I’ve been waiting for all the feminist commentators on OLO to say how wonderful it is that there is love between a man and a woman.

But there doesn’t appear to be anyone.

And yet, HRS, no men have stepped forward to say the reverse.

In fact, there's only been one comment. A critical comment about feminists, from a man.

Beautiful article Audrey. Ignore the trolling from HRS.

An article comes forward, about the simple love between a man and a woman, as well as the difficulties it can present.

It's not judgemental and it doesn't criticise men.

Yet HRS stills find a reason to hammer feminists, simply because there's a lack of comment.

I find that repulsive.

And HRS, you're still just ignoring the fact that self decribed feminists have spoken in these very threads, saying they don't hate men.

It's clear you have no response to this.

I'm still waiting for Audrey Apple to take the banner "Boys are made of slime and snails" off her blogsite.

Audrey Apple can say whatever she like (and judging by the amount of profanity on her blogsite, she does), but removing the offensive banner is a tangiable sign that she actually does believe in love, and actually does believe in males.

But I think I will have to wait for a long time to see the banner removed.

As far as the feminists on OLO are concerned, they keep portaying themselves as being such loving people, but "no comment" provides considerable doubt as to their claims.

Hell, HRS. I hope to high heaven she doesn't remove the banner.

It's a joke. Most people get that. Removing it would be kowtowing to censorship pressure from someone who clearly just doesn't get it.

Your solution to the destructive types of feminism, has been to group all feminists under this banner.

This is such a dumb tactic. Instead of having a portion of feminists as your enemy, you're declaring war on all of them.

What's particularly stupid, is that the logic of the hardcore fringe feminists is easy to dismantle.

Heck, when genuinely destructive, hyperactive feminists publish articles on OLO, I'll be right there alongside you criticising them for empty rhetoric.

But when you attack reasonable feminists, and those who have the temerity to use a little humour, and yes, make some lighthearted criticism of males, you turn sensible people off.

Take a look at the damn big picture. One 'snips and snails' comment, does not a man-hater make. She's told you so direcly, but you just don't want to believe her. You'd rather bully with passive-aggressive tactics until she changes her creative style to suit your feminist paranoia.

Screw that. I like her stlye and I hate censorship.

Tell me HRS - how many people have you persuaded on these threads, who weren't already of a similar mindset to yourself?

Contrast this to how many you've disgusted. I know I have no time for the ridiculous kinds of feminism that just attack men. The kind that seeks rights for women where there are still inequalities however, I support.

You however, are doing exactly what I dislike about the man-hating feminists. You're grouping them as one, and refuse to accept some are decent.

You're a hypocrite.

And you still can't accept the fact that self described feminists are commenting in these threads that they don't hate males.

Until you address this blatantly obvious fact, your transparent feminist hate-streak doesn't have legs.

I've brought this up repeatedly, but you can't deal with it, so you ignore it, though I suppose this is the only viable way to maintain delusional conspiracies.

HRS says, "I'm still waiting for Audrey Apple to take the banner "Boys are made of slime and snails" off her blogsite."

So did you send Audrey an email, HRS? Or are you just waiting for her to divine your viewpoint via emanations from the ether?

Having read a few of Audrey's blog posts at http://audreyapple.blogspot.com , I'd be fascinated to see how you would try and persuade her in this.

So, best of luck in your campaign and do keep us informed.

Even within a barrel of bad apples, it is still possible to find a good one.

I do have to say that this bad apple did write a particularly moving article.

Grief is just another word, until, one experiences the rawness of the emotion. How it tears you apart inside and the world continues on around you as if nothing had happened.

As my father lay on the hospital trolley after his heart attack, tears started trickling down from my eyes, for a moment I wanted to stop the flow, then I thought to myself, I needed to cry and let them flow. On the periphery I was aware of others being uncomfortable with my tears.

Now there are a few points that I could raise that would undoubtedly raise the hackles of a few. Perhaps in a later post, I am still debating the merits.

Turnrightthenleft,
It is very perplexing that so few feminist lovers have not commented on the article.

There are many feminist lovers that post onto OLO, but perhaps there aren’t that many feminist lovers that believe in love between a man and a woman.

Johnj
Audrey Apple is fully aware of the situation. Audrey Apply writes that she is a feminist, but I don’t think any self-respecting male has made Audrey Apple put the banner “Boys are made of slime and snails” onto her blogsite.

