Belly,

Sorry mate, I've offended you.

But you agreed with JoM - and his stance is that women have no place in political or bureaucratic life - as if our more emotional base precludes a valuable input.

I happen to agree with Houellie and individual in that both their opinions have merit.

Why do you mention "women's domination"?
Let's face it, Western feminists are only buying into the male paradigm. That's not women's domination. It's merely women jumping on the male-constructed bandwagon.

I have a lot of time for you, Belly. Why, I'd probably even let you open a door or two for me - and I'm capable of returning the favour.

Yes what are you on about Belly I couldn't decipher any of that?

'Western feminism has merely fallen into line with the male-orientated way.'

I see neither male or female oriented 'ways' I see both support the status quo. For every exploitative resource mis-managing monolith compamy, there needs to be drone workers (Men, apart from a select few), and happy little consumers (women, by proxy of their husband's paycheck and now more explicitly)

Which brings me to

'where whole societies depend on the overarching industry and organisation of women for their societies to run smoothly'

That's still how it is man. What man really keeps track of family engagements, the social secretary looks after that. How many wives buy the presents for their in-laws, and remember the kids names. The industry of women is making platters and socialising people to talk to their families, because there's no way men would bother. There'd be whole tribes who had never discovered each other if it wasn't for tea parties and cakes.

Half the communities found each other by conquest, the other half by that special social phenomena known as female networking and out-doing each others' cooking and obligating the purchase of little presents against each other.

Actually the silent war, the arms race of buying little presents has kept many an economy going. I swear I fork out more for little presents for my partner's friends and even birthday presents for all the children of my partners friends than I do on food every year.

I honestly think that women help the economy far more than men, though men seem to be embracing the female lately with this new metrosexualism.

Even Bunnings is totally reliant on women. It's a microcosm of this society; man trying to impress woman with what he can build for her. It's just like the 'wait until your father gets home', and SHY is the woman who cries crocidile tears for the exploited workers that bring her that 'you're worth it' luxury of feminist career and childcare and ikea, the products of the supposed 'male-orientated way'.

Houellie, I agree with you.

But we do live in a rather skewed paradigm in the West. We're all co-opted to keep the tills ringing - and women are by far the best gatherers. It, therefore, stands to reason that were always going to be the best shoppers - instinct you know.

Gawd...I've got Ludwig's editing bug : )

Should read - "...It, therefore, stands to reason that "they" were always going to be the best shoppers...."

[poirot, in fact I would open the doors every time I do not agree with what I seem to have said.
That NO women should be in politics, and my reference to being flogged are for an absent, hope she is OK poster.
But every time I look at that greens Hanson young I bite my lip, I once said she was good looking, far from it.
Those eyes hide a dragon lady, no need to be right, every need to be obeyed.
Labor, in my view, reserves far too many seats for union officials and women, off late both in one.
Surely ability not sex is the measure?

Surely ability not sex is the measure?
Belly,
that depends how good either of them are. :-)