|
Comments
Never understimate the stupidity of men - or the superiority of women. These days women are evolving faster than men. There has been a major shift in human consciousness and women are way ahead of men in understanding how to build the society of the future. Most men are only dimly aware of how much better the world would be if women ran things openly. Because of this men are generally dragging society down the drain. The best thing a man can do is to stay out of the way and let women rise to take the power they deserve. It's safe to say that women's influence is the driving factor behind the most noble elements of society and also the only thing that has so far kept men from destroying the world. Can a matriarchy even exist if men don't exist? What kind of choice is it to say that we aren't useless but we hinder the chances of a matriarchy? Without men I don't see how there can be a matriarchy. It's sort of like saying, I live alone and I'm the dominant decision maker in my household. AnonymousSep 13 2004 8:45pm Men will not become extinct and are not useless. It is just that women are going to be calling the shots because they will be better educated and therefore will have have the power which comes along with managing the economy. AnonymousSep 14 2004 5:48am Men are not useless... as I man I know. All men should strive to do the best they can and not become useless. Yes, women are clearly superior and deserve to rule, and men's place will be to obey, but this doesn't mean men should stop trying. Men can still be doctors, scientists, factory workers, civil service workers, writers, musicians, truck drivers, etc. Accept your status below the superior female, be a good slave if you are honored to have a woman to serve, but don't allow yourselves to become useless. SamSep 15 2004 5:09am Slaves can be very useful, essential in fact. anonymousSep 15 2004 4:34pm I like Sam's comment. Inferior doesn't mean useless. It's more a question of "useful for what." AnonymousSep 17 2004 10:11pm There is a larger percentage of males who are useless to (even harmful) to society than women. sad but trueSep 18 2004 11:25pm For every good woman, thier is a great man standing in front of her. AnonymousOct 05 2004 9:24pm As long as a man is capable (and willing) to follow orders, he can be useful for heavy lifting, manual labor, and menial tasks which don't require much intellect. The real key to success for them is in their attitudes and willingness to follow indtructions. BellaNov 10 2004 11:42pm Men are useless if they aren't serving Women. AnonymousNov 13 2004 12:15pm Well said Bella. The only worth that we have as men is insofar as we can be useful or pleasing to women, the superior sex! jasonFeb 03 2005 2:50am Bella is a female version of everything that she and other women have bitched about in men. They can always rationalize and justify in themselves what they find repulsive in us. Don't go lecturing other people on intellect when you don't know anything about it yourself. Spank! Spank! The real success for men is to tell women like Bella to go kiss our butts when they try to force that crap about men being "the blame for everything." I would see this world in a sea of flames before I would see it in the hands of women like you. PaulMar 18 2005 12:43pm Bella, I don't what indtructions are. I must be ctuped and ezeles. AnonymousApr 25 2005 6:01pm I would have added my name to the last entry, but I don't know what my name is. AnonymousApr 25 2005 6:02pm Bella, I don't what indtructions are. I must be ctuped and ezeles. AnonymousApr 25 2005 6:02pm Bella, I don't what indtructions are. I must be ctuped and ezeles. AnonymousApr 25 2005 6:02pm Bella, I don't what indtructions are. I must be ctuped and ezeles. AnonymousApr 25 2005 6:02pm Bella, I don't what indtructions are. I must be ctuped and ezeles. AnonymousApr 25 2005 6:02pm Bella, I don't what indtructions are. I must be ctuped and ezeles. AnonymousApr 25 2005 6:02pm Bella, I don't what indtructions are. I must be ctuped and ezeles. AnonymousApr 25 2005 6:02pm Bella, I don't what indtructions are. I must be ctuped and ezeles. AnonymousApr 25 2005 6:02pm No they can serve Women. submissive samAug 21 2005 3:28pm Pathetic, not useless. undermyGIRLOct 09 2005 3:57pm If there is a complete matriarchy, there will be the next great holcaust. There might be alot of animosity against males, and that could lead t some fascist movement. But it will be those men who are cannot please the female who would face exterminatin. That would be 40 to 50 percent of the male population where the female generals would round them up and send them to some death camp. Seriously though, in a patriarchy women were always needed because they were essential for reproduction, and were the prime nurturers. In a matriarchy only a small pool of men would be needed to reproduce and please the female. The rest would be deemed useless. You could argue that men shuld be around for heavy labor. Well, if you are short skinny guy you wouldnt be able to. But more importantly in such a society, women would be superior to men in all levels. And that includes physical superiority. So the purpose of men will have dwindled to pleasure and reproduction. In this hypothetical society,If you are a short, fat-balding guy, you might as well kill yourself or else the ladies will do it for you. JoeOct 25 2005 5:05am I agree with joe. Genetics will play a role. If you as a male are physically inferior to other males, you will be used as cheap labor, and then disposed of perhaps as fertilizer, reduced to organ donor or as food for carnivores. Males who are physically appealing to women will be used as breeders and perhaps have a decent life...as long as they are appealing...after that, well perhaps it's the lions cage for them as well. MichelleNov 18 2005 3:43pm Never underestimate the stupidity of yman. SCNov 27 2005 4:24am As long as the Catholic Church is around, there will NEVER be a matriarchy. Just won't happen. grizzlyDec 22 2005 7:03pm No, there will always be a use for slaves! DaveFeb 25 2006 1:06am When women get the power, their cruelty equals that of men, or even exceeds the cruelty of men. AnonymousApr 03 2006 11:03pm Since women are so superior, let THEM fight the wars while us weak and stupid men stay home and enjoy life without women. Contrary to popular belief, us men can be very happy without sex. Being away from women helps us males to focus our minds and find true meaning. And save lots of money. Kung Fu MasterApr 15 2006 10:22pm Men are are like toilets, either occupied or full of @#*! and their emotions come before reasoning AnonApr 28 2006 3:03pm As long as men obey and work hard for Women there will i hope be a place for males in the coming Woman run world. Lou RollsApr 28 2006 8:28pm The Venus on Top Society discussion group: http"//groups.yahoo.com/group/VOTDiscussionGroup/ AnonymousMay 12 2006 9:23am www.likelike.com/poll.php?poll_id=2550 AnonymousJun 07 2006 12:53pm Man and woman have been created, that is to say, willed by God: on the one hand, in perfect equality as human persons; on the other, in their respective beings as man and woman. ?Being man? or ?being woman? is a reality which is good and willed by God: man and woman possess an inalienable dignity which comes to them immediately from God their creator. Man and woman are both with one and the same dignity ?in the image of God.? Man and woman were made ?for each other? ? not that God left them half-made and incomplete: he created them to be a communion of persons, in which each can be a ?helpmate? to the other, for they are equal as persons ? and complementary as masculine and feminine. Catechism of the Catholic Church, paras. 