I think some of the Ladies on here need to go over my knee, right who's first

Brutus

Watch out for the stampede!...

Howdy Mr. Bricky!...

Thanks

Howdy Leigh, I just love your sarcasm, even when it's aimed at me

Well thank you Mr. B, but that was NOT sarcasm....

Oh oh ....me me!.......lol

((((Leigh))))

I U ((((( PINK )))))...

Ohhh, I see the cats are out. I should sharpen my claws. Meow.

I want you at the back of the line, I always save the best for last, oh yeah

Woohoo....ok Mr. Bricky.....

Why wait in a line when I only accept the best? That means you will have my undivided attention.

What type of offspring do bunnies and dogs create? Hmmmm

Bunny Russells?

Skipping over three pages, but making up for it in sheer length and density of post...

Too long; didn't read - oppression of females is not quite as bad as it's made out to be.

I can understand the misandrist perspective if a woman has been treated badly by several men in her personal experience (I don't want to name names, but one begins with an "E" and ends with "-stelle".)
However, it is the pro-feminist misandrists (and thank you for that term, I've been looking for it since college) who want to blame the modern me and my kind for the crimes of different men in ages past, who annoy the hell out of me. That is completely nonsensical, and I doubt the intellectual powers of people who make these kinds of arguments. Now, if you want to blame me for the way I've been treating you now, that makes sense. (Though I hope I haven't been and never will be blamed for behaving like that.)

I have only seriously looked at history through the field of literature, but I bet if you went a few hundred years in the past and asked the woman on the street if she thought she was "oppressed", you'd get a serious and complete "What?" in response. Any reasonably accurate look at Western history for the past few hundred years will reveal plenty of instances of equal and empowered women. I am amused by the all the historical examples that feminists and misandrists "discover" and wave over their heads like it's some great big revelation. It seems to me that those examples couldn't be found if they weren't there to be found in the first place. If women were so viciously oppressed, where did all these examples of equal or empowered women come from?

Sure, the argument goes "Only a tiny fraction of women ever achieved real (political, economic) power!" That's because only a tiny fraction of the entire population achieved real (political, economic) power! Only three or four queens in English history, you say? That's because there're only one or two rulers on the throne at a time! And most of those got there by killing off the royal before them, so be careful what you wish for!
Only eleven (11) of the hundred (100) senators in the United States are women, you say? That's because there are only one hundred (100) senators out of the 300,000,000 citizens in the United States. 11 women out of 300,000,000 are pretty good odds, considering. Some of them have been in power for a god-awful long time, when you realize that each term is only 4 years - Diane Feinstein of California has been an incumbent Senator since 1992.
http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/biography

Have women been oppressed? Yes, of course. But in most eras of history they were oppressed right alongside the men. Serfdom. Slavery. Even classic chivalry put certain constraints and prohibitions on both parties. (REAL classic chivalry, the feudal rules of social conduct, not just opening doors for people.) In classic chivalry, women could order the executions of men who had wronged them. (I think "E" would like reading up on this - I point her to the Arthurian story of "The Loathly Lady".) Just like "feminist", a lot of older terms and concepts have been bastardized by common use and popular media.

The only disagreement I have with this is a point of fact, and not one of opinion. A term of a United States Senator is actually 6 years. Other than that one point, I agree with you.

this is another human nature issue , in my opinion

people look after the groups they feel a part of, that's natural

if that group in power is man its going to be MUCH MORE LIKELY That they look after mens interests,, whether intentionally or subconsciously


if that group in power is WESTERN CULTURE< it is MUCH MORE LIKELY They will look after the interests of WESTERN CULTURE

, its not a matter of individuals treating individuals a certain way
when 'oppression' is spoke of , it is a matter of demographic groups

its real, however many 'examples' of those who overcome it may be,,,it doesn't make it any less real


where men have ruled , with the power and money,, they typically have to be 'persuaded' to care as much about womens interests

where women have ruled(and it has happened throughout history), with the power and money, they typically have to be 'persuaded' to care as much about men

where white or Europeans have ruled, with power and money, they typically have to be ,,,,

you get the jest


,,,its not for naught that people have a false belief that finding examples of success somehow negates claims of demographic oppression,,, but its false logic,,,,,as oppression is not about the number of exceptions but about the 'usual' or 'average' experience within a demographic