I have heard more or less valid arguments that having sex with a prostitute should perhaps be legal (to protect the protitutes). But I will never be convinced that it is ethical to purchase sex from another human being.

A john may be buying easy, no consequences sex, but really the ease and lack of consequences are all for him- he has no way of verifying that the prostitute has become a member of arguably the lowest status profession easily or pleasurably,let alone free of abuse, coercion and addiction. To pretend that sex for money is on par with a back rub and we just have to get a healthier sexual outlook is disingenous. Those women live in the same world that we all do and at the very LEAST they suffer a huge social stigma that thankfully is now being shared more equally by their customers.

Most of those who think that the taboo surrounding prostitution is just all about sexual hangups is really being dishonest, in my opinion. They know damn well that the purchase of sex is different than getting physical therapy, and they know damn well that protitution, legal or not, is rife with misery and exploitation for the sex workers.

Buying sex is sleazy, ugly, exploitive and wrong.

This is a list of books written up by people who hardly ever read.

Catcallers are bullies. They are not flirting, or complimenting, or expressing interest to a woman. They have every intention of embarrassing or frightening women. A man who doesn't catcall may be skeptical about what it's really like and how bad it is. Unsurprising- they don't usually do it when a man is nearby.

"It's just that the selection against females cheating is stronger because the cost is greater for the male partners (raising another male's offspring)."

I've always found this to be an illogical assumption, born from malecentricity. Why is raising another male's offspring worse than a female losing her mate's support, or not having it in the first place, biologically speaking?

I am all for financial independence. However, as the sister and daughter of women who are stay at home moms, I must point out that if you are the main wage earner for a stay at home spouse or underemployed spouse, YOU are accepting economic responsibility for that person, even post-divorce. Don't worry- you'll still have your salary, earning power, retirement and medical benefits. She'll have to start all over, and it will suck for her much worse than it does for you. Also- remember that even a wage earning spouse can become dependent through unemployment or illness or plain old age, so don't be so hard on the non-wage earning spouses who have a right to be taken care of after a divorce.

Dragon: most men haven't been in battle either.

There's no denying, in my opinion, that Susan is banned from Paradise because she is a woman of'reproductive age'.On the other hand, he starts the series with a young female heroine and every book has more for that I will always love his writing. That the movies have improved on remembering that females exist is wonderful.

...kept her winning primaries up until the bitter end.

Perhaps Abba didn't produce the "important" music of their time, but Abba's perfect pop songs, as another poster aptly described them, endure in a way that edgy, cool songs don't and never can. Music on the vanguard has a short shelf life, and then listening to it is like eating your vegetables. I don't want to have to 'get' a song written by a self important tortured young man 30 years ago. I want to dance with my 8 year old in the kitchen.

Eventually, every discussion about the veil devolves into: when she covers her all of body, her hair and perhaps even her face, men respect her more and stop seeing her as a sex object.

Well, I want it all. I want to wear clothes that are comfortable, allow me to move freely, and flatter me AND have men speak to me as a human being. You know-like men are able to do with THEIR clothes. The idea that women dressing in comfort and fashion always makes them sexual objects is a really awful way of looking at things-how about ignoring sexual tension or letting the men deal with it themselves instead of making life uncomfortable for women? I don't ask the college boys running around town to put on shirts so they don't distract women like me and every gay man who happens by.

A person who believes that the extreme modesty of this Islamic dress is a reasonable strategy for women to be treated with respect hasn't thought it through. If I cover up my body, my hair and my face for 'modesty' I sacrifice a lot more than looking 'sexy'. I want to hike! Ride my bike! Swim in public! Have a barbeque in the backyard in a tanktop, show my face, for God's sake. I want to be an old lady who walks around in shorts and a t-shirt, I want my daughter to be able to wear a sundress on a hot day. If I'm to respect a person's reasons for wearing a veil, then I ask that no insinuations be made that western women are just foolish sex objects whose only consideration is how to look sexy. Western women have countless valid reasons for wearing what they wear. You know, like western men.