@Col Rouege: I don't think misogynists and misandrists represent all of humanity.

This whole topic is abhorrent. I will take artificial insemination as an example. It entirely negates evolutionary processes. The strongest or fastest sperm do not win. Instead a random sperm is selected and inserted into the ovum.

This includes donors. It has been written in scientific studies fairly recently, that people choose their sexual partners based mainly on the chemistry of their genetics. That is to say, the chemistry that attracts you to a partner determines suitability for reproduction. Now when you get donors this process also is destroyed. I'm not saying this will have a massive effect but it seems reasonable to conclude that ignoring evolutionary processes would be a bad thing.

Those are just two examples of damage being done to our genetics. I doubt the effects of such processes are being tracked.

There's me,

Irish + Scottish Knight, bush boy, kissed by the wild gypsie spell.

Massacest begged to be whipped, beaten and hurt.

The Sadist said No.

Foxy wrote, "It takes a woman twenty years to make a man of her son,
and another woman twenty minutes to make a fool of him".

Foxy-20 minutes to make a fool of a man? You are SLOW! Or kind.

It took my Anne Bolyn 2 seconds to make a fool of me-that look across the crowded room, that meeting of eyes! I was a goner! And I started to open jam jars compulsively.

Why all the focus on Jam Jars when a much more critical duty remains? Who will kill (or remove from the house/street/suburb) spiders if men were gone.

A jam jar rarely evokes the sense of urgency that a spider does and spray's just don't do the job.

While spiders remain and sprays don't kill and evaporate the bodies instantly we will still have a role.

R0bert

Dear Henry,

I always supected you were an old romantic ...

You just had a bad agent.

Country gal, my last post was designed as whimsy, to insert levity into the debate,

To your comment “Are men necessary? Strictly speaking, no, but arent relationships usually much healthier and more fun if they are based on want, not need?!”

You need to read my previous posting

Per Posted by Col Rouge, Wednesday, 13 February 2008 9:13:10 AM

Regarding the family unit and the healthy development of the progeny

“We are wired by nature to function in family units with a father and mother prominent. Remove one or both of those parent elements and you get something less.”

As someone who is divorced from the mother of my daughters and as someone who has, despite threats etc, been a consistent presence in my daughters lives, the relationship I have with them both and the way they deal with their own lives, as independent minded women and the things they say and the love they express to me suggests there are very positive benefits to be afforded to someone with interaction and love of both parents, regardless of the marital status.

My ex-wife and I have always been able to bury our differences for the sake of our children, dancing together at the girls prom nights and always having birthdays and Christmas as a family, despite the divorce.

Men might not be necessary, women aren't either.

However, mothers and fathers are absolutely essential.

Steel “I don't think misogynists and misandrists represent all of humanity.”

I was having a joke at the expense of your post Steel, don’t take it seriously.

For the sake of gravitas, take the last line of my response to Country gal as from the heart and not something quick off the lip.

to respond to Foxy's observation of Henry VIII

"I always supected you were an old romantic "

With 6 wifes I would say he was a Masochist.

and Foxy to you previous comment

"means treating women as sequels."

actually whilst some men and women choose a polyamorous lifestyle, far more as simply "serious monogonists".