A lot of this crap on these gender wars is really unnecessary. There is a reluctance for the genders to meet half way. And I'm not talking about on the issues (you cant realistically expect that), I'm talking about the norms of communication between men and women.

I mentioned on another thread how men have been brought up with a thicker skin. Men joke around and express themselves in a way shaped by the expectation that men have been socialised to have a laugh at each other, and shock, and the social contract not to be too worried about each others feelings.

Women on the other hand are all about being 'nice' and sparing any harsh truths and sugar coating stuff.

My example on another thread is of men openly laughing at each others shortcomings in appearance and women I have observed generally give affirmation to each other on the surface. But it applies more generally.

Anti shows a lack of desire to tone down his recourse for a female audience. The female audience, who we're always told has such high emotional intelligence, decide to deliberately discount antis more traditionally masculine way of conversing, take the moral high ground and use it to discredit his arguments.

As Foxy has shown, women can be constricted in outwardly showing blatant aggression and a lack of sensitivity, but would more than likely have the same aggression, just display it in the Fractelle patented ('excuse me for having an opinion while being female') passive aggression. Anti shows the emotional intelligence to recognise it for what it is. In a way I think he's the more intellectually honest, but I have a male bias.

Antis deliberate insensitivity and the chicks deliberate passive aggressive reaction creates a beautiful dance that makes these gender threads so entertaining.

Pity about those who want to reach some understanding. Though I'm not sure, by the behaviour and wilful ignorance and neglect displayed, there are many people really that disappointed. Well, I'm not. It's piss funny.

Antiseptic claims:

<<< The people who tend to engage with me on these subjects are zealots. They are not only convinced that all men are evil, they are convinced that all men will forever be evil. >>>

You would like to believe that people who disagree with your POV are "man-haters", however there is no evidence of that. People like Foxy, Pynchme, Suzeonline frequently express admiration for the men in their lives and are very clear on where they disagree with you. I suspect that you are projecting your own emotions into this debate; you feel you have been short-changed with regard to your custody arrangements - and maybe you have. However, that does not mean any women who do not agree with you, Antiseptic, hate ALL men. That indicates placing a rather large degree of importance on yourself - the world does not revolve around you or your opinion.

In conclusion, one thing the sexual revolution has done for women, is to give them the confidence to speak up, to proffer their opinions (whether right or wrong) even when some men, such as yourself, disagree. And more power to them.

"You would like to believe that people who disagree with your POV are "man-haters""

I can't speak for Anti, but I certainly believe that those people who defend and perpetuate legal systems and attitudes that are grossly unfair to men need to be held accountable.

Famiy law is unfair to men.

The misuse of AVOs is unfair to men.

Society's tendency to assume that men are villans and women are victims is unfair to men.

Accusing men who disagree with any woman of being sexist and unable to handle a woman having an opinion is unfair to men. Some of us have explained in minute detail why we disagree with many of Pynchme and Suze's opinions and it isn't because they are women

I'd just like to say a few words...

I feel that most of us whether it's in a relationship
or in the workplace, we're always negotiating our
own voice. I'm comfortable with my own ideas, I
believe they're worthy of being heard. I'm secure
and unafraid of speaking my own mind. My intentions
aren't to win some sort of "gender war," (I actually
wasn't aware there was one), and I always feel good
that I've spoken my mind without malice or anger,
but just from the depths of my truth.

Sure, sometimes I realize that perhaps I should
have said things differently (haven't we all thought
that at times?). But I've always been aware that it's
important to be conscious and compassionate and act
with great civility. There is nothing more unpleasant
for me than to see a person demeaned - as I've
watched it happen in my own home - growing up.

As far as OLO goes - I wasn't aware as I said that there
was a "gender war," of any kind going on. As far as
I'm aware - Antiseptic is more than capable of standing
his own ground in any discussion. As for -
Suze and Pynch, they are both people that I admire greatly -
because of their constructive debating skills. Their
attention is centred on the topic itself - and they
respond to the argument not the arguer.

Finally, it's silly to finger point - because for every
finger you point there's three pointing back at you - and
so it goes. You can't win. Besides as I've said before -

"A woman can say more in a sigh
than a man can say in a sermon!"

Women like silent men,
They think they're listening.

Back to the sexual revolution and the wondrous little pill that liberated women.

What interests me is why The Pill remains only available through prescription despite a successful forty years 'trial' and very low incidence of problems from it.

- Why shouldn't it be available from Coles and Woolies?

Demographics
Who could ever have forecast the mammoth effect one little pill would have on the demographics of Western countries?

- Could have resulted in environmental sustainability and a better quality of life for millions. Instead, the greed of the few required growth.

There is still time to release women in underdeveloped countries from the bonds of being baby factories. Liberation of women from unplanned pregnancy and being forced to carry umpteen children is the real sexual revolution. ZPG for the world should be the aim of governments not something they studiously avoid.

- However it would seem that having more women in positions of responsibility does not guarantee a change.

I would like to see the Pill available from vending machines world-wide. That is my wish for women and the world. That would be a real revolution.

H: <"Most of the stuff you say like loving men etc bares (sic, btw) no relation to how you argue about gender stuff and the image of men you are all constantly portraying.">

No Houellebecq. The image that's portrayed is of abusive men, not all men. You and others seem to have a problem differentiating or separating yourselves from abusive men. That's your image problem, not mine.

It's very interesting that in one post, females are blamed for being aggressive, passive - yet in relation to Foxy's posts, it's none other than YOU who takes the bow with, "See this is the kind of attitude I've long looked to foster in you". You've fostered? Thank goodness eh or Foxy might never have evolved towards her full posting potential.

Btw - I am sure it won't give you but a moment's laugh, but I find the term, "kiddie fiddler" irritating. It minimizes the distress that children experience when this very serious crime is foisted upon them. Many, though far from all, who have been "fiddled" end up deceased; at the least they are compelled to carry the psychological effects and the memories for a long time.