She has done this of her own accord, and maybe she has put the banner onto her blogsite, in the hope of attracting other feminists to her blogsite.

Why is that at all perplexing HRS? I see no reason at all.

Perhaps it's because it's not controversial. Everybody knows that this is the case - there's nothing in this article to disagree with, but that's not to say it's not right.

That's the key point here HRS. You keep saying "oh! Those nasty feminists must all hate men! They're not saying we're great in all their articles! How dare they!"

When in actuality, the truth of the matter is, everybody knows men have positive attributes, except the dumb few hardcore fringe feminists who are extinct outside a few academic institutions.

The only reason why they're heard at all, is because their stupid comments are controversial.

Now you come bopping along, clearly with some past grudge against one of these hardcore feminists, and say "all feminists must be evil - why, they're not commenting on sweetness and goodness of men!"

Bulldust HRS. Weak as water.

Not everyone has time to sit around, extolling the virtues of man. There's more worthwhile things to write articles about, because the vast majority of people are well aware of the fact that men have virtues.

That's why there's not many comments here. I read the article, agreed wholeheartedly and found it beautiful. There was no real need to comment, until you popped in to say "Yah! No feminists are saying how great love (and it's clear what you really want to hear is how great it is that men can love) is! Must be part of the conspiracy."

Bulldust again. It's just that it's a given HRS, but you construe that silence as being indicative of something it's not.

HRS, I think it's really sad that you have taken what is simply a reflection on death, loss, love, grief and hope and tried to co-opt it into some kind of attack on feminism simply because I wrote it. I'd ask you politely to transfer your attacks on me to the other (apparently immortal) thread and to leave this topic simply as it is: an homage to the strength of love and passion two people can hold for one another, and the inevitable loss of self that comes when one person dies. Even JamesH (who disagrees with much of what I say) can recognise this thread is not really the place for childish demands and pigheaded retaliations.

I loved this article, HRS, but commented directly on Audrey's site. To be honest, I found your hostility a bit scary and neurotic, and didn't want to fan any flames. I still don't understand why you don't get the snails reference - it comes from a nursery rhyme. A couple of people have pointed this out - perhaps you could google it? But, you are, of course, entitled to find it offensive if that kind of thing offends you.

Audrey Apple,
I think that when boys hear someone say that they are made of slime and snails, then a part of them dies.

But you would obviously know more about children and boys then I would.

Still waiting on loving feminists to comment about the love between a man and a woman

Audrey, it was a lovely article that most normal people would have appreciated.

I wouldn't pay too much attention to HRS, who is a sock puppet for the former troll user "Timkins" (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/user.asp?id=6333), who was banned from OLO some time ago.

HRS
"Still waiting on loving feminists to comment about the love between a man and a woman."

That's a fat porky, HRS - and you know it. A scroll back through the OLO gender essays show many posts made by feminists that talk of the love they have for their husbands and partners. I myself have been a very happily married feminist for over twenty years and am proud to have shared so much of my life with such a wonderful man.

Audrey's love and empathy for her father shines through this article, every bit as much as her grief and longing for her mother.

JamesH
Your glib reference to Audrey as 'this bad apple' was plain disgusting, in light of the deeply personal article she writes here. I believe you lack the ability to credit feminists with having any humanity at all. That's your problem, not theirs.

Thank you for sharing your story with us Audrey.

I'm a feminist and know from many examples that love between a man and a woman is a wonderful thing. My parents, my grand-parents, both my grandmothers were early feminists and very modern in their thinking, so were their husbands, my siblings and sundry friends, not to mention my own love story with a thoroughly modern man who is also my best friend and the father of my children.

Happy HRS and JamesH?

James, it is OK to cry. It is only other men who 'feel uncomfortable'. And exactly why is that? Challenge that. Not only what you think others thought, but also why you thought that.

I've seen my husband cry when his beloved dog died after an horrific accident, but then he couldn't care less what some men, or women for that matter, think about that. Though years ago, it still brings tears to my when I think of it.

HRS, stop alluding to the boys, snail and slime things. You don't get it. Drop it, because you are beginning to embarrass yourself.