369 and 372. AnonymousJul 07 2006 11:37am Useless... there is always housework, waitressing, stewardessing and all those ex-'feminine' chores that need to be done by the newly retrained male.... OmphaleAug 16 2006 12:52pm Yes omphale males need to be retrained perhaps in male re-education centres if society is to prigress. Lou RollsAug 29 2006 4:47am With Women outperforming men in every level of education, and the invention of the dildo, Women really don't need men anymore. If a man wants to be with a Women, he better be ready to completely obey Her and please Her. Women are the ones who will be calling the shots from her on in boys, so as much as you don't like it, you better get used to it. I did and now I like it a lot. So will you. submaleSep 04 2006 2:33pm Submale, Lou Rolls, Omphale -- you can all take a flying leap into Hell. Which means spending eternity with Big Brenda and STTG. AnonymousSep 10 2006 7:34pm Many places in the USA have low or very low educational standards. Therefore, outperforming the average is easy, so females who outperform males have little to boast about. I fear that the low academic performance of boys is merely a symptom of a deeper psychological problem: It seems that American males are more depressed, discouraged, aimless and unmotivated than ever before. What is causing this mental fog, and how to escape it? Samurai PsychiatristSep 10 2006 7:35pm Jason, you may have a low opinion of yourself, but I do not have a low opinion of myself. The problem is not strong, assertive women. The problem is meely mouthed little wimps like you. Real men shoudl not attack women, they should attack, and with a vengeance with no let up, non-men like Jason until they have been reeducated or eliminated altogether. AnonymousSep 12 2006 6:30am Anon, women are the emotional creatures. Men are reasonable. AnonymousSep 12 2006 6:31am Jason, you may have a low opinion of yourself, but I do not have a low opinion of myself. The problem is not strong, assertive women. The problem is meely mouthed little wimps like you. Real men shoudl not attack women, they should attack, and with a vengeance with no let up, non-men like Jason until they have been reeducated or eliminated altogether. AnonymousSep 12 2006 6:31am Down with all anti-male gender traitors! Up with all pro-male gender-loyal men! Gender Loyal MaleSep 14 2006 8:52pm New Poll: THE WAR AGAINST BOYS www.likelike.com/poll.php?poll_id=2603 AnonymousSep 19 2006 6:06pm Has anyone here read THE WAR AGAINST BOYS, by Christina Hoff Sommers? I just finished reading it, and it is excellent. AnonymousSep 28 2006 11:59am << It's not just that boys are falling behind girls, it's that boys themselves are falling behind their own functioning and doing worse than they did before. >> SOURCE: William S. Pollock, author of: Real Boys: Rescuing Our Sons From the Myths of Boyhood, and professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School, quoted in the article: Men Are In Trouble by Deborah Hornblow, 7/10/2003, The Hartford Courant, www.rense.com/general38/men.htm AnonymousNov 28 2006 8:49pm Sat. 2/3/07 Date UpdateFeb 03 2007 10:45pm #049 #Feb 07 2007 5:23pm #0050 - (Sun.)3/25/07 UpdateMar 24 2007 9:47pm I see that over the last few months the vote for men being completely useless has edged ahead of the vote for keeping men as slaves. Imagine what it would be like in the future Matriarchy if Women have found a way of replicating themselves either by cloning or parthogenisis and the Matriarchy holds a plebisite to determine if men should be eliminated entirely or be kept as slaves. Imagine you are a naked male held in an internment camp, and pending the outcome of the vote you will be either executed or sold. The muscles in my butt cheeks tense just thinking about it. obedient husbandApr 30 2007 6:41pm I see that in the vote, the percentage of voters who believe in keeping males as slaves as now edged back into tie with the percentage of voters who think men are useless. Wife seems to feel that She gets some value from owning my behind and I hope other Women find uses for their males. obedient husbandMay 05 2007 12:22pm If the world comes to that then so be it.Womyn will be the future of the race so it will be irrelevant what we males think. Lou RollsMay 12 2007 7:44pm What we think IS irrelevant. What is relevant is whether or not Women will find uses for our behinds in the future. At this point a bare plurality of voters seem to think so and there is still hope that our bare behinds will kept around. obedient husbandMay 17 2007 6:58pm #0055 - (Fri.) 5/18/07 UpdateMay 17 2007 11:12pm Well a month and one half later, the vote for keeping men as slaves has fallen three points behind elimination. Who will labor naked in the fields while Women build a Matriarchy if there are no male slaves? Will it not be cathartic for a member of the Superior Sex to vent by applying firm corporal discipline to a naked male rear? We can be used for that at least. obedient husbandJun 23 2007 8:16pm #0057 - (Wed.) 7/11/07 UpdateJul 11 2007 9:45pm Very well. I challenge any women on this forum to debate me at a topic of their choosing. I bet that i can and will be able to hold my own in any depth of understanding and discussion that they have. This isnt an attack, but it's time for many people to prove their claims. Step up and let's do it. FNOLAug 10 2007 4:46am sorry forgot my email. randomisedwhite@gmail.com FNOLAug 10 2007 4:46am #0060 - (Fri.) 8/10/07 UpdateAug 10 2007 8:38pm Real slick FNOL. You try to intice one of us or more, ladys to a dual. You now you can't win, so to keep from embarrassing yourself in front of all of us on this poll, and to keep us from knocking you for a verbal loop, you decide to leave your e-mail address so you can do this in private. PS. Or is it your feeling you could get LUCKY with one of the ladys??? I thing I use the famous "Anonymous" this timeAug 10 2007 9:15pm "You now you can't win" . It's not about winning or losing. How exactly do you WIN a debate as slippery as this ? .Its NOT a competition. That's entirely my point. All I can do is to show that its entirely possible for a male to engage in the necessary processes of debate. "To a dual". NO no no ! , not a duel, a discussion (sigh) . You are inciting the very hatred you are crippling me for !. Peace. FNOLAug 13 2007 11:33pm "Or is it your feeling you could get LUCKY with one of the ladys??? " Happily married Loving my highly educated, similarly left wing, 5'10, strong and empowered wife who works for the CSIRO in the chemical analysis department. No thanks. FNOLAug 13 2007 11:35pm "You now you can't win" . It's not about winning or losing. How exactly do you WIN a debate as slippery as this ? .Its NOT a competition. That's