the problem is the idiots, liars and deniers that won't admit this. In addition to the fairness issue here there are real consequences when someone has to pay a high price for something and/or accept shoddy goods. You can suppress the discussion if you want but doing that won't make ALL of the consequences go away, is it possible that there could be some value in someone, somewhere, telling the truth.

THAT is going to be fun to watch, if I live long enough.

it's not worth it to exchange good sex for barely better than nothing sex. If it ever happens you will see that I am right, but who knows how long it will be.

that it has never NOT been around. There are only variations in emphasis.

There seem to be a lot of hints though that people were REQUIRED to profess certain views in public; if people were "naturally" "moral" why so much effort to promote and impose "morality".

This is an absolute and total lie. Read my posts.

of the "pro-sex" virgins

my impression is that women who have problems with the pill don't take it. It seems doubtful to me that any man would refuse to use a condom and risk getting stuck with 20 years of child support if a woman told him she wasn't on the pill because of the side effects. You seem to be suggesting that all or most women have problems with the pill, I don't think this is the case especially if they try different ones.

maybe some women don't have problems with the pill and prefer it.

I seriously doubt it. Women can:

take the pill and have sex (with or without condoms)

not take the pill and rely on condoms

not have sex

I don't think there is any reason to believe that women don't pick the one they want and do it. I don't see anything that would constrain their ability to choose whichever of those alternatives that they prefer. Since there is no problem, what is the problem.

If you are male there is always internal pressure, as someone pointed out the only choice which is absolute is no, yes requires the cooperation of other(s). So those who prefer no to yes always have "more choice".

if any of the disruptions associated with increasing female power always are shown by a completely objective cost benefit analysis to be worth it and any disruptions caused by increasing male power always are shown by a completely objective cost benefit analysis to NOT be worth it, well I guess the completely objective analysis speaks for itself.

they CERTAINLY never would.

It's nice to see you trying to stick by your principles, but really, don't you think a survey of women's responses to these OLD guys would make it pretty clear that treating everything as equal/the same just doesn't always fit reality. Or maybe that is your point.

So much verbiage would be superseded by facts on the "ground". It will be something to see alright. If it is ever allowed to happen.

They may be a minority, but there are A LOT of women who get off, figuratively AND literally, on penetrative sex (yes I mean when they are on the receiving end). Discussing THIS fact of course is also taboo.

until men and women are the same? are you sure you want to stop there? do you really believe this is possible without medical intervention? are you in favor of THAT if necessary?

no one is stupid enough to belive that we would do this so 9 billion people can drive hummers...ok, well maybe there is a problem.

if they can get it, failing that however some fakes are better than others. Obviously, considering what people pay.

I suspect they may however, although maybe not, since any woman or gay man can find at least an average person to fuck.

but they don't.

they both risk disease but if he is willing to trust her she can't pretend that he is asking for anything he isn't willing to give. It changes the entire dynamic of the discussion.

but there are plenty of moslem societies (and others) where women are dominated by men.

is the problem and so whoever has the thing attached to them is the one who loses out. For me personally this isn't really the problem, it's the loss of sensation derived from direct contact so for me I don't think there would be much difference. Obviously most men CAN get off wearing condoms and since women have so much trouble I can understand why they don't see it as a problem, but shouldn't the goal be for everyone to have good sex, not for everyone to have equally bad sex.

but it is interesting that a lot of the specific examples being provided of why this is true seem to be coming from men. It may seem funny for me to be saying this, but really in this case it is true, male opinions on male attractiveness really are totally meaningless.

the only time you have a society worth living in for most people is when there is enough "surplus" wealth that those who have it can allow some of it to be spread around. Obviously this isn't the only requirement, but if you only treat better the people you are forced by necessity to treat better lots of people won't be treated better.

but strangely enough women seen utterly disinclined to return the favor. The best one I've hear recently was the attempt of feminists to OUTLAW men testing the paternity of their (alleged)children without the mothers consent. How can anyone really dispute my point when these sorts of proposals are taken seriously.