Killarney: No, they didn't. There is NO record anywhere of a feminist-organised demonstration of bra-burning.

Whoooa! I remember the big Feminist Rally in front of the Capitol Building in America where they all took off their bras, made a pile a pile of bras about 4 metres high & danced around the burning spectacle singing, "We will not be moved." It was big on the Movietone News & TV back then with lots of interviews & no blurring in those days.

Name me one year where at the World Women's Convention that hasn't ended in an all out brawl. I don't think any Country will host the Convention any more. The one in China a few years ago, the Chinese tossed them out of the Country half way through. An' women want to rule the World. Yair right, Ha! One of my wife's friends came back with a black eye & bruises all over. She probably looked at another woman over there & her girlfriend didn't like it.

JayB

‘Whoooa! I remember the big Feminist Rally in front of the Capitol Building in America where they all took off their bras, made a pile a pile of bras about 4 metres high & danced around the burning spectacle singing, "We will not be moved."’

WOW!

Topless women dancing around a 4-metre-deep-brassiere-funeral-pile?? (Mathematically, that would require many, many thousands of brassieres, requiring many, many thousands of topless women.)

How decadently Pagan? How savagely Wiccan? The penultimate dudely women’s mud-wrestling/wet T-shirt night fantasy!

And pray tell, Mr Gender Accuracy Historian, if such a patriarchal wet dream actually DID occur, why wasn’t it front page news throughout the Western MSM for days, weeks, months … years … decades? If such a Feminism-Meets-Playboy event actually happened, then the MSM wouldn’t have to pay journalists to make up all this fake bra-burning stuff.

‘Name me one year where at the World Women's Convention that hasn't ended in an all out brawl.’

I’ve no idea what the World Women's Convention is, but if you are referring to the World Conference on Women, then Ditto all the points raised above. The Western MSM has a voracious appetite for stories about women hating and violently assaulting other women.

So … where are all the front-page headlines? Even dutifully conservative Wikipedia has nothing to say about this ‘feminists are out of control’ story: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_World_Conference_on_Women

How many words have been written regarding the page 3 girls, as opposed to those devoted to No. 2 as highlited by Onthebeach above?
When were the 'frightbats' outraged by Onthebeach link?
Just asking? Maybe a T shirt or a #tag? Nope, nothing.

Killarny: Topless women dancing around a 4-metre-deep-brassiere-funeral-pile?? (Mathematically, that would require many, many thousands of brassieres, requiring many, many thousands of topless women.)

Yep, that's exactly how it was. There were many famous film stars on the steps of the Capitol. It was in the News Papers, TV, & Movietone News at the Pictures. It was around the late 60's early 70's & was one of those "March on Washington" for Women's Rights.

Wolly: The author says that social definitions and norms, such as the idea that women are weak, are constructed by women with their needs in mind, and that praise is only given to a man when a woman's needs are met in some way."

Spot on Wolly.

OTB: Doubtless Evelyn would be having a smirk at the power women have over men, and the endless opportunities to act 'violated' when the 'wrong' male looks. Double standard.

Spot on OTB.

SOL: Once the current crop of good ol' boys have passed on to their male-dominated heaven, maybe the next crop will be more reasonable.....

If only that could be said for the Ladies. (Oops, women.)

"That's simply a neutral observation of how power is distributed across the genders in our society. "

It's not neutral, it's biased and circular. It means that whatever facts you look at, you conclude that it's bitterly unfair to women, and justifies your hate speech against men.

It's clear that the women in this thread have got a problem with sex itself, i.e. the existence of the sexual difference.

Susie's idea that because men like looking at women's breasts therefore women should equally want to look at men's breasts is one of the stupidest things that anyone has uttered ever, anywhere, at any time in the history of the world. Yet that is the mental level that all the women in this thread are operating at. It wouldn't be so bad if it wasn't combined with such bitterness, as if the fact of the existence of sex shows how hard-done-by women are, which is exactly what these harridans think.

Get this:
1. men like looking at women's breasts
2. men see younger women as being prettier, which is the same thing as saying they see older women as being uglier

Get used to it, because
1. it's never going to change, and
2. there's no reason why it should because there's nothing wrong it.

The fact that men are attracted to women is not any kind of evidence of any kind of oppression, unfairness, wrongdoing, exploitation or social injustice. Bitching and moaning and harping and complaining and mewling and puking about the fact of the existence of the sexual difference, is nothing but bigoted ignorant intolerant stupidity, and you need to grow up or shut up, simple as that.

Nor is it abuse to point out your ignorance and intolerance. You've got it back-the-front. It's the feminist culture and habit of hate speech against men that's abusive, and you need to change it.

If you don't like pictures of women's breasts DON'T BUY MAGAZINES WITH THEM IN IT FOR GOSSAKE.

Finally JKJ something you & I agree on.

Ssssshhhheee. Women & their mental problems. Ithe only thing in this World I fear is a women with a mental problem. I guess that about 80% according to a female Psychologist at the Melbourne Uni.