Your writings on the mystery of the female orgasm (and the crass baseness of the male "release") are so beautiful.

Men are vile, earthbound pigs, while women are ethereal, spiritual beings.

It's almost like a women's encounter group from the 70s.

Cataract and fetboy, you are both complete morons.

Go back to spewing racial hate against black men, you piece of trash.

You are bad news.

But when women spend endless airtime talking about how men should behave, or do just about anything else, it's okay.

Live by the sword, dies by the sword.

Marriage strike, James. Might not be affecting you, but a lot of women are being left alone because of bigoted self-hating men like yourself getting the bully pulpit.

If you're a man - stay single. Marriage is for women and male chumps. Submissive married Herbs of BS, feel free to flame.

More proof positive that feminist "equality" is about benefits for women.

True equality would have women paying lifetime alimony (spouses requesting alimony from marriages >10 y in CA qualify, contrary to the previous poster who seemed clueless), shoveling coal, and collecting garbage, like men are wont to do in order to support their families.

Women default on child support in much greater numbers than men, as well, but enforcement seems to forget that women owe anything at all.

What a crock women have turned marriage into. Welcome to the jungle, feministas - enjoy.

And after the RFK remark, Hillary's "white voters" comments, her lies about Tuzla, her taking false credit for Northern Ireland peace talks and countless other slurs, gaffes and missteps her shoddily managed campaign has produced......we should vote for her because she has a vagina.

Wonderful. Her feminist supporters - overwhelmingly white, privileged college-educated bigoted feminists - have spoken.

Vote for Hillary because she's a woman.

Take your sexism and shove it where the sun doesn't shine. We're sick of the same old thing coming from the same, tired, middle aged hag army of American feminists. We don't need Hillary in the White House.

But the Democratic Party be damned, she'll hang in there (with your support) until the party fractures and McCain gets the presidency. Nice going.

“We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June."

Not much at all. In fact, it might help him......

http://tinyurl.com/3ojdp4

Hillary Clinton is now complaining that her candidacy has been harmed by sexism. Interviewed earlier this week by the Washington Post, Sen. Clinton said the polls show that "more people would be reluctant to vote for a woman [than] to vote for an African American." This gender bias, she grumbled, "rarely gets reported on."

So a woman who holds degrees from Wellesley and Yale – who has earned millions in the private sector, won two terms in the U.S. Senate, and gathered many more votes than John Edwards, Bill Richardson and several other middle-aged white guys in their respective bids for the 2008 Democratic nomination – feels cheated because she's a woman.

Seems doubtful. But hey, I'm a guy and perhaps hopelessly insensitive. So let's give her the benefit of the doubt and assume that her campaign has indeed suffered because of sexism.

This fact (if it be a fact) reveals a hitherto unknown, ugly truth about the Democratic Party. The alleged bastion of modern liberalism, toleration and diversity is full of (to use Mrs. Clinton's own phrase) "people who are nothing but misogynists." Large numbers of Democratic voters are sexists. Who knew?

But here's another revelation. If Mrs. Clinton is correct that she is more likely than Barack Obama to defeat John McCain in November, that implies Republicans and independents are less sexist than Democrats.

It must be so. If American voters of all parties are as sexist as the Democrats, Mr. Obama would have a better chance than Mrs. Clinton of defeating Mr. McCain. The same misogyny that thwarted her in the Democratic primaries would thwart her in the general election. Only if registered Republicans and independents are more open-minded than registered Democrats – only if people who lean GOP or who have no party affiliation are more willing than Democrats to overlook a candidate's sex and vote on the issues – could Mrs. Clinton be a stronger candidate.

I am neither a Democrat nor a Republican. But if I ever become convinced that Mrs. Clinton is correct that sexism played a role in her disappointing showing in the Democratic primaries – and that she truly is her party's strongest candidate to take on John McCain – I might finally join a party: the GOP. At least it's not infested with sexists.

Mr. Boudreaux is chairman of the economics department at George Mason University.

http://tinyurl.com/6mq6hb

More 70s feminist crapola - "women = victims", "men = perpetrators".

And Germaine Greer. That clapped out, geriatric pedophile should have recused herself from society long ago.

Leave it to RT to shill for her. Keep singing the feminist Kumbaya chorus, hairy victim-feminists. The women's studies echo chamber needs some noise.

wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww

The law in CA mandates a 50/50 split of community property after a marriage of ANY duration. However, in a "marriage of long duration" in CA (defined as a marriage of 10 years or more), the lesser-earning spouse may qualify for lifetime alimony.

It's a golddigger's paradise.

if you're bashing men and boys. Then it's "fighting the patriarchy".

When women and girls are denigrated, it's discrimination.

And, never mind the assassination references, the Curious George t-shirts, etc. Not as nasty as asking Hillary to iron a shirt, no way.

Thanks, Judy. This is an important crisis, a milestone in the patriarchal victimization of women that epitomizes women's struggles worldwide.

How many people died in Iraq this year? Never mind!

Thanks for your critical defence of BS's highlighting Sex in the City.

You go, girl!