Feminists are not a movement to speak up for masculinity or define it. Heck, even amongst ourselves women disagree on exactly what femininity is and what it means to be a woman, which is the beauty of it.

We refuse to be stereotypical cartoon characters, but we will keep on challenging society at large and other feminists in particular on the merits and importance of our own particular stance. It keeps us alert and helps us to keep on refining and revising our own arguments and beliefs.

Men arguably need to do the same for themselves if they feel so challenged and victimised by the female gender in particular and society in general. But then again, maybe it is only a few men who feel victimised

SJF,
Death is a very tragic thing, and you are very lucky to live in a country where there is very little death.

I wonder who is responsible for that.

Yvoone,
"refuse to be stereotypical cartoon characters,".

That reminds me of something I have seen in Audrey Apple's blogsite.

And when boys read that type of thing, or hear it being said, they die a little death. Can all add up eventually, and I've seen it being carried out.

But you would probably know more about that than I would, being a feminist and all that.

HRS:- Get over the slime and snails obsession. Repetition doesn't enhance your argument.

James:- Cry or don't cry it's up to you, don't let gender stereotypes tell you not to, don't let feminists tell you that you have to express emotions in a similar way to women in order to avoid being labelled emotionaly retarded.

Yvonne:- A lot of your words betray you. 'Father of MY children'? Not 'our' children? modern man? Is a non-feminist man not modern?

These words exhibit a shaping by feminism we all exhibit.

As to your comments on men speaking up for masculinity, I would think a feminist who understands the plight of women in working in a business environment which has been framed (and hence supposedly deliberately biassed agains women) by male gender values, would in turn understand that gender politics and discourse has been framed by female values.

There is a lot more resitance to any positive change for men, or a so called men's movement, because women have gotten in first, and the baseline for gender equity discourse is skewed in favour of women.

The very term 'feminist' ensures an approach not toward equity, but assumes women to be in a weaker position, searching toward equity with men. This makes any claim a man might make for equity in any area invalid, as women are the ones in supposed need of equity. It's all too late as these are the terms of gender politics.

Under this supposition, men will never be heard or allowed seriously into the converstaion until society tips to such a level of inequity in favour of women that brought about the original feminist movement.

I have debated much about writing the following as it amazes me that no one else has picked up on it.

"with his wife's aggressive onset of Alzheimer's."

"With the disease progressing steadily, Fiona decides to enter a nursing home. After her admittance, she and Grant make love one last time"

What is ‘sexual consent’?
Identifying what 'sexual consent' entails will help us determine if an individual genuinely agreed to participate.
http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=6823

It has been determined that someone must be of sufficent cognitive ability before they can give a valid consent to sexual intercourse.

My question is how can a woman with Alzheimer's be able to give valid consent for intercourse to take place?

"My mother once told me that raising a son was like having a mini love affair,"

Let's reverse genders and have a father saying that raising a daughter is like having a mini love affair. What would people then, think of that statement?

What is ‘sexual consent’? [with dementia]
When one partner gets dementia, consent is the most difficult thing to gauge. Suddenly, the person you've been having sex with consensually for fifty years can become unable to give consent. On what day does that happen? If you have the answer to that question, James, please don't condemn those who find it difficult. Tell them. Share it. This isn't a gender issue.

"My mother once told me that raising a son was like having a mini love affair" - "Let's reverse genders and have a father saying that raising a daughter is like having a mini love affair. What would people then, think of that statement?"

It's been a long time since I was little, but I hope my dad would still say that raising me was like a love affair. It was for me. And I know (and both my mum and my husband have agreed) that I've always looked for a guy just like my dad.

I admire my dad for a gazillion reasons. But one is that a lot of his contemporaries married women who were pretty, but slightly less clever, and slightly less sophisticated, and slightly less funny than they were. My dad just went for the prettiest, cleverest, funniest woman he could find - and *wasn't* intimidated if she was any more of those things than he. That was more than fifty years ago - and they're still married. I was a late baby - they kept trying till they finally got a girl. So I was the second woman my father fell in love with. If anyone finds that offensive, the can kiss my arse.

Vanilla I think James' point relates to what I hinted about earlier about the attitudes in society towards men's sexuality vs. women's.

The best way I can sum it up is a painting I saw in a pub I loved in London, of a women masturbating, and it was erotic and beautiful at the same time, and obviously and rightfully socially acceptable to have it hanging there.

