>I think that instead of nagging a person who is not an expert at this three times,<

1) The guy thinks he's an expert--or does know what he's doing. But he's _not_ fixing the problem. If he doesn't want to do it, why doesn't he just say so the first time you bring it up?

>and then assuming your only choice is to pay someone $300 to do it,<

If you've asked the guy three times and he won't do it, what _should_ you do? If the sink is clogged up and you can't wash the dishes or run the dishwasher or the washing machine and work is piling up, what _should_ you do?

>communicating and negotiating what the issues are and the priorities<

Why shouldn't the guy say upfront, "I don't want to fix this?"

>seeing if there is some cooperative way to change the priorities<

When something is broken to the point it's interfering with the house functioning, _that_ is a priority.

>discussing the finances and the issue of the $300 payment and seeing if that is agreeable to both parties<

But, see, a guy with this kind of head does _not_ want to discuss squat. He wants to do the repairs himself when he feels like it--not when it needs to be done.

>and if it is not, since he knows little more than you do about it, you can either a) change your budget to pay for the repair, or b) pick up the damn plumbers wrench and get the job done.<

Fine. But said guy has no frickin' right to 1) sulk; 2) bitch about the cost; 3) pull some passive-aggressive crap thereafter. I have no beef with any person who doesn't want to do repairs. But that person shouldn't prevent the other person from getting the job done. You can't have it both ways, and people who are perfectionists about repairs or cleaning always want it both ways--which means nothing gets done unless they compromise or you force the issue.

>Yes deering, your example shows you can construct an example in which you are always right.<

And you are not answering any of the questions Allie or I raised, so you don't really want to debate. You just want to whine about how everything is women's fault. (For your information, this example actually happened to someone in my family, but you'll probably discount that as "anecdotal" so you won't have to address the issue. Nice play...g!)

>But not all men are like your strawman.<

I never said they were. You keep saying I'm referring to all men. Again, you aren't reading what I'm saying--you just want to play the same blame game over and over. And you want to parse words to a ridiculous degree without addressing the main issue. For the last time--if something needs repair; a woman asks a guy to do it; he says he will but doesn't do it three times running (but will get peeved off if she fixes it or has someone else do it,) what should she do? What are her options? How can she get the job done without making the guy sulky? And why the hell should she have to go through all this crap just to get a stupid repair done?

>Why waste your time responding to them to defend women and feminism when all it does it let them screw you over in public?<

1) These guys actually _believe_ the hatred they wallow in, which is perversely fascinating. 2) Dealing with them shows you the kind of arguements misogynists generally use--and helps you be ready for them. 3) And it's entertaining to see these guys scream about how illogical and emotional women are, yet do post after post that spread ignorant vitriol and refuse to address the issue under debate.

>It's interesting that you think bosses should reassign tasks without discussing this with you<

That is what you and your dimwitted fellow-travelers said. You brought up the boss analogy, so people took you up on it. It's interesting you think a woman should respect a man who keeps saying he'll do something; never does it--and doesn't want her to do it.

Roiphe laid the groundwork for folks like Coulter, O'Beirne, Flanagan, and Maureen Dowd to make cash flow off bashing women. And she's playing a very old "talented-tenth" game--putting down other women and making out like she's the sterling exception to their "weakness" so men/those in power will see her as strong. But of course, she reserves the right to whine "You're picking on meeee" tactics when she gets called out for her crap (as her reaction to Pollitt's perfectly-logical question proves.) Doubt she's learned a damm thing except how to hide her contempt better.

>Roiphe strikes me as a literary-world insider who's good at self-promotion but pretty clueless when it comes to actual relationships.<

She's like a lot of elite legacy-types--she's had everything handed to her. As well, she's never had to deal with the legal system or anything else when it comes to rape, so she's had the luxury of taking the "me stronger" high road...and acting like her inchoate ignorant world-view is expertise.