they are interested in women who like men. I defy you to find a straight man who would be interested, apart from wanting to please his girlfriend or as a political statement, in two guys getting it on. Why is it so inconcieveable that some men are as interested in gay sex as they would be interested in eating a rock to satisfy hunger.

It's possible to have total comfort with AND total lack of interest in something.

Apart from a tape recorded confession that the entire story was fabricated. It's he said she said either way. Doesn't a woman therefore, provided she is mad enough to go through the hassle, enjoy an absolute right, in practice, to make false accusations?

deal with" is interpreted by a lot of men reading it as a taunt or as gloating and not a sincere attempt to commiserate or discuss the issue.

I think it's safe to assume that if you marry someone and then don't want them around but want to see them a few times a week to get laid they will wonder why you married them.

Any system will inevitable favor one gender or the other unless it is specifically consciously designed to deal with the actual differences in order to include both.

that women at some schools were fighting openly over the few available men, paragraph after paragraph after maybe a sentence or two wondering about what other effects might be. That is literally all they talked about. Men are biologically dispensable and always have been, and when there aren't constant wars to kill off vast numbers they often have to stick most of the population in monastaries to get them out of the way, as in Tibet. In fact it is very obvious that the disucssion is being conducted very carefully, there's not much of a problem with the idea that women would make all the money and decisions but there is some anxiety about how you could successfully convert the male population into docile, competent and monogamous sperm donors/babysitters/housekeepers. I think maybe there's not much need to worry.

you feel has injured you, made you mad, or done you wrong in any way! What is wrong with you? Statements from women like "I can't image.. blah blah blah" implying (without being willing to say so openly) that no woman would ever do anything nasty are one of the reasons men don't believe women when they say they are interested in real communication as opposed to control via propaganda. Of course the consequences of being accused will vary with circumstances but they are ususally significant and with no chance of ever being found out it is incocieveable that angy women don't pull this stunt. I agree there is probably no way to know specifics.

It takes evidence to convict but NO EVIDENCE TO ACCUSE and the accustion itself usually causes real problems.

being considered an apologist for rape? I an genuinely curious about this.

but you rarely hear men saying they've opted out of sex and relationships because they can't find anyone worthy of them and women, or so I hear in the media, (no one ever said this to me personally LOL) say this all the time. Assuming this in any way reflects reality it is a real difference between the sexes and not just another example of dueling grievances.

Parents don't have an obligation to tell their kids everything and any obligation to tell them a specific thing would need to be based on something. Since as Cary points out there is absolutely no way to come to any conclusion on way or the other of the effects of telling them or not telling them there is no way to establish an obligation on the part of the parents to tell them.

or take away the the boys papers because they find the girls social style more pleasant? It's true that the reason lots of males don't go to college but go into lucrative trades because unlike women they need lots of money fast if they are ever going to have sex but this doesn't change the fact that over the long term this will lead to a female dominated society.

is some sort of connection between the experience of a woman who is raped and can't prove it and a woman who isn't raped and claims she was. The only explanation I can come up with that makes sense is that on some level some women really do feel that all women have the right to punish all men for rape. If you have another explanation for this odd assertion I would like to hear it.

If it is he said she said, that is there is no evidence either way, then there is no way (assuming the system is functioning) that he could be convicted of a crime or that she could be convicted of filing a false report. By that way can someone really not see that admiting that something actually happened to you is an entirely differetn experience than pretending that something happened which didn't happen?

just make sure you don't piss off the owner during, or anytime after, the visit. By the way I do get that if you set the bar high for proof, or even require any proof, that something happenned you allow the possiblity that someone can get away with something unpunished, so there is a policy relationship between the two issues, just not a personal one for the people involved.

which was partially based on equal protection, i.e. women needed the means to mitigate the "inequality" of pregnancy, rather than on a right to privacy (as most people probbly assume)