I then thought about if it was a picture of a man doing the same. I'm sure it would be considered dirty and disgusting, and not socially acceptable. I really believe this is not all in my head.

Then I started to think of say a female flasher vs male flasher, and the different reactions each would get. Then you think of the suspicion about any male who works in a job involving young children. I also discussed in one of my posts the different attitudes to David Hamilton and Germaine Greer's books. Look at the different attitudes and sentences handed down to Female teachers that have relationships with children compared to men. When two drunken people get drunk, the man has to be responsible for the womens actions in relation to confirming consent.

It's all part of the PR war. Men are seen as predators, and not to be trusted. Women rail against the whole madonna whore thing, and you see articles such as Audreys article castigating men's attitudes to women in Zoo magazine but women's attitude to men's sexuality needs examining too.

Feminists have been guilty of perpetuating this all men are potential rapists idea, but ignore the fact most are capable of it, and very few take advantage of it.

When men see adverts like the Violence against Women one by the government, and the speeding advert attacking mens body image and sexuality, they seem them knowing full well that such an attack against women would never be allowed.

Vanilla, I can relate to your story about your parents and your relationship with your father. My father also married the cleverest, funniest and prettiest woman, with her own opinion about just everything. My parents had some great arguments (debates). Generally a consensus was reached, sometimes one came up with the best argument and 'won'! Because there was love and respect in their relationship, the object was never to feel worthy by annihilating or diminishing the other.

Whitty, I admire your ability to deconstruct in best modern 'leftist feminist' style my language. You have a point that our language is shaped by the environment we are in.

My husband refers to me as, 'the mother of MY children', 'MY house' etc, should I put a stop to this? Is he claiming sole ownership do you think? Or is he having a conversation in which I was not part so a joint statement didn't seem necessary or perhaps even relevant?

I would only be bothered, and my husband ditto, if one was expressing sole ownership with both of us together part of a conversation. And even then it would need to be taken in context.

My husband does not classify himself as a feminist man, but a feminist supporter. He does see himself as a modern man living in this age, as opposed to his father who, though until his death also lived in this age, had some values regarding women that were acceptable quite a long time ago, he was not a modern man. A woman had a particular place in society and so did a man. If either went into the other's 'realm' was suspect and detrimental to the well-being of society.

These values affected his sisters for instance and now his widow. Contrary to values that my father had regarding women. My sister, brothers and I grew up with identical expectations and values regarding education, respect and regard for self and others, and very importantly, life choices. My father, maybe even more so than my mother, encouraged me to become the woman that I am.

Whitty: "...I then thought about if it was a picture of a man doing the same. I'm sure it would be considered dirty and disgusting..."

That's an amazing example. I agree with everything you write in your last post about men. (And I hadn't thought about the speeding ad until your brought it up. You're right.) I just disagree that life's a bowl of roses for chicks. We get assaulted by unrealistic images of femininity hourly (and before anyone gets their knickers in a twist, I'm NOT blaming men for that - I think culture's a complex mix and there's many issues at play).

Is it not possible that a woman can say one thing - even a positive thing - about gender on this board without getting attacked?

Because, seriously, you are honestly offended by Yvonne referring to "the father of my children"? Would you be offended by a bloke saying "the mother of my children"? You said on another thread that you hate political correctness - that's about as pc as you can get.

You and James and HRS often attribute things to feminists. What frustrates me about this is that *I'm* a feminist, and I seldom agree with those things. I associate with feminists, and ditto - they're clever people with happy, successful relationships with men who *don't* appear to think their partners are crazy extremists. Nor do I see extreme feminist views coming from the women on this board. I appreciate that some women may think and write those things, but can't you understand how frustrating it is to be told that you believe things you most certainly don't? To hear that others think you would accuse your beloved grandfathers of being rapists and abusers simply because you passionately hold the view that all people should be equal under the law? Isn't that what frustrates you also?

That's why I'm compelled to stick up for myself whenever I hear "feminists think x". Maybe we think x. Maybe we think y. Maybe we think the whole gamut from a to z.

Whitty, that was a great post you wrote. Challenging, and confronting with issues that are indeed uncomfortable.

