I really am my own worst enemy - find it too hard to back away from an argument.

"IVF is love" - mostly it is. Its about creating a child that is wanted and loved (as opposed to one created by accident that no-one wants). It is also clinical and scientific, but that doesnt detract from it purpose. If people didnt want children to love, IVF would cease to exist.

"Abortion is love." Now you are being silly. Its difficult to link abortion to love in anyway, but that's perhaps because I feel that there is only a limited role for abortion. Part of the reason that abortion has become more available, widespread and accepted in the wider community IS the work of feminism, but this work has been to try to bring some equality into the equation of child-bearing. Most women who seek abortions have little if any support from the male that helped impregnate them, and are left holding the baby - literally. So they are now free to exercise an alternative. Now, I dont agree that just because the father is useless, that the mother should get off the hook. Its too tit-for-tat. But I can see the logic to the argument for availability. It just doenst sit well with me morally.

"Feminism is love." Well, yes it can be. You obviously dont want to see this side of it. Its more about seeking equality of opportunity and fairness in treatment. As for the nutters at uni's, if you teach your kids early on that academics are mostly theorical rather than practical, then they'll know enough to endure the rantings needed to get a degree in the Arts. Better still, send them to business school. They'll at least pick up some skills that will do them good.

Paternity fraud is a kind of love that delivers stability and security for mother and children. Why would any resident or social father wish to deny it (unless as suspected by feminists, men are evil)?

Divorce can be as much about love as marriage itself. Change in dynamics certainly, but more often about love none the less. Best interests of children? Pure love. What is abortion if not tough love? Why would a woman allow her potentially lovable child endure less than loving conditions? Sadly but understandably, it is because “father is useless” – otherwise, conditions would be ideal, wouldn’t they (hello?!).

Anything involving screwing men, that is not love, is simply lust. So when not lust, it is definitely love. Why can’t men discern between love and a kick up the butt? Probably because they are soooo stuuuuuupid!

Country Gal,
I think you misunderstand me. I’ve now become liberated and progressive, and I totally agree that men are useless (and women aren’t), and I now fully support the IVF industry, as it does appear to have tremendous potential for profit.

Reproductive Choice – great marketing slogan.

Designer children – should be advertised regularly in Good Idea magazine.

Single and lesbian women – represent a significant market for IVF industry expansion.

Children having a father – who cares.

The Island of Dr Moreau – would make a great tourist attraction.

Regulation of the IVF industry – the IVF industry is love, and there should be no regulation of love.

There are companies that control the seed supply for various plants, and the IVF industry could do the same with humans. If feminists and the IVF industry can convince the consumer that the normal mating processes between a man and a women are primitive, unliberated and non-progressive, then the only way for the consumer to reproduce would be through IVF.

The shares I recently purchased in the IVF industry would increase markedly in value at that time, which would represent an excellent return on investment.

Seeker,
You are correct, divorce is love, and also men are stupid. But they can be exploited for profit, and that is the most important thing.

Buy shares in IVF. I think it won’t be too far away when marriage is replaced by a system of donor conscription, and there is a tremendous future in IVF

Ho-kay.

Well, I am done arguing about IVF, HRS. You are, of course, free to hate it, and campaign against it, as indeed – as long as you do not hurt them – you are free to hate women. Hate away; I hope it soothes. I prefer your rage to the non sequiters and feeble sarcasm. And I am genuinely sorry for whatever drove you to that rage.

But your facts are frequently incorrect. For example, there is *enormous* money to be made in adoption. What prohibits Australian parents from adopting is, in fact, the money: it costs between $25,000 and $45,000, and takes years. Conversely, the first IVF cycle costs around $2,500. Subsequent cycles are cheaper. In Australia, doctors who treat infertility or give abortions are not richer than other doctors, nor are their clinics more profitable than other medical clinics.

Furthermore, feminism isn’t a cult, it’s a civil rights movement dedicated to achieving women’s social and political equality with men (notwithstanding our many biological differences). Feminism’s first and greatest battle was suffrage – 1902 in Australia, though shamefully not extended to Indigenous women and men until 1967.

Still, we are not so powerful as you fear: worldwide, only 17% of parliamentarians are women – in the Australian federal house of reps, it’s 25%. We remain underrepresented on boards and in business. We do not conspire against you.

In fact, those of us who call ourselves feminists do so not because we hate men – how ridiculous! – but because we love justice. As Rebecca West said, “I myself have never been able to find out precisely what feminism is; I only know that people call me a feminist whenever I express sentiments that differentiate me from a doormat.”

I sense you are seeking a political framework to justify your misogyny, which I suspect arises from some sense of powerlessness in your own life. You do not want my advice, but you’re getting it anyway: if you feel there isn’t enough love in the world, love more.

Country Gal and Billy: high five! You guys rock.

Botheration,
I haven’t said I dislike women. In fact, I have said men are useless and stupid, but I haven’t said the same about women.

If I said anything positive about men, then there may be less demand for IVF, and the value of my shares in IVF might decline, and I wouldn’t want that.

Most cults train their members to respond to criticism in a certain way. For example:- the Moonie cult trained their members to say the words ”Crush Satan, crush Satan” whenever someone questioned the Moonie cult.

The cult of feminism trains its members to respond to criticism by saying that the other person is “misogynist”, or “a woman hater” etc. This response by feminist cult members is universal, and it can be seen on web-sites all around the world. It helps feminist to continue with their hypocrisy.

But feminists seem to have a preoccupation with abortion, IVF and divorce. They all are love of course, but it is very rare for a feminist to mention adoption.

If there was more concentration on adoption, then obviously the costs of adoption would decline, similar to the decline in the costs of IVF over the years.

However it is good that feminists can’t think for themselves, and have been programmed to malign males and not to mention adoption much, because it indirectly helps to keep the value of my IVF shares steadily increasing.

HRS, I apologise for calling you misogynist.

Best of luck to you.