entirely my point. All I can do is to show that its entirely possible for a male to engage in the necessary processes of debate. "To a dual". NO no no ! , not a duel, a discussion (sigh) . You are inciting the very hatred you are crippling me for !. Peace. FNOLAug 13 2007 11:35pm #0065 - (Tue.) 8/14/07 UpdateAug 14 2007 12:41am From the looks of this polls and it results, so far and the fact that you have had NO takers? It looks like the ladys know how they feel and were they stand, and having a DISCUSSION with silly old male like yourself, would be a waist of there time!!! anonymousAug 20 2007 9:33pm Actually "FNOL" doesnt exist. He's just an enlightened "redneck" personality for collecting information my psychology thesis. People are unfortunately catagorical in their responses. A real shame really :-( "FNOL"Sep 17 2007 2:37am Just a little note to yman at the top of the page. You do know that if women take over they won't be dressing up in leather body suits and carry around whips to hit you with like they do in Masturbater's Quarterly, your favorite femdom magazine, don't you? MADOct 18 2007 8:08am If there was a web site with 50 polls about white people being superior to blacks, that web site would be quickly shut down. I want to see all of www.likelike.com permanently shut down and removed from the internet. If that is not possible, then I would like to see all polls on this web site erased and all new polls. AnonymousOct 21 2007 3:01pm #0070 - (Sun.) * 10/21/07 UpdateOct 21 2007 3:22pm Anonymous, I am not going to answer you on every site but just as there are some polls saying such things that are not shut down there are also polls supporting the Nazis. As Mao said "let a hundred flowers bloom". Unfortunately Mao backed away from this and started the cultural revolution but it doesn't appear that someone deletes politically incorrect polls. obedient husbandOct 21 2007 4:46pm "You try to intice one of us or more, ladys to a dual." And what would you have me do Anonymous ?. If I don't argue, I am accused of not defending my points or being a dumb male. If I do I am attacked for being aggressive which is a crude male trait. I cant subscribe to you're idiotic views, because I am a person with an average level of intelligence and common sense. So what do you want hmmmm ?. Stick you're neck out and go on the attack, let's see how you do. FNOLNov 07 2007 3:40am Your wrong FNOL, your a DUMB male regardless of the stand you take :-( AnonymousDec 11 2007 2:10pm Oh. Then who is to blame for you're conclusion Anonymous ?. Someone else of course !. FNOLDec 11 2007 6:08pm #0075 - (Thu.) * 12/13/07 UpdateDec 13 2007 1:46pm fnol, You of course! Who else fool? AnonymousDec 13 2007 1:55pm Hold up there Anonymous , rather than me being on the backswing, rebutting you're irrelevant insults, why dont attempt to present a compelling arguement of to back up you're last statements ?. I dont believe you can however. You're beliefs no doubt render you incapable of anything that requires a degree of self examination. Why disturb a nice settled mind I guess ?. FNOLDec 13 2007 4:47pm I just read your post to Anonymous. You know FNOL, your English really S.U.C.K. You must have self taught yourself english? Because you have almost as many errs as you have words, in your last post. Are you sure your not a second grader? If you are, you should be a nice little boy and move on, this kind of site is not for little ones like yourself, So go get yourself cleanup & put PJ's & your little bunny slippers on & then go brush your teeth & then go to bed, because it getting way past your bedtime, sweet dreams, little pukey Mommy LindaDec 14 2007 3:16pm Yeah yeah , Mommy Linda I know you can sit behind the keyboard and roll out the insults in an example of textbook perfection. If that's what you want be my guest. On the other hand, if you put forward an argument pro or against this topic, I will bite. If you do not, I will ignore you're childish insults against somebody who you only pick on because you have an inability to respect diversity of belief. By all means shred my argument to pieces, but show me the proper respect of dissecting and engaging my points, not dishing out the vitriol out of spite alone. Thanks. FNOLDec 15 2007 1:27am #0080 - (Sat.) * 12/15/07 UpdateDec 15 2007 7:25am FNOL, "I know you can sit behind the keyboard and roll out the insults"?????????? Sounds like the pot calling the tea kettle black, DON'T YOU THINK??? AnonymousDec 15 2007 7:42am Not at all. I have always made ample effort to justify myself by presenting an argument. Check above. And rarely if any , are my so called 'insults' simply because I am trying to annoy someone. You might be able to escape double standards here because many here are unable to exercise their frontal lobes , but you are not achieving anything by 'prodding' me when you clearly have no purpose other than making up for you're lack of ability to debate , by insulting me instead. I hate ultimatums, but this is the last you will hear from me on this matter. Debate me on topic or I will not bother anymore. Thanks. FNOLDec 15 2007 7:35pm Well then, that is the ingratitude of childhood isn't it?, eh FNOL. AnonymousDec 15 2007 10:56pm Great. Seeya !. FNOLDec 16 2007 7:00am Additional : Just before I saunter off Anonymous, just this once , curtail you're programming and answer me this hypothetical. If science produced a new super race created to be perfect at the genetic level , would you willingly lay you're self down as an inferior and prostrate you're self as a fool and slave to do their bidding without a second thought ?. To this I would be curious to see an answer. If you can. FNOLDec 16 2007 7:15am #0086 - (Sun.) * 12/16/07 UpdateDec 16 2007 8:12am FNOL, With new super computers being obsolete the day they introduce them to the market place and the development of robots that will be able to out preform a human in every way, (50 to 1 are more physically.) All that they (science) will need to do next is to come up with the technology to give the super computers the ability to reason and we're there. So your calling it hypothetical is silly, its just a matter of time (OUR LIFE TIME.) Lets face it man has always been able to think himself into a corner with there technology, and with very little room to wiggle out of it, when an unforeseeable problem shows up...and they always do. But once he comes up with a thinking robot...you know one that has a super computer inside...for a brain, that can comprehend...and then when they (the ROBOTS being massproduce)realizes that man is inferior to them and is in there way to taking over the world which could lead to money, power and greatness. Well need I say more, and of course man won't be able to put them in charge...fast enough, so man can go lay out on the beach and drink pina colada and brag to the pretty young girls about all the things they have acomplished for mankind in just a few short years. And of course it won't be long before they find themselves in there final corner with "NO" more wiggle room. I guess what I'm getting at is man is not smart enough to leave well enough alone. Then it won't be long and man will find themselves become just another animal in the zoos