I am so disappointed in this community. Whether you agree with Maureen Dowd and Rebecca Traister; whether you feel offended; I don't see the need for the personal attacks. Can we have a civil discussion? If a person expresses a viewpoint, no matter the quality of the expression, her experience is her own and is valid simply because she has experienced it. A bottom line respect for this as one valid entry into the human experience is the basis for civil dialogue. So please call off the dogs and offer something constructive.

I also suggest that just because you found a path in life that works for you - marrying someone who earns less; realizing that love is service to the other; or whatever - you might consider that this is not the right path for everyone. There is no one right way to go about life and relationships. If there were it would all be so easy.

Is it possible that we do still have cultural blockades to allowing women to be fully realized in whatever form they naturally are without being villified? I would say that the comments on this site confirm that possibility.

It is also possible that what Ms. Dowd may be expressing (I haven't read her book) is a symptom of leadership. Whether you agree with her views or not, she is a successful and well-read writer. Her opinions are published in the New York Times. By virtue of her career status she is a leader. Leaders by definition can be lonely, as they have fewer peers than non-leaders. Leaders also have the personal dilemma of having a calling to serve a large group of people rather than a single individual. It is not selfish to pursue that calling. Rather is quite selfless. It can be tricky to find a relationship where the needs of the personal relationship don't interfere with carrying out your calling. This is why nuns, monks, priests of many faiths take a vow of celibacy.

There is that addage, "Behind every successful man is a devoted woman." These women are not merely the trophy wives that we demean them to be. They play a vital role in managing the personal life of the man, so that he can focus his energies on his leadership role. The woman has to be content with the support role and be fulfilled without having as much personal attention as she might receive with another man. Or she has to heed a calling of her own and find fulfillment there.

Perhaps the addage should be, "Behind every successful person is a devotee." That devotee is not always a spouse. She could be a secretary. He could be a brother. Or a great friend.

I am not as successful as Ms. Dowd. I am probably less educated. I am however, somewhat facile of mind, somewhat articulate, and, I'm told, somewhat attractive. I own my own business and that business hosts a creative community that is predominantly women. I have been told repeatedly throughout my adulthood that I intimidate men. I am not an angry woman. I thoroughly enjoy the company of men. I have a great appreciation for all people.

Yet, when I hold my opinions strongly, I am often told by men, who claim to love me, that this is offensive. Of course, it is only offensive when I'm not expressing their point of view. And when I signed up for Match.com and researched other matchmaking services, I was told that I would be the most difficult type of woman to find a match for. Why? Because I owned my own business. Who knows more about the ethos of male/female attractiveness than professional matchmakers?

Of course, these are my anecdotal experiences, but there may be a discussion to be had here. In this culture that claims to worship individuality, do we still try to tear down individualists? In our supposedly post-feminist society, do we still want to stone a woman who claims the power of her voice and struggles to find or figure out if she wants a mate?

Yes, there has been improvement in the choices available to women. Still, we don't get paid the same wage for the same job. The biological fact that we have to be the ones to bear children is considered a career problem. The question of a woman's right to choose whether she ends a pregnancy is under attack. We're treated as though we make these choices frivolously. We still subject ourselves to precariously high-heeled shoes which make sure that we aren't well grounded in order to be considered attractive. Women still rip each other apart if someone stands out in the crowd. And we're still considered 'unfulfilled'if we choose, or even consider being, single for life.

Yes, we've come a long way. But just as the work of racial prejudice is not complete. Nor is the work of gender bias. So, let's join our sisters and brothers in the continued work to break out and value each person for who they are. Let's empower each person to feel comfortable and safe to voice their experience and express their humanity. Let's see what we can do to end the suffering of others rather than attack for their suffering. We might simply start with some mutual respect and a willingness to let each person put their experience safely into the melting pot. And some understanding that every human being has her personal inner struggle that informs her perspective on the cultural challenges of the day. It is all those personal struggles that actually make up our culture after all. Each and every one a living result of our impact on one another. What kind of impact are you having today?