to any speech which they believe challenges propriety, authority, good taste and ESPECIALLY to any reference to sex for as long as the phrase has been in use. The feminist left foolishly played into their hands by allowing any mention of sex to qualify as harrassment if in the entiretly subjective and unqualified opinion, or claimed opinion, of a woman she felt harrassed. I think after Clinton's blow job impeachment began the serious phase of the imposition of a right wing theocracy most non fundamentalist women figured out there were bigger problems than hyperventilating over men, or teenagers on planes, "talking" about sex.

now what?

that is exactly the point. Men NEED women, women used to NEED men but not longer do. When you need something you will be willing to put up with significant pain in order to get it, when you like something it is optional and you will not be. Obviously for this issue to be reached for discussion we would need to get past the feminist assertion that men's problems are all self inflicted

If Roe is overturned Repugs/anti-choicers will probably suffer, how many parental notification and other harrassing laws will pass if Dems are in charge. Most people don't or didn't realize how much of the anti-choice agenda can be effectively enacted with Roe intact though. Still, you will see real unhappiness on the right if it is upheld.

that the ability they have to change their mind after the pregnancy starts is a great advantage and benefit that they have that men don't. Women say men are obligated to pay child support by virtue to having sex, so why aren't women obligated to be mothers? there's a reason, but instead of complaining women should admit they are in a better position than men, not a worse one. If men could undergo an abortion rather than pay 20 years of child support you can be sure the illegitimacy rate would be zero.

but the woman gets the choice to choose before OR AFTER. It has to be this way, but God Dammn it why can't women admit they have more choices instead of pretending that it is always men who have everything their way.

but can you not see that none of your statements in any way refute the reality of what the previous poster stated. Both descriptions of different aspects of reality can be true. This has been the radical feminist line for 35 years, female anger negates the existence of anything other than itself, the fact that any man has ever gone along with it is in itself a total refutation of the claim that women have no power.

overwrought and overbroad defenses of feminist womanhood apparently coming from men.

If a man tries to seduce all his female bosses and associates into giving him special treatment that's exactly what he will get, but not the kind he wants. It's the same reason parents care more if their daughters fuck around than if their sons do, the practical consequences to the parents are different. There are real issues of gender fairness but until the real reasons for them are dealt with rather than treating everything you don't like as a malevolent conspiracy you won't get far in solving them. Assuming a solution and not total victory/unconditional surrender is what is wanted. If that is the case I hope you have better luck than me talking them out of it.

the enthusiastic male reception to contraception that doesn't either permanently destroy fetility or the pleasure of sex. Who knew! Don't men just enjoy putting the "burden" of contraception on women in order to preserve men's entirely enviable position? What you will see is more condom resistance and more test driving of relationships with fertility concealed.

Or will there be enough whose goals are so extreme that they can't be included left outside to keep the pot stirred.

is that it IS SO MUCH EASIER to get a woman's body to become infertile than a man's. THE ONLY REASON

Re-arguing the case with everyone who shows up won't change anything

it might as well be someone hot.

who are sick, and are or will be a burden to others, because they are too fucking fat. Both are problems but one affects a tiny group compared to the other. Fat people need MORE pressure to be thin, not less, since apparently human biology dictates that being fat is the default condition in the presence of cheap, tasty and always available food. The problem is that anorexics are delusional about the true medical conditon of their bodies, as are a lot of "fat acceptance" activists, not that they are pressured to be perfect.

A woman wrote:

What's wrong with slowing down and getting to know someone and making sure you can trust her before penetration occurs, and being sure to use plenty of protection when it does? Does a guy have to "go all the way" (with no condom!) two seconds after meeting someone or forfeit his "manhood" all to hell? There are, after all, plenty of bedroom alternatives to intercourse, and a woman's response to his proposing one to her can be a pretty fair indication of whether she really digs him or is just looking for a baby daddy.

I think this really illustrates the reason behind all the hostility and rigid ideological posturing. The specific factual and logical issues could probably be spelled out and dealt with to everyones acceptance, if not total satisfaction, if it weren't for the fact that behind all the discussion of specifics is the female attitude that if only men would think and feel and act as we would if we were in their position there wouldn't be any problem, so if there is a problem it's there fault anyway and besides we are really pissed about all the problems this failure to do this "right" thing causes for us and men should be punished for that too.