spread throughout the world, and you can use your imagination on what will become of the rest of us. that they don't need around any longer??? P.S. Oh did you say something about being inferior.? Some of that happens in the middle east countries already 24/7, and what about some communist countries some of there lower class cittizens who would be better off as lab animals. AnonymousDec 16 2007 11:23am Right. Well thanks for the discussion Anonymous. I happen of course to disagree on the most fundamental of levels but I think we have both reached the end of our respective 'tethers' in this 'debate'. Thanks all the same. FNOLDec 16 2007 11:19pm I have been married for 14 years, and our household is completely Female Dominated. When I first married my husband I had a very high paying job. He on the other had a manual labor job that paid much, much ,much less. I worked 60 + hrs to his weather permitting 40 or less a week. So I had him began to get more involved in housework. He began doing the cleaning, cooking, shopping. I was slowly getting him ready for more to come. After our first child a girl, he stayed home to take care of her, plus his housework. Three years later I had another child, a boy. I had decided no more children and it was up to him to undergo sterlization. First I was too young and doctors do not like to sterlize women at such a early age. Males on the other hand I found out can be sterlized at any age. We went thru Plan Parenthood, which is geared more toward women. I was the aggressor and it was plan for them to see who was wearing the pants in this family. We dealt with all women discussing my husbands future. He was so embarressed as we talked about his procedure. The date was set and my husbands balls fell to a complete female team to sterlize him. After 12 weeks of sperm testing my little hubby was "safe". I was told that most men afterwards they are deamed safe want more sex. Well before we got to that stage, I secretly had him put on female hormones. Soon his hardons began disappearing and his dick started to shrink. His balls also became tiny and he lost all interest in sex. He wasn't even able to jackoff. He developed all his time to our 2 children and the house. I continued to climb the ladder to success and made more, and more money. I told him that since he became impotent, I was going to need sex. I started to find young studs to satisfy me. Our marrage was totally the opposite of most. I had him raise our daughter like a superior compared to our boy. My husband would be limited to clothing when I decided and received punishment in front of our daughter. It was a true Female Dominated household. So the question are MEN USELESS? Not in my life. I have my own eunuch. HOUSEWIFE OF THE FUTUREMar 18 2008 10:24am IS THIS THE FUTURE FOR US MALES????? Hold on to your balls guys, this women is set to castrate us all. tonyMar 18 2008 10:27am Tony, if She owned you that would be Her right. She who owns me likes to play with my organs so I still have them. But Wife of the Future is correct. Male slaves can be very useful. obedient husbandMar 20 2008 4:29pm Housewife of the future should be arrested and thrown in prison for abusing her son. You are evil and worse than men. Talk about useless. U R all that. Dominant man of the futureMar 21 2008 6:29am HOUSEWIFE OF THE FUTURE, I aplaud Your creativity! Plus having eunuchs is a good argument to those Women who believe that all men must to be executed. Another salute to a well-done job. Hope that soon You will allow Your daughter to whip Your hubby. We males ought to know our place in the future world! Nick NMar 24 2008 3:25am Nick, Thank you for your opinion. Males are not useless, its their dick and balls that are the problem. Control them and you have a good slave. I really believe males know their place they are just too brain washed thinking they equal to a female. Believe it or not most men would gladly agree females are superior. In the future men will take their place in society, less their silly male gentials. HOUSEWIFE OF THE FUTUREMar 24 2008 2:36pm Dear Mrs HOUSEWIFE OF THE FUTURE, thank You very-very much for Your positive comment. I'm really a bit embarrassed and my face has turned reddish, while I'm much more accustomed by my Mistress to have rather my behind red :). As for knowing my place -- indeed, I've noticed that I'm becoming more and more polite and docile when talking with Women in my workplace (I'm not a full-time slave so far). So I feel myself that all this awful malish arrogance is only a result of male-dom upbringing and rough physical strength. Hope that quite soon I'll be able to eradicate all results of my improper upbringing from my so-called behavioural pattern. And maybe my Mistress will agree to make me Her 24/7 slave. But to achieve it I ought to try really hard... Nick NMar 26 2008 4:28am #0096 - (Fri.) * 3/28/08 UpdateMar 28 2008 12:29pm Men are not useless. They are just inferior to women. And as I see it men are superior to everything else. (Women > Men > everything else - plants, animals..). Men have still so many opportunities. Being inferior doesn't doom you, it defines you. Men can still be very succesful. Bob SalingerApr 06 2008 12:26am If a Woman trains Her hubby/bf harshly and whips him severely for any misdeed and/or misbehaviour (maintenance spankings included), then in a years or two She may get a docile and obedient male very useful around Her house. Nick NApr 10 2008 2:27am Certainly, when Wife puts Her foot down I obey and I certainly bare my behind on command and accept whatever discipline She administers. obedient husbandApr 11 2008 7:31pm obedien husband, I dream to be as obedient and spankable as you are. Mostly only this type of hubbies is really useful! Nick NApr 16 2008 12:23am Health Topics: Depression How Depressing: It's a Boy Study examines whether a child's gender factors into postpartum depression By Lisa Farino for MSN Health & Fitness Depression is one of the most common postpartum medical problems that new moms face. New research suggests that the risk is even higher for those who give birth to boys. Most moms will readily admit that rambunctious little boys are a bit more challenging to parent than little girls, who are generally quieter and less physically active. But the impacts of gender on parenting don?t necessarily start once the little ones start toddling. New research out of France found that women who gave birth to boys were significantly more likely to suffer from severe postpartum depression than women who gave birth to girls. The findings weren't limited to severe depression: Women who gave birth to boys were also much more likely to report a lower quality of life than women who gave birth to girls. This study, published in the Journal of Clinical Nursing, is the first to examine the impact of infant gender on postpartum depression for women in a Western country. Previous studies in China, Turkey, and India, found that rates of postpartum depression were higher among women who had given birth to girls. Researchers suspect the findings reflect the strong cultural preference for boys over girls in these countries. WHY MOTHERS OF BOYS MIGHT BE MORE DEPRESSED? The French research team didn't