The article by Racheh is a standard type article that is written daily by various journalists. The actual subject of the article does not really matter, just the ability to portray males negatively, or to try and blame males for this, blame males for that etc The article ends with it's just "The Rules", marginally updated and packaged from a man's perspective.”

So in other words --- it’s the man’s fault (isn’t it).

There are women’s magazines that are filled with such articles, that disparage males or try and blame males for any type of problem, while at the same time portraying women in a positive way. If women (as a gender) were presented in a negative way in these magazines then obviously these magazines would not sell.

The type of articles in these magazines also spill over into other areas of the media, into newspapers, TV, radio, and into areas such as OLO. The advertising industry has churned out ads for many years that portray the male gender negatively. Those men that have complained have met with a wall, but that is now changing both in Australia and in other countries.

Rachel can learn from this and become a better journalist, because the future of journalism will not be based on blaming males as an easy excuse for anything or everything

Audrey,

You make some valid points, and I thank you for adding to my understanding of the issues. Timithy also makes some very good points.

Perhaps there is some pain in debating issues that can demoralise and destabilise. But then, that is exactly the point. It is how feminism achieved all that it did. The pendulum has swung too far now in some respects, and this also, should be debated. You shouldn’t try to shut it down, just because it is inconvenient to feminism. Feminism, I’m sure is robust enough to withstand my little snipes.

I’ve actually tried to recommend for deletion, a recent post of mine, because I thought it was going too far and was basically just a personal attack on someone, without adding anything of value. There is probably more than one such post. It wasn’t removed as I asked.

The point is, there is some heated argument and raw emotion shown at times, on both sides of the fence. It is not always thoughtful, or logical; I think most of us recognise this, even within our own commentary. Yes, that includes overreaction. From time to time we also see that magic flash of light, exposing the previously hidden, the out of reach. Sadly, we don’t always publicly acknowledge it, since it may spoil our argument, but nevertheless, we learn from it. This is the beauty of such a forum – its biggest advantage is also its greatest weakness – it is interactive. Let’s sift through all ideas, and take with us only the valid.

Now, please don’t try to shut opinion down, because I know that is precisely what feminism fought against. I’m open to good ideas. To challenge them is to validate them.

Seeker, I would never advocate shutting down the expression of opinion, and in fact was aiming for a contrast. I'm a firm believer in the Socratic method and hence felt that bombarding the comment pages with a long list of complaints about feminism is over burdening the debate and creating an imbalance. Timithy has the right to an opinion, but I sense that Timithy's opinion is invariably one-sided and it's either 'my way or the highway'. That's not debate. That is just noise.

Fact is, you can't prevent people from reading but you can encourage them to take in some bits and not others and to ask questions. As much as Timithy opposes Feminism and fails to see it's value, it has provided a voice that has helped a lot of women into a better position in life, gotten them closer to equality, and urged them to leave abuse behind. Perhaps the tide has turned to now to encourage men to state that they also now feel aggressed against and misunderstood and have a right to say so. And I'm all for that. But blaming feminism is not a solution. Expressing yourselves in an independent and intelligent way is. Feminism did.

Audrey, It is extremely debateable that feminism has helped many women at all. Of course feminists will say that it has, but it is also know that feminists use a lot of propaganda, and tend to look at history through a very narrow magnifying glass.

If feminism is a political or social movement, then most definitely it should be open for analysis and criticism. But I do get the feeling that various feminists have now learnt not to cross swords too often with too many adult men, and I do get the feeling that various feminists are now targeting younger men and boys (as these are more vulnerable).

I have noticed that feminists will try and imply that any criticism of feminism is abuse or misogny. Not so, its just criticism and they will have to begin to understand that. I have also noticed that certain people have also called me a variety of names and made various insinuations regards myself, when they don’t even know me. I could be female for all they know.

However any thing I have said of feminism, I have provided examples of, (or will further provide if you require). My opinions of feminism have been founded upon considerable research and experience, and at the end of it all, I’m like the young female journalist that said that feminism just "doesn’t add-up”. It is non-demoncratic.

In regards to women’s literature, then the majority of it is now in women’s magazines. These magazines sell more copies than all other types of magazine put together, but most of the articles in these magazines operate to a formula. For a good understanding of that formula, read “Spin Sisters : How the Women of the Media Sell Unhappiness --- and Liberalism --- to the Women of America” by Myrana Blyth

A question in another forum on IVF I personally would like an answer to is “Why do women choose IVF treatment over adopting orphaned children. Perhaps you could go to that forum and provide some thoughts.

I'm going to talk to the females in the kind of language that they understand.
If you were told that over half the dates you go on will end in a date rape, and that one in thierteen of those rape victims would be so traumatised that she would suicide would you continue dating? No.

Well thats your answer. Because half the marriages end in divorce and one in thirteen of the men suffer so badly from post divorce trauma that they do suicide.

Twelve hundred dead bodies every year. Equal to the national road toll.

No woonder hes not into you.

Timithy, seems to be a slight misunderstanding.

I’m asking why is it that out of those marriages that fail, the women made mistakes about choice of partner, more than 70% of the time. With all this advice available to them, why do women get it so wrong so often?
Seeker

Seeker
Heres your answer

I go on this great first date and we decide to share a cab home - separate stops. When we get in, he buckles his seatbelt! I know that's a wise thing to do, so I feel like a jerk saying this, but it totally turned me off. It just seemed so kid-like and lame. Is he too much of a weenie for me, or am I out of my mind?" wrote Unrestrained Lady, Upper West Side.

To the uninitiated, Unrestrained Lady may seem like a neurotic aberration. But ditching men because they fail to measure up in some infinitesimal way has been common place among daters and among womens talk for years. We all know women who won't go out with men who don't drive prestige cars or didn't go to a prestige school. Or the woman who instantly went off a man she had been crazy for because he turned up at her front door wearing a plaited belt. In the days before e-tags, another felt her stomach turn when her date fumbled with the bridge toll. These are usually not just excuses to jettison an unsatisfactory male, but genuine reasons for spontaneous revulsion

Clearly, there is no man shortage. Only an abundance of shallow women!