclusion and divorce...and because she couldn't inherit property, or work any real job, she would be reduced to poverty.

Women are still without rights around the world. Rapes still go unpunished, and is being used as a war tactic in Africa.

Without women, the U.S. economy would have ground to a halt during WWII... and the government repaid the sacrifices of those women by forcing them out of the jobs when men came home.

Did you know that women are rated one of the predominant ways to improve the global economy? Doubling the size of your workforce increases what can be done, and since women tend to control household expenses better than men, more money would go toward better things.


If you oppose women's equality because no one opens a door for you anymore, I'm so sorry. I'd gladly open my own doors for the freedom to be seen as a human being rather than an object, or an infant.

And no, I don't hate being a woman. (Btw, would you ever have used the word "b***h" to respond to a man in this context? I doubt it). I do hate being treated as worth less than my peers for something I have no control over, a trick of genetics and birth.

I do not oppose women's equality at all. What I'm saying is that the thinking was backwards.

And yes, I would have used the word b***h in this content if I was talking to a man, b***hing is not a gender thing. That really was stretching it there, don't ya think? Shame on you for that one.

I am sorry that you . I truly think that is in you.
Not to say that there aren't chauvinist's out there, of course there are. There are also plenty that aren't, and there are plenty women that think all men are. And a hundred different degrees.

As for b***hing, ...much more likely to be a term used on women. So, no, not a stretch at all.

I didn't write the article, and I didn't make gams or MandolinOrange agree with me. So it's probably not with me.

Do you like wearing pants? Pants are part of women's lib, too.

How about living alone? Women's lib.

Maintaining your own checkbook (rather than your father doing it for you)?

You've been blessed in so many ways by fights other women (and men) fought, and yet you think I have a chip on my shoulder for saying there are bonuses for men being men? (There are bonuses for women being feminine, too).

The joy of having more choices (given by women's lib) means you can now choose to not work if you don't want to. If that's the real downfall of women's lib...drat, that's horrible.

Even though I hate the play personally, perhaps you should see "The Dollhouse." The concepts might be helpful.

You think no women wore pants, lived alone or took care of their own money before women's lib?!! Really?! Wow!

And the b***hing thing, yes, it was a stretch. NOT used on women more than men, I think you know it too. I tell guys to stop b***hing all the time, ask Moe :)

You do have that gender chip on your shoulder, you moan about it a lot. You also just called being a women "a trick of genetics and birth". I see it as a lucky draw.

But really, we are not going to agree on this, I am done.

This has got to be the worst thread ever...

*feels the need to bump the best thread ever*

I find some of these to be gross overgeneralizations, because they don't apply to me. If it was a privilege as they imply it is, then it would apply to everyone. Also, they fail to realize that some of these (particularly the ones to do with general sex behavior) are partially due to hormonal influence. While the people that give in to it are no doubt shallow and blights on society as well as disgusting for abusing another human being, it's the male hormones (such as testosterone) that put that drive or tendency there. Plus, while women and men have equal dignity, intellectual potential, and things of that nature, there are differences in the sexes that are clearly visible in physiology and brain development that will skew tendencies. The way the male brain is built will cause men to, in general, be certain ways. The way the female brain is built will cause women to, in general, be certain ways. This, I would say, is likely to be the root cause of many of these trends once you trace it back far enough.

We need to acknowledge that while men and women should be treated as EQUALS, that by no means whatsoever infers that they are the SAME.

As sidran pointed out, there are myriad differences in the two. Instinctively men are wired to protect physically and women are wired to nurture. Of course there will be exceptions...there always are. I once saw an interview with Gloria Steinem - she adamantly REFUSED to acknowledge the genetic fact that women are intrinsically better at nurturing. Even in the face of virtually every other species of animal on the planet proving that out. What is the point?

Lists like this serve ONLY to ostracize one from the other. Why can't we acknowledge our differences and treat each other...BOTH DIRECTIONS...with respect?

*Rubs head*

Uhg. Lynxie is pretty much saying what I want to say but better. Especially because my current thought is mainly "What."

So I'll just kinda stay back and watch.

I totally agree with everything you just said. From women's lib on up. I wish I could upvote you more!!! :D

I don't know a single person...woman or man to whom this applies. Not one. This includes people anywhere in life from those who don't have 2 dimes to rub together all the way up to multi-millionaires. Not one of them has the choice to not work.

The choice to not work has nothing to do with gender. It is entirely an economic issue.

Sorry sugar but women's lib has gone too far IMHO.

My daughter could end up going into battle or out to see with men on a ship when they sign up to join the military.

And I can tell you there are many problems with women working alongside men in close quarters like that. I have personal experience with my son and some of the drama he went thru with women in his platoon.

Women DO have their places in all jobs, even police and fire. But try as we may, we are wired and built different and I just think there are still some things a man should be doing and not a woman.

Women are still oppressed. Even in the USA. I had a friend who was raised in a religious home who did not wear pants until she went to medic school. Never cut her hair, her father wouldn't allow it. No Tv, nothing.

Women's lib did not free us all. There is still abuse that happens ( I get a daily reality check at work)

I just agree with Bingo wholeheartedly on this matter.

"sea" out to sea.