set out to determine why women giving birth to boys might be more likely to suffer from postpartum depression. In fact, when they started the study, there was no reason to believe that the baby?s gender would influence maternal depression, since there?s no cultural bias in France for babies of one gender over the other. Once they noticed a trend, however, the researchers did speculate about why mothers of infant boys might be more depressed. Are infant boys more difficult to care for than girls? Lead researcher Claude de Tychey, professor of clinical Psychology at Universite Nancy, cites studies showing that infant boys are ?more irritable and more difficult to soothe? than infant girls. Robinson agrees with this assessment. "At birth, girls are more neurologically developed than boys,? she says. ?This can make it trickier to care for an infant boy?they're not as settled and are more likely to keep you up at night." Do women prefer daughters to sons? No one asked these women what gender of baby they had hoped for, information that would have been useful in teasing out the reasons for the study?s findings, as well as perhaps more clearly identifying who?s at risk. Nonetheless, de Tychey speculates that women (at least in France) may prefer daughters to sons. One of his theories: the growing narcissism of the modern world is leading new moms to desire mini-me?s (that is, girls) instead of boys. Therefore, when a woman doesn?t get the gender of child she desired, she is more likely to suffer from decreased quality of life or severe depression. De Tychey?s psychoanalysis may strike Americans as a bit far-fetched. But you don't need to buy into the psychology of narcissism to suspect that women in Western countries (especially American women) may actually have a preference for girls. Take overseas adoptions by Americans, a process that?s typically driven by women. Overwhelmingly, adoption agencies report that adoptive parents declare a preference for a female child. AnonymousApr 21 2008 10:37am I new it boys are not only a real pain in the butt!!! They F with your mind fron get go!!! BeckyApr 21 2008 10:49am To Ms. Becky and Anonymous: Surely the research underlines the reason why we males should be spanked from our early years. Being rambunctious and less mentally developed (that is, more primitive), we dramatically need such form of mental support as the firm Mother's hand on our naked bums. As teenagers we surely need a good belt from our Mothers' hands to show our place in this society. And after marriage we must be regularily belted/paddled by our Wifes. Personally I don't see any other way to improve our behaviour. BTW, the events in Austria (where a man was keeping his daughter in the dungeon and raping her for 24 years) show how dangerous may be man's rule. So, dear Women, never ever permit your hubby punish your Daughters!!! (being more developed mentally, maxiumum what a Girl needs is a seroius talk with her Mother and maybe a grounding) I believe that the sons ought to be punished only by their Mothers, too -- to understand from their early age who is the Boss in this world! NickMay 06 2008 3:36am #0105 - (Sun.) * 5-11-08 UpdateMay 11 2008 12:06am Perhaps you should get a stronger mind then Becky. The rest of the world seems to be able to cope with men. They are after all equal to women and will continue to be so as technology eradicates any remaining physical disadvanages between the genders. As people love to say on this site , this is the way of the future , get used to it !. Oh and to Nick N, using a tragic case such as the one you mention in a fetish capacity is pretty sick, No offence meant. FNOLMay 11 2008 11:50pm To FNOL: "They are after all equal to women"... Of course, a purely theoretical egalitarism must be a pleasant mental exercise... But try to convince a farmer that he should have a herd of bulls, not of cows. A flock of roosters is also much better than of hens :). Nick NMay 23 2008 11:14pm Theoretical ?. Rubbish. How exactly is a modern western society being totally destroyed by the influence of men. And we ARE talking reality here Nick N. Are you suggesting that every man is a violent loose cannon and an abusive moron who's potential only lies downwards ?. You insult the many intelligent , morally strong and wonderful men who have literally given their very lives to make society better for everyone. Fetish is fine, that statement you just said is frankly sickening. FNOLMay 26 2008 9:18pm Nick I used to debate with FNOL six or seven months ago but I realized he is someone who simply rejects the postulates on which Femdom is based and he likes to come on line to dispute the very concept. It is the equivalent of an atheist joining a Bible Study Group or Ann Coulter blogging on the Daily Kos. He has the right to do it and seems to derive some satisfaction from it but it does not create an opportunity for rational debate. The underlying preconceptions are too far apart. obedient husbandMay 29 2008 5:58pm Obedient husband, 'FNOL' is just one of many "personalities" on this site. As much as 'FNOL' (my version of a an articulate but thick necked rightious twit) irritates you, there are others who you have conversed with in a femdom capacity, and evidently derived satisfaction from it. But as fun as it was to write 'kaela' or 'jessica' etc to explore peoples reactions , I think FNOL provided the most interesting of discussion. I am now reverting to a single person on this site which will take the name 'FNOL' and I assure you, he understands the posulates of femdom perfectly. You can lay that point to rest at last (phew ?). "FNOL"May 30 2008 6:12am Like I said dude you can do what you want. I did not say you did not understand them, I said you reject them at inception. It is like debating the nature of God with one who thinks there is no God. The only possible debate with that person is the existance of God which is a different debate than one about the nature of God. And since when I come on these boards it is the mind set of one who accepts the postualtes of Femdom I cannot have meaningful debate with FNOL. If Nick can, more power to him(or to his Mistress). obedient husbandJun 01 2008 4:23pm #0012 - (Tue.) * 6/3/08 UpdateJun 02 2008 11:28pm bad count above #113 - (Tue.) * 6/3/08 UpdateJun 02 2008 11:32pm Men are not useless they can be useful for kneeling naked at the door and licking the feet of women as they come home from work. JanetJul 20 2008 12:11pm If the Woman has had a hard day at work She can bend the male over and take out Her frustrations on his behind. obedient husbandJul 23 2008 2:48pm I estimate that over the past two years, 90% of the new polls on this web site, www.LikeLike.com, have been about women who are strong, muscular, dominant or superior. Also, this web site seems to be one of the biggest meccas on the internet for those topics. STNG FanAug 03 2008 7:57pm Well, we now know that Janet a Male!! AnonymousAug 04 2008 9:22pm Women would be a lot better off if they didn't wake up every day believing that their asses should be kissed from the moment they wake to the moment they fall asleep. Truly arrogant females is what is detroying the relationships between the sexes SAug 16 2008 2:45pm On