Re seeing paintings of naked women vs naked men. Who is it exactly that finds portrayal of naked men disturbing? Women or other men? Germaine Greer would not object to a good looking naked man and neither would I. It is all in the context.

I agree with you that sentencing female teachers who abuse students differently to male teachers is wrong. But the fact is that the judiciary is largely made up of men. Why do they think that there is a difference? I really don't think you can lay that at the feet of feminists.

There are other issues you raise. I just think it is not possible to just lay the blame at the feet of feminists. I also think a lot has to do with how men view masculinity and what is macho.

That is were the speeding ad comes in. It is mainly young men who are killing themselves on the road. Why is that? Do young men behave on the road the way they do to impress other males or females of their daring manliness? The ads implies it has to do with macho behaviour and a macho man must be 'well endowed'. Feminism cannot be blamed for this presumption. If men disagree with this and come up with a different reason than they should speak up. There are lives at stake.

Everything you raised should indeed be examined. Including how some women view men. I cringe when I hear some women speak of men. They are very rarely feminists, but women who actually see themselves as 'real women' who want 'real men'. Whatever that means. These kind of statements just tend to make my eyes balls roll back into my head.

Men must examine and challenge how they see themselves and are viewed by society and some women. Not only attitudes from women, but most certainly from other men. Men in politics, men in the judiciary, men in advertising, the men who own magazines.

Vanilla,

'can't you understand how frustrating it is to be told that you believe things you most certainly don't?'

Certainly! I have been told through various channels all my upbringing how terrible this patriachal society of evil men is responsible for the terrible plight of women. How ALL men's attitude to women is responsible for all women's body image problems, and how everything wrong with society can be directly attributable to men, while women are the devine, selfless, altruistic, emotionally stronger and more loving gender.

It's like I say the PR war has been won. I suppose I should give up fighting it.

I suppose I try to even out the bias for myself in illusttrating that men can actually be worse off than women, and even heaven forbid women aren't totally innocent.

'Would you be offended by a bloke saying "the mother of my children"? '
No. I realise that was over the top. I do feel a lot of women think they own the kids and have more right to them than men. I think the Laws also back this up. In this instance I feel I am using feminist arguing tactics back at them. Notice how PC tactics are only valid in one direction.

Yvonne,

I just noticed you perhaps understood where Vanilla did not.-> Whitty, I admire your ability to deconstruct in best modern 'leftist feminist' style my language.

'Who is it exactly that finds portrayal of naked men disturbing? Women or other men?'
I would say women. Think of flashers. If a woman flashed me I'd be excited and I think most men would be. If a man flashes a woman maybe she would be intimidated. It's women's fear of men that leads to the attitudes. This fear is as destructive as a fear of black people in terms of violent crime for example.

'I really don't think you can lay that at the feet of feminists.' A lot of feminst doctrine decries that problems in society are the sole responsibility of men. Why cant both men and women be held responsible for society?

Yvonne,

See this is exactly my problem. 'society and some women'. Men are seen as responsible for society.

'Not only attitudes from women, but most certainly from other men.' Men are seen as primarily responsible for the attitudes of society towards men? Why is it that feminism puts the onus on men to change the attitudes of society towards women?

'Men in politics, men in the judiciary, men in advertising, the men who own magazines.'

The few men (few compared to all men, not to women) who are in power do no shape 'society'. Those who vote, and those who consume (I think more so these days) shape society.

Also have you heard the saying 'the hand that rocks the cradle rules the world'. How are the attitudes of men responsible for society and it's laws, and women blameless, when a lot of the time these very men have been raised by women.

My point about the speeding ad is that it is irrelevant what the purpose or psychology of the ends is, the means would be unacceptable if it was aimed at women.

Whitty, are there female flashers? And if there were, why would you be excited and not intimidated or afraid? Would a young boy be afraid? It is after all an aggressive act of forced confrontation with sex.

The point is, I would be surprised if there was any woman who has not found herself at least once in a situation which was frightening. So, regardless of what feminists say, women themselves have had personal experiences that were not made up, were not just hysterical attention seeking behaviour.

Stating this, cannot be reduced to a statement that women think ALL men are evil potential rapists. But we have learned that many men can be opportunistic when faced with a choice. Otherwise, why can't a woman walk scantily clad alone at 11.00pm down the street for instance?

