This is turning into an interesting discussion
as I had hoped it would be.

Thanks to you all for your inputs thus far.

I apologise that I only gave the one website
in my opening post - and that it was one-sided.
My aim was to get the ball rolling on the topic.

However, the following website I hope, will balance
things out a bit:

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=1375083

Over the centuries, women have submitted to extraordinary
physical constraints demanded by men, from thirteenth-century
chastity belts, designed to keep women faithful while
their husbands were away, to early twentieth-century footbinding
in China, where men admired dainty female feet. To the
late nineteenth century rigid corsets that produced the wasplike
waist that men expected in that era.

Today, the emphasis is on body-shape, youth, and breasts...

Compared to women, men have three times the suicide rate,
three times the rate for severe mental disorders, and six
times the alcoholism rate. Men commit most serious crimes,
and constitute the largest number of prison inmates. They're
also far more likely to suffer from stress-related diseases
like ulcers, hypertension and asthma. They also die earlier.

As for sexual experiences - men and women are exploring a
wider variety of possibilities. More options are becoming
open and equally acceptable for both sexes.

Another little datum: There were extensive studies done in the UK, and a smaller one in America, genetically testing the parentage of new-borns. In all the studies it was found that in over a third of cases the father was NOT the one on the birth-certificate, despite the marital/relationship situation of the mother. ALL these studies were halted as soon as the evidence began to surface, as an "infringement of a woman's right to privacy" ! How about a man's right to know if he's the father or not? How about the child's right to know their parentage?
How about the TRUTH?
Why exactly do "women's rights" over-rule anyone else's? Try getting your child tested, you can't without the mother's permission, hardly likely if she's been "playing away". Why is this so? Considering the costs, financial and emotional, associated with child-rearing, I feel it should be done to ALL children at birth, this would vastly simplify many problems, and eliminate some, the only problem I see it causing is if the woman has been naughty, and that's on her own head, she should be willing to "own" her behaviour, just as women demand that we men do, goose and gander situation methinks.

Scientists argue that our biological or evolutionary instincts mean men are apt to want to spread their "seed" around,particularly to younger women because they are more likely to fall pregnant. Women by the same token as "natural mothers" tend to remain faithful because of the importance of the family unit and caring for their children. It was also vital that the father knew he was the actual father of any child.

I would suggest these evolutionary factors may still play a part of who we are today. This does not mean that all men are unfaithful or that all women are faithful.

Women cheating has always been frowned on because of the difficulty in ascertaining the father of any children. This is probably why women who sleep around get labelled as "sluts" while men have the more complimentary label of "stud".

Not all gender differences are due to inequality sometimes there were very valid cultural reasons. I read somewhere the reason that women lost the Miss and became Mrs was because it was men that made the first move and one had to distinguish between the available and non-available women.

There are double standards on both sides of the great gender divide in law, sex and work. In the washup, I figure it works out about equal in terms of discriminatory practices although within the domestic violence issue I would argue women are the bigger losers.

It's interesting. The sociologist Ian Robertson
feels that "the double standard of
sexual conduct for men and women is changing
to a certain degree, partly because of the greater
equality of the sexes and also perhaps because
contraception freed many women from the fear of
pregnancy. In sharp contrast to the
situation that existed a few decades ago, today
only a small minority of people (of both sexes) would
worry whether a woman was a virgin at the time of marriage."

However, Robertson concurs that," promiscuous behaviour
in a woman is still more
likely to attract a stigma then similar behaviour in a man.
Although, a strong sexual appetite in a woman is no longer
likely to be seen as a psychological disorder - 'nymphomania.'"

Robertson notes that, "One interesting effect of the changing
relationships of the sexes is that the responsibility for a
successful sexual encounter has largely shifted from the female
to the male partner."

In the past the sexual problem used to be female "frigidity.'
The inability of a woman to achieve orgasm or even to enjoy
sex. Today, Robertson tells us that "frigidity, has all but
disappeared, instead the same problem is more likely to be
labeled as one of poor "performance" by the male."

Which of course puts pressure on the male.

As Pelican points out - we have "double-standards," with
the great gender divide - in just about everything.
But, with time and the greater equality of the sexes -
perhaps things will change for the better in all areas,
(as we find roles that will be acceptable to both men
and women). As our society becomes more individualistic
and highly open to change and experimentation the
restrictions of gender will no longer apply - ( all
possible options will be open and equally acceptable for
both sexes).

Men will be permitted a more gentle and expressive
personality. The image of the aggressive male - today
has less and less appeal. Like the feminine role,
the masculine role today will hopefully become more ambiguous,
more flexible, and more subject to interpretation by
the individual.

That all may well be true Foxy, though I'm dubious, but the basic humanities will remain, "nice" guys will still finish last, women will still sleep with the "bad" guy every time, given a choice, people will still be un-faithful, it's all written in the genes, and until we change THOSE, nothing else will, much. There's only so much education can achieve, e.g.: tell me you know of one single woman who hasn't been drawn to that arrogant, selfish "B" we all know, no matter how wrong she knows it to be? See? Many a man has fallen for that "sweet young thing", against his better instincts, yet despite women making a game of tempting men, it's always our fault if we fall for it? It's in the genes.
"Common-sense is a most un-common sense"

A female friend once told me that a woman will make a long list
of qualities that she seeks in a guy, but in the end she will
run off and follow her feelings. There is some truth in that.