the contrary, Women who wake up everyday believing that their behinds should be kissed and are able to enforce that directive are usually empowered confident successful individuals. Wife loves it when She thrusts Her behind in my face and orders me to kiss it. obedient husbandAug 17 2008 7:35pm Surely, behinds of all Women who want it ought to be kissed as often as they wish it. Whereas their hubbies asses must be whipped as often and as harshly as these powerful Women want. But unfortunately it's only the ideal we go to. As for reality, I believe that only that Woman vay be called powerful who can order Her hubby to kiss Her behind and to belt him whenever She supposes it must be done. Nick NAug 23 2008 7:22am #0121 - (Fri.) * 8/29/08 UpdateAug 29 2008 2:37pm You people need immediate mental help. PaulSep 12 2008 11:23am Only after you, Paul! :) Nick NSep 20 2008 1:14pm ((As for reality, I believe that only that Woman vay be called powerful who can order Her hubby to kiss Her behind and to belt him whenever She supposes it must be done.:-) Nick N, With a sentence like this? You think he should go first??? Oh, on second thought, I guess DUMB ASSES are usually found somewhere in the REAR END acting like an ass!!! JodySep 30 2008 2:05pm #0125 - (Mon.) * 10/6/08 UpdateOct 06 2008 12:40pm Jody, want do you dislike in this sentence? Surely it's a bit difficult to read, but so is my thought which created this sentence. Nick NNov 14 2008 12:31pm It seems that everything that I have read in these polls, that women are really the control freaks. The same thing that they have accused men of being. WOW...How ironic. Bob M.Nov 15 2008 11:19am Bob, it's just because we inferior males had no right to control Women in the past - in fact we did it only because the level of society development was very low, tough physical strength was necessary to earn food to survive, and our ancestors and gender-mates use it to control Women, too. Now when our society has made several steps up and being physically strong is not so crucial as before, Women return to control and it's absolutely correct. So, dear Bob, you'd better to obey your Wife/Gf ASAP, too! Nick NDec 11 2008 9:32pm Bob M., We learned how to do it from you boys, don't criticize us for being quick studies AnonymousJan 10 2009 9:27pm #0130 - (Sat.) * 1/10/09 UpdateJan 10 2009 9:30pm UPEEPLRSAD! @#~Feb 06 2009 9:33am Oh, look at that...@#~ Is beside himself, ain"t that so sweet:-) we love you to little fool!!! Won't Be Much Longer, Now!!!Feb 16 2009 2:37pm It is obvious that 99% of the polls on this web site about strong or muscular women are created by just 1 or 2 people, which is frightening if you consider how many polls have been created about those topics. The people who create those polls must be very sick people with no life an no girlfriend so they just fantasize all day long on this web site. AnonymousMar 17 2009 6:56pm Only a really useless male (and many of us inferior males are REALLY useless -- like drones in a beehive) can write the message we see above. Nick NMar 31 2009 6:14am #0135 - (Wed.) * 4/1/09 UpdateApr 01 2009 12:03pm If you like to know a little bit about REALLY useless males or see one Nick N, go look in a miror. AnonymousApr 01 2009 12:17pm You are right, Anonymous, I am as useless as all my... hmm... gender-pals. Nick NApr 07 2009 10:49am men are only useful insofar as they submit to women SteveJul 21 2009 11:51am ALL Humans are useless. Ctrl-Alt-DeleteSep 06 2009 9:30am #0140 - (Tue.) * 9/8/09 UpdateSep 08 2009 1:52pm Yes AnonymousNov 21 2009 11:11am Can any of you prove that you really exist? PaulNov 21 2009 11:11am Are any of you of a celebrity in disguise? DonaldNov 21 2009 11:13am No, I'm not. But I do have one standing behind me reading this, and rubbing her tits on my back. Can you guess which one it is? EricNov 21 2009 11:14am #0145 - (Wed.) * 11/25/09 UpdateNov 24 2009 10:51pm Phyllis Diller??? Just a guessNov 24 2009 10:54pm yes they are nicoleDec 25 2009 12:50pm Nicole you are stupid. But be happy it is not your fault that women are too stupid to do something. Why every woman wants here to enslave men and WHY did it not happen? - Is it because women are not smart enough to make a good plan? - Or are women just stupid lazy creatures? AnonymousJan 21 2010 8:36am It seemss to me that woman are taking control and they are getting stupid males to do it for them. Look at the laws coming outof washington. Women live 8 years longer than you weak males yet laws are being passed to help women live even longer while you males are left out to die. I could tell a lot of other laws that are women friendly and that also makes males suffer. I would say women are taking control and like I said, stupid males are helping us AmyApr 17 2010 7:54pm #150 - (Sun.) * 5/23/10 UpdateMay 23 2010 10:16am Don't worry Amy, when women take over Washington and are in power, because men help women out when they had the power...Women in power will help out the male and take real good care of us!!! CoryMay 23 2010 10:28am UPEEPLRSOOOMRBD! @#~Jun 24 2010 3:23pm I just wonder how many fat, sweaty, smelly lesbians are running this site. Bad BastardJul 24 2010 12:51pm Over the years Wife has occasionally loaned me to full figured, perspiring Gay Women and it was an honor to serve them. obedient husbandJul 28 2010 2:58pm I disagree with most of the votes here. men are not useless collectively. Although our move towards Female Supremacy is rendering them quite useless if they cannot embrace their new subservient status. A well trained obedient male is a pleasure to own and control and a treasured possession. Goddess AmandaAug 08 2010 2:14pm Amanda do you know why women have smaller feet than men? Because they can be nearer the kitchen stove. AnonymousAug 11 2010 12:04pm Womyn have smaller feet so the male mouth can kiss and adore them. Once you have been trained to kneel and obey even a moron like you could serve a purpose in life. Goddess AmandaAug 13 2010 10:31am Why do men die earlier than women do? Because they want to. MasonAug 13 2010 1:35pm Nobody is able to train me. AnonymousAug 14 2010 8:58am men die younger because once they have served their purpose as workers , consorts and breeders they have fulfilled their destiny. Mother Nature has decreed males as more peripheral to the cycle of life. Goddess AmandaAug 15 2010 12:52pm To 'Anonymous' You arrogant male beast! Being trained is a privilege not a challenge. You seem far too unworthy for such an honour. Goddess AmandaAug 15 2010 12:55pm Thank you amanda. Maybe you are right, I gonna buy a playboy and jerk me off on "Superiour women". Pity that you are as ugly as a goblin. AnonymousAug 16 2010 7:32am Actually the spelling is 'Superior Womyn' inferior male. Have you finished High School yet? You think I am ugly? That comment is so wide off the mark it gave me a chuckle! Goddess AmandaAug 16 2010 12:58pm Stupid Humans! You're all alike! OdamaAug 26 2010 4:17pm When Matriarchy becomes a reality, males will have one primary function; giving Womyn something to laugh at! ymanAug 26 2010 6:03pm What makes you think you dont serve that purpose already? Goddess AmandaAug 27 2010 5:55pm Yman, this whole board is something to laugh at. Not a functioning