Johny Rotten,

No thank you for your abuse. Find a feminist employed in a university who has said anything good about the male gender.

Most of their pay is coming from males, and they know it.

Theoretically, and considering everything they have said about the male gender, they should only be asking for money from women.

Ha ha, poor ol' Ozandy. He "believes" the reason why maths and science is not taught as maths and science anymore (that's "his" contention), is because girls found it too hard back in the good old days. My old grandfather had similar old fashioned "beliefs"; he thought women should never, ever be bank tellers because women couldn't handle the maths involved and would also be too emotional for the job.

Nice to know there's a few old timers left like Ozandy, Vanna, my grandad and RObert.

Perkinsky has summed it up..may as well shut down the thread now.. she has said it all..and said it well.

//We have got to move beyond the competitive binary of male/female and think more holistically about how the two genders can move forward as a complementary team.//

For those who might be interested....

22Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. 23For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

25Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her 26to make her holy, cleansing[b] her by the washing with water through the word, 27and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. 28In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself.
(Eph 5)

Samsung,
"old timers"

No thank you for your abuse. Which university did you go to, and where did you learn to denigrate men.

Come on, you can give the name of the university and course.

There is almost no maths and science left in the education system. In schools such as QLD schools, about 5% of teachers time was being spent teaching science.

Universities also cannot fill maths and science places, and in many courses, the majority of students are now foregin students.

If feminism does have any positives, (and there may actually be no positives considering the fact that the majority of women are no happier since the 1960's), then the present education system is definitely not a positive outcome of feminism.

Candide
How could anyone have sex without objectifying another?

GAJ
Do you respect and celebrate the wonderful individuality of each human being by locking them in a cage if they don’t agree with your political opinion, or don’t submit to being treated as your chattel?

On the other hand, if rape was legal, would that make it okay?

What’s happened is that women now have the advantages of patriarchy – plus more – without the obligations, while men have the obligations without the advantages.

Do you assume that men have a “responsibility” to pay women for looking after their biological offspring, for no other reason than that they are their biological offspring?

Try this thought experiment. Let’s suppose that men can’t be caged for refusing involuntary servitude to pay for a woman’s choice to look after her own children. No spouse maintenance, no child maintenance, no compulsory child support, no single mother’s pension, no family tax benefit A or B, no baby bonus, etc.

All this is saying is that relations between the sexes should be based on consent. Is that so radical? Are you so opposed to it?

In our thought experiment a woman can’t use legal force or threats to get a man’s income or capital for her uses. And let’s suppose she wants to negotiate terms, purely by consent, on which a man is to agree to devote his income to the joint use of her and her children for life, which is what traditional marriage entailed for the man. This means he won’t be able to devote any of it to inducing other women to agree to have sex, nor to any other resulting offspring. Of course this arrangement suits women unequally, because they have no other possibility of reproductive success. Men do.

There is no reason why a man should agree to such an arrangement, except on unequal terms. Why not? Because it’s not equal in the first place. It unequally favours women, and to add to it even more aggressive violence favouring women makes it more unequal and unfair, not less.

Ha ha, now we have another old timer, Al, asking wives to "submit" to their husbands. Notice that he expects no such submission from men towards their wives. Says it all.

Yep, we can add another old timer to the list, Al.