As to the picture, I can tell you who is uncomfortable with seeing naked men. It is other men. Not women. Sure some women might be, but then there are men who disagree with women being portrayed naked too.

And as to the raising of boys. Yes, mothers raise their sons, but so do their fathers. They see how their father treats their mother, speaks to her and speaks of other women and men. He may grow up to think that he needs to be 'a man' rather than a human being who happens to be a male. Anything to differentiate and distance himself from female.

Our society is not shaped by women. It is shaped by men. I have no idea how old you are, but I'm here to tell you that it was not very long ago (the 60's and 70's) that a woman could not make financial decisions or living choices without the permission of her husband or father. Unlike men. In 1981, I, as a 20 year old independently earning adult, needed my father's permission to move out of the nurses quarters for instance. The blokes did not.

Women are only very recently independent consumers.

Audrey that was beautifully written and very moving, and brave as hell.

HRS, be a man and embrace your inner slime. Be the boy who relished the notion that he was made of slugs and snails and puppy dog tails...lighten up.

JamesH, I agree that the 'mini love affair' bit was wrong. Raising a daughter is an enduring love affair.

Yvonne,

There are plenty of female flashers. Have you ever heard of Mardi Gras in New Orleans? I definitely wouldn’t see it as an aggressive act. I don’t condone flashing children though.

I find it quite offensive that you say ‘Many’ men are opportunistic when faced with an opportunity to rape. You obviously have a very low opinion of men.

I cant agree that men are uncomfortable seeing other men naked. Well that’s not my experience in the rugby change rooms.

‘…needs to be 'a man' rather than a human being who happens to be a male. Anything to differentiate and distance himself from female.’
Why are women closer to human than men? Why have men no right to a distinct identity while women do? Traditional male attributes of aggression and stoicism and pragmatism have been demonised. Just look at the speeding ads. Rather than attempting to moderate behaviour for all, it is necessary to attempt to emasculate young men. Even natural outlets of aggression between males in sport are sanitised. Notice nobody considers women cry too much, it's men don't cry enough.

‘Our society is not shaped by women. It is shaped by men. I have no idea how old you are, but I'm here to tell you that it was not very long …’

Society is shaped by both men and women and always has been. Do you think the feminist movement didn’t shape society? Do you think absolutely NO women were happy with their gender roles before feminism? I cant imagine a society when half of the population, who has sex as a bargaining chip, would be down-trodden for the whole of time until 20 years ago. Do you think Muslim women all want to be walking around in bikinis, and that it’s only their fathers who would disapprove? It’s ridiculous to believe women were in no way compliant to the structure of society pre feminism. Before you go on about voting, remember it was only a small amount of time considering the history of humankind most men didn’t vote either.

Our society is not shaped by women. It is shaped by men. I have no idea how old you are, but I'm here to tell you that it was not very long ago (the 60's and 70's) that a woman could not make financial decisions or living choices without the permission of her husband or father.

Yvonne,

Well Yvonne, Sotirios Sarantakos conducted research into "Marital Power in Australian Families." He found that majority of families, even prior to feminism were either matriachies, or the power was shared.

Nursing is not a particularly good example, because the matriarchy of nursing required your fathers permission, secondly whilst nurses residences tended to be ruled at times by an iron fist (iron bra), university dorms were much much more relaxed in their rules in the exact same era.

So it was the matriarchy in nursing who made the rules, not the fathers of daughters doing nursing. So your idea that society is not shaped by women simply does not match reality.

Prior to large numbers of women moving into the workforce and earning their own income, it was mostly the male who provided financial support for the family, so naturally it would be in the banks best interest to deal with the person whose income that would pay off the debt.

I suspect however that perhaps many men went along with decisions made by his wife. Today the wife makes around 70-80% of the financial decisions in a marriage, she influences the house that they buy, the car. So I doubt very strongly that this is a new trend, but a trend which had been present for a very long time, but not as noticable because until recent times(last 100 years), most income was spent trying to survive.

Lord, it's getting hot in here. Let's take off all our clothes.*

Whitty, I'm not sure if you're deliberately not getting some of Yvonne's point, or really not getting them. I think she was talking about flashing that was intended to frighten or intimidate, not stripping off for fun. This is a well-documented desire some people have. Women and men stripping or flashing at Mardi Gras, conversely, are generally trying to entertain and attract, not scare you.

