They do but those who claim exclusive connection to the real truth, in this case the Orthodox, have about as much respect for reform Jews and what they do as a bible banging gay bashing fundie has for a gay unitarian.

No, just to have everything your way, (i.e no "discrimination" "sexism" "objectification" etc) an entirely different thing.

If it has a choice betweeen starvation, no sex(extinction), or walking on it's hind legs all the time it will probably walk on it's hind legs thus demonstrating how incompetent dogs are at walking.

and when they are forced to talk about it they are revealed.

This is absurd, you can't "own" someones experiences. You can prevent them from revealing certain information or you could even make them agree not to do certain things as a condition of taking certain jobs, but even in the unlikely event that it was constitutional to prevent anyone who works for the govt. from ever talking about their experiences it would mean 1) No one sane would ever work in govt. 2)We would never find out most of what the people in govt. were doing.

that will be the kind that most people have.

Not if people have a CONVENIENT way to blur their faces and do other things to preserve their anonymity and therefore protect themselves against punishment/being made an example of by those who are trying to force people to behave "properly".

the question, Mel, is why this is considered a ridiculous extreme.

As long as anyone has the power to make them unhappy women are powerless and oppressed in their own eyes. Men are programmed, by both culture and biology, to understand that the world, or more specifically the people in it, don't exist for the purpose of making them happy (it's based on reproductive role, women know that NATURE can be tough i.e pregnancy and childbirth but they expect the role of other PEOPLE to be supportive; because men don't have to go through that they DO have to fight for opportunities and be rejected).

that there is something "unnatural" about other people not doing what they want them to.

For most men that would be zero: ALL money is spent on necessities either by the definition of both or the definition of the woman i.e. for her they are necessities and for him that means they are necessities too, if he is going to have a life.

Why do you assume this. When people have no money and no way to live, or at any rate no way to have a life, they tend to get desperate. Everyone needs their own.

is it because when couples go to movies the man usually pays (even if this is true it's unclear why this would lead to him making the choice, at least in my experience). Once a product is pitched to a particular audience then only the people who like that product show up to have influence on what is produced. It's like talk radio, once it became right wing only wingers listened to it.

and that movie doesn't seem to have given birth to a new genre. Is it just my lack of awareness or did that movie have no effect at all on the industry.

because the resources to make it happen simply do not exist for people to finance or to do ANY of this privately. Either old people can stay with it enough to manage with a little help or they are taken care of with whatever public/insurance resources become available to them WITHOUT the use of paid advocates etc. because most people don't have the money to pay for them. People have to work every day to survive, they can't dump it and travel to take care of ANYONE.

If you stay thin, maintain good cardiovascular fitness, maintain good joint flexibility, maintain muscle strength, (all of the forgoing can be done by anyone who is willing to eat right and exercise unless they have a congenital disability or are in an accident) plan ahead, and are determined to be self sufficient even if it involves accepting limitations you probably will be able to keep going on your own until you are close to death. It won't always work this way of course but very few people do all these things and those who do are much more likely to have a good result. The second, (or possibly the leading depending on how the evidence is evaluated) cause of dementia are vascular problems and mini strokes the vast majority of which are due to damage to the cardiovascular system due to poor eating/consumption habits and lack of appropriate exercise.

(and what I am comparing it to doesn't involve surgery, I don't think)

This is an important point: it is entirely impossible to say what should be done or what could be done without taking into account who has the legal and financial power in the situation. When people are legally competent and in control of the money there isn't much you can make them do no matter how out of it they are. When they don't have the power you can FORCE them to do the "right" thing but they may very well get VERY pissed off and stay that way. Without knowing which type of situation is being discussed it is almost impossible to comment intelligently on what can or what should be done.

Actually it doesn't, because size really does, or at least it can, mattter.