brain cell amongst the whole lot, and that includes the "superior womyn". No one has bothered to ask the obvious question. When speaking of uselessness, useless for what? Useless to whom? Ahh, there is the issue. Answer those questions and you will expose the agenda of the asker. It's obvious that nobody on this board lives in the real world. Your intelligence and abilities have nothing to to with your gender. Educate yourself. Dare to use the grey matter between your ears. Stop believing that your gender determines who and what you are. Try dealing with people as individuals, rather than consigning them to the inferior or superior heap based on something as silly as gender. I see why it is appealing though. For those that have no confidence in themselves, it's comfortable to blame their ineptitude on their gender. For women that have never accomplished anything in their lives or feel incapable, it's comforting to claim superiority based on your association with a group. Either way, it's a self esteem deficiency on both sides. I feel sorry for all of you. I mean that, I'm not trying to be condescending. It's sad. The only reason I post here is to add some sanity and balance and maybe I might help some poor soul who is on the fence about all of this, see it for the nonsense that it is. PatSep 01 2010 2:51pm Pat, You're no fun at all. pervboySep 04 2010 6:24pm LOL, pervboy. I know, I am a party pooper. Critical thinking is always a drag at a party. Having said that, I realize that most on this board are simply fetishists. If that's your bag, go for it, knock yourself out. But this isn't necessarily a bdsm discussion forum. If it was, I wouldn't bother posting, trying to tell people they're wrong for what they're doing. This is a general forum that is supposed to be serious, and some people do take this ideology seriously. I just like to point out how ridiculous it is, because there are some impressionable minds around. PatSep 04 2010 10:42pm men once thought giving Womyn the vote was ridiculous.Doing 'men's' jobs like being lawyers, doctors, accountants, etc was also once 'ridiculous'. Now some people claim the idea of a forthcoming Matriarchy is ridiculous. If I was was a betting Womyn I know where I would put my money! Goddess AmandaSep 05 2010 10:17am Wow, you really are caught up in your militant feminist mindset Amanda, still trying to prove that women can do anything men can do. Nobody doubts the ability of women. The men that thought women were stupid and incapable, they probably didn't actually believe it, but those that treated women as if that was the case were ignorant bigots themselves. The majority of men in this age respect women and their ability. You can stop crusading now. The fight is over. You're shadow boxing now, with no real enemy on the horizon, so you have no option left but to invent one and preemptively attack. Secondly, define your terms. Matriarchy or gynarchy? To me, those are different terms. Matriarchy is the more interesting idea and would have a lot of male supporters. I may be one of them, though there isn't yet a consensus on what it actually means. You might be shocked to know that historical matriarchal societies have always been egalitarian, something you are staunchly against. PatSep 05 2010 11:15am Actually Pat, the nature of the rhetorical question is such that I think this WAS intended to be a BDSM board or at least a Female Led board. I am sure that there are internet sites which seriously discuss the biology and or sociology of Females vs. males, perhaps sponsored by universities. Goddess Amanda appears (like Big Brenda) to have caught the spirit of the board and I look forward to Her posts. What you are doing would be the equivalent of going on a Manchester United site to say you don't like Football (soccer) or going on a Green Bay Packers site to talk about how you do not like (American) Football, or (I may as well cover all bases here) going on a site dedicated to the All Blacks (if you are a Southern hemisphere resident) to talk about how you do not like Rugby. You have the right to do it but I wonder what your point is. obedient husbandSep 05 2010 3:14pm LikeLike is a bdsm site? I'm sorry, but you are wrong. Besides titles like, "Are men useless" and "Are men redundant" are not femdom topics. Here, you have an ideology, female supremacy, being expressed with some not so subtle prescriptions about what we should do with men - namely, castration, slavery, execution. I'm sorry, but I have a right to express an opinion on these issues. The fact that they turn you on is your own problem. I think it is filth and I choose to debate the merits of those positions. See, I actually am a sub. Admittedly, one of these less radical topics attracted my attention. But once I saw the nature of the views being expressed, I realized we're not talking about sane and consensual femdom practices, which is basically a game as far as I'm concerned. Once you take it out of the realm of personal decision and express an ideology that would impose this on other people, such as saying that men should have no rights to education or property because they are inferior to women, you have crossed the line. You can expect some serious debate about it. For someone who practices a bdsm lifestyle to condone something like that is irresponsible, and a sign that your fetish has slipped into that of a social pathology. If we were talking about the relationships between a domme and a sub, that is something different. Within that context, the sub has chosen to forfeit status and rights under certain conditions and it is usually temporary and strictly negotiated. However, understand that even in some consensual relationships, abuse occurs. I would also share my opinion on that if I thought a certain type of practice had gone too far. So, what is my point? To counter the irrational ideology of people who have taken femdom and turned it into a gynofascist manifesto. Why don't you try taking these topics to a real femdom or bdsm board? Let's see how many people would tolerate it. It flat out violates the safe, sane and consensual mandates of the bdsm community. You would likely be banned from the forum because people would be repulsed. If you read around the web, many people in the femdom world are catching on to this female supremacist agenda and speaking out against it - the ones speaking the loudest are sane dominant women. PatSep 05 2010 6:24pm I think there's no doubt that the question of men's 'purpose' has become a common point of debate in sociology and anthropology. Remember that men were at one time accepted to be the natural superiors of women in all matters except childbirth and nurturing. Women were actively excluded from all power positions in business, academia and politics unless it was unavoidable that an individual woman be included here or there. So there are notable exceptions to discrimination against women. But the rule was that women didn't belong in business, politics or academia. No one can make that case any more. All over the world, women are making significant inroads in all these areas and the results are encouraging. Women have shown they are AT LEAST as capable as men in any field they chose