Someone flashed me quite recently. He saw me walking up my street at night and hid in an alcove, then jumped out, waved his erect penis at me, and called me something unmentionable. He was laughing. His intent was not to entertain or attract. I'm not sure what it was in all its Freudian complexity, but he *really* wanted to scare me. Few men or women find this kind of sexual kink satisfying, but some do.

For the record, I wasn't scared. I know flashers are generally just that. But my husband was scared for me. Incidentally, we flash each other all the time. I find *that* exciting.

Also, about seeing other men naked, I think Yvonne was trying to find an example similar to yours. You said you found the painting of the women masturbating beautiful. I'm sure I would too. Personally, I'd find an erotic picture of a man masturbating beautiful as well. (To be very frank I think I have some downloaded on my computer.) I think Yvonne's question is would you? Would most men?

Maybe they would. I don't think there's a right or wrong answer. But it is a good question.

Lastly, you keep on about the speeding ads, and rightly so. You've convinced me. But I think most women relate. We feel like that hourly - our bums are too big, our boobs not big enough, we're too old, etc, etc. As I said before, this is not "all men's fault" or whatever you think feminists think. But it is so. So why don't we work on improving culture's sexual belittling together?

* Jokes!

Vanilla,

I cant imagine being itimidated by a naked woman. Someone being naked amongst the clothed is also normally associated with vunerability. But to answer your question, being hererosexual I would be indifferent to a painting of a naked man masturbating. I can anticipate you bringing in homophobia, but I think the reason the picture would be unnaceptable is that a man's sexuality is considered threatening. I haven't tried to blame either sex for this.

I still think there is difference in attitudes to men vs women flashing and masturbating. A woman doing either is cheeky or adventurous or 'liberated', a man doing either is dirty and perverted.

About the commercials I think it bites a lot harder when the message is coming from the government. I think what Yvonne is saying really equates to it's all mens fault, as she stating that 'society' has been created by men and women have had no part in it.

You seem to differ from Yvonne in this, and I noticed you didn't refute any of the last paragraph from my earlier post. But note women already have the stage on body image problems, sexism, discrimination, and it does little to help men's plight to reactively relate women's problems in response to any men's issues. This is the root of my problem with feminism and it's effect of creating a bias against men by drowning out any men's issues as if they threaten women's exclusive victim status.

This is illustrated in the government deciding just one depiction of domestic violence by women against men would so weaken the message of their domestic violence adverts.

As I posted earlier, the very term 'feminist' ensures an approach not toward equity, but assumes women to be in a weaker position, searching toward equity with men. This makes any claim a man might make for equity in any area invalid, as women are the ones in supposed need of equity. These are the terms of gender politics.

I have enjoyed our discussions and apologise for my generalisation of feminists, but I generalise from my experiences.

I've finally gotten around to reading Audrey's excellent piece.
Finished my read with damp eyes and a lump in the throat. A wonderful and touching piece of writing.

Then I got to the posts, amongst it all there seems to be some great dialog (Vanilla, Whitty, Yvonne) but this thread seems like totally the wrong place for this discussion. Maybe time to move it over to a new general thread.

Audrey has written a piece that we could all take some time on as we think about getting older ourselves, our partners getting older or our parents growing older. I've seen people I knew go through the pain of a partner slipping away mentally but have not had anybody close to me do so.

There is much in the article that is worthy of taking time to ponder and it seems sad to see that apparently lost in a debate over feminism.

Audrey thank you for one of the most touching pieces I've read on this site. For the others engaged in what is for the most part a constructive dialog I hope I'm not being too harsh, I've appreciated many of the points made and the responses, it just seems like the wrong place for them.

R0bert

I entirely agree. In fact, I made this point myself somewhere. Then proceeded to ignore it. Very rude of me.

Apologies Audrey.

I saw a news item tonight on research which it is hoped will help minimise the memory loss experienced by Alzheimer's disease sufferers.

Passing small electric currents through the brain has been demonstrated to help memory. I've found one link to similar work at http://www.news-medical.net/?id=20882

The decription in the article varies from what I recall of the news article but is similar. I've not tracked it down on either the Nine or ABC news sites yet (and don't remember who carried it).

Practical help is probably years away even if this works but it is a sign of hope.

R0bert