Not ALL women agree with this, fortunately, at least not all the time.

can this work on adults?

they would be able to say when someone was messing with them. Obviously they can't be born with understanding but if sex was a part of life that people learned about in an age appropriate way (whatever that is) it seems like that would help. Death isn't easy either and there are limits to understanding it but we don't attempt to keep people oblivious to it's existence until they are teenagers.

If so she was for sure lying about the 6 months away from the computer.

and then there are women like this:

http://www.charmandrigor.com/clips/details-raping.html.

I don't think I am capable of sorting it out.

so that people are forced, or at least strongly pressured, by circumstances if not legal force, to tie themselves for life to someone they are not in love with is not the answer. I don't know what the answer is but that isn't it.

it can't be more than two because then there would not be clarity about who could speak for who. It used to be that only certain people were allowed to live together, now the govt doesn't decide. People in relationships tend to live together but the govt is not involved.

Movie stars and sports stars are selling a performance that lots of people are willing to pay for, it's the same as microsoft making lots of money by selling a million copies of a piece of software. The ONLY REASON CEOs make what they do is because they are, effectivly, setting their own compensation (everybody sits on everybody elses boards) and since big business owns the govt. the govt doesn't do anything to rein them in.

if there is a real point being made.

so any woman who doesn't choose to get one if she isn't married is choosing to be a single mother hence single motherhood is normally a choice.

This attitude is one reason men are reluctant to get married: if she is ever disagreed with about anything then he is an "180 lb kid who thinks he deserves to be boss".

the fact is that almost the ONLY taxes that have been lowered during the past 38 years of right wing ascendancy have been taxes on rich peoples incomes.

banks and a lot of other things in the rest of the world manage to keep their e-mail, and everything else, running just fine without paying this kind of money.

if they measured and compared kids in long term cohabitation with both parents with those who are not rather than married and unmarried.

DNA provides the equivalent in establishing responsibility.

this isn't surprising, and in fact unless you want a population decline it is a good thing.

they just got used to their enemies being less powerful. Ok it has changed in that they hate the same things, they just hate them even more now.

are not obssessed/paranoid/paralyzed by concerns over their status and attractiveness these relationships are probably not as rare as the raw demographics would suggest.

oppose it

but I am against taking the attitude that all of the difference is due to male inferiority/obnoxiousnes/privilidge. There are plenty of women who through their own experiences understand how their sex drive can disappear even when nothing in their external environment changes, or at least nothing that is any mans fault or that any man can do anything about. I hope things things even out somewhat, but the preferred strategy seems to be to even them out by LOWERING EVERYONE'S interest. This of course is not a new approach, it's hundreds of years old, at least, but I'd prefer NOT to see it updated for the modern era any more than the considerable amount it already has been.

Maybe you are right but this approach is also an excellent tactic becaue as long as it DOESN'T even out men haven't done enough. Of course nothing that is done will ever be enough.

but it's a little difficult for me to see a meaning of hot which doesn't involve at least wanting to think about getting them into bed if you could. If women are surrounded by men willing to sleep with them and the women don't, or rarely, do it, then the women don't "really" think those men are hot, at least in the way that men mean it when they describe a woman as hot.

when you know there is NO chance you tune out a little.

had women begging them for it the world would be a very different place. Actually it would be a lot like the world of gay men (of course "begging" is something of a misnomer when everyone gives it up to everyone, but you get my drift I think).

That is becaue it takes different things for a man to be hot than for a woman to be. What makes a woman hot is to have a nice body and face and to be willing to make it avialable (obviously other things can add appeal to but that alone is worth quite a bit). It obviously takes a lot more than this for a man to be of interest (except to gay men).

they both describe the same situation i.e one where there is a sexual response to what the speaker considers the wrong thing by what the speaker considers the wrong people.

should go to the police. Maybe there would be privacy issues but why would this be any different than the privacy issues involved anytime the police collect or hold evidence.

in this area particularly media just reflects what is already there, or not there. Most people understand that when someone is obsessed with the idea that porn "turns people into", say pedophiles for example, that you probably shouldn't let them babysit your kids. Why is feminist posturing on "porn" not subjected to critical scrutiny.