to enter, and are re-defining some fields. Men are now looking at formerly male dominated professions and wondering if they can keep up with women. Boys being outstripped in school, young women entering the workforce are now earning more than males. .... Why is this happening? I believe it can be traced back to the scientific research of the early 20th century which was originally intended to prove that males were indeed the superior sex by virtue of their biology, but ended up proving just the opposite. You can find plenty of books from that period in Google books which discuss this very subject. Efforts to construe the discovery of men's and women's differing chromosomal structures as favoring the male were common at the start of the era of microbiology. It took a couple of decades before the y chromosome was discovered to be the weak link in the male genetic chain. When this happened, the dam broke. All the centuries of male oppression of women were seen in a new light. Women were now aware for certain that it was all a lie. They now had science to back up their innate sense that male superiority was a sham. ymanSep 06 2010 2:05pm Well put yman. obedient husband also has a valid point that a majority of posters here have an interest in BDSM as I do myself. People like Pat and an intelligent life form really dont grasp the ethos of many posts here which are motivated by sexual fantasies. They seem to assume every comment is a literal political manifesto and accept it as face value. They also seem to get off at getting offended and outraged by comments and seem to see themselves as crusaders for equalitarianism. I just regard them as rather tiresome, trolls. Having said that I am not opposed to an intelligent, respectful debate on Female Superiority or Gynarchic politics. However, both Pat and so called 'An intelligent life form' seem to regard insults and abusive labels as the same as a cogent argument. Then after insulting everybody in sight here they claim we are all running scared and will not tacke their brilliant arguments=insults. Its time for a moderator here to sort out such naughty boys out. A Womyn naturally! What do the rest of you boys think? Would you favour moderator to scold you when you breach forum rules? Goddess AmandaSep 08 2010 4:34pm I am honored that Goddess Amanda thinks I have a "valid point". I presume Goddess Amanda does NOT go to the Taken in Hand site and post against male-dom. I used to belong to, and even moderated TES meetings in the nineties where people discussed different points of view. Most people (well most sane sober people anyway) accept the premise that an individual has the right to opt out of any fantasy or lifestyle. But if one showed up at TES and it was "Equestrian night" She/he could leave if the subject was uninteresting but was not well received if She/he stayed and went into a long diatribe about how equestrian play was stupid. On the other hand a respectful "so what exactly is the attraction of this play for you" would probably be reasonably well received and might get a cogent answer. I knew a Woman whose fantasy was to give a Super Bowl party where She had ten naked men chained to Her throne (for you British Commonwealthers the Super Bowl is an American sports event perhaps analogous to the FA Cup). Maybe She finally did it. But I am sure if She did, it was with men who wanted to play the role. She did not go out into the street, hit strange men over the head, and drag them back to Her apartment. What Pat seems to want to do is to go to TES equestrian night and tell the people prancing around in their mouth bits and being led around by bridles that their play is stupid, or wrong or something and I do not get why he does it. obedient husbandSep 09 2010 7:00pm Very well put obedient husband. I have made the same kind of point on these boards but it seems to fall on deaf ears with these two men. To quote an old movie line 'he doesn't hear you and he never will'. I have always emphasized that if people reject Female Supremacy they can easily move on. However, the tangible anger and fear in their replies indicates these men feel they have to try to convert the rest of us to their viewpoint by endless arguments and abuse of those they disagree with. I can only assume they are quite insecure, vulnerable beings. Goddess AmandaSep 10 2010 10:36am Goddess Amanda, Most males are insecure vulnerable beings, especially those who deny the superiority of Women. Males who cling to the superstition that males are superior, or even equal to women, are living in denial of scientific fact and must - deep inside - be aware of the truth. In order to prop up the myth of male superiority or equality with Women, males must force themselves to invent myths which they force themselves to believe. The truth of males limited purpose in nature in too difficult for the male ego to handle. When a man accepts the destruction of his male ego, he can be truly secure in the truth that he has found his true purpose as an adjunct to the Female ymanSep 11 2010 4:02pm Man and Woman are but adjuncts to each other, for one without the other is truly a useless being. a sexism hating life formSep 11 2010 6:20pm Goddess Amanda Ma'am, thank You again for Your kind comments. Males ARE insecure beings as yman says and need affirmation from strong powerful Women. obedient husbandSep 13 2010 7:55pm Are YOU insecure, obedient husband? an intelligent life formSep 21 2010 3:23pm No because I know my purpose in life is to serve Wife/Mistress and submit to Her firm hand. I HAVE affirmation from a strong and powerful Woman. obedient husbandSep 23 2010 7:08pm Ok folks its time to call time on my creation: Goddess Amanda. I have had real fun over the last few months but I really can't keep the absurd pretense of this Female Supremacist 'Womyn' going any longer. I dont know what was funnier. The cringing male subs like obedient husband or arguing with incandescent masculinists like Pat. On the record Pat I agree with just about everything you have ever said! However, it was much more fun being Goddess Amanda. However, I have had my fun. Time to retire. Oh and yes I am a guy! Straight,into BDSM and what they call a switch. I do like the fantasy of female supremacy. However, that is where it should stay..pure fantasy. Not least as I enjoy dominating women too! Unfortunately people like obedient husband and Big Brenda are gender bigots who have reified men into a preconceived notion of inferiority. As someone once said 'you will see it when you believe it'. Take care Goddess Amanda -Sorry that should say Mark Goddess Amanda ( aka Mark) Goddess Amanda ( aka Mark)Sep 28 2010 4:46pm indtructions? umm yeah ok.now i'm clueless myself..lol jacobOct 03 2010 10:04pm i would really like to submit (fully) if possible to a much Superior women, i have i have always worked with women and find them more Superior than men in all shapes or form, my name is Ara i'm at ssubslv4u@yahoo.com thank you ssubslv4u@yahoo.comNov 05 2010 5:04pm Of course men are not useless. Our heads serve the purpose of human thighmasters for the ladies. It is our duty to allow the women to exercise their thighs by squeezing our heads. Men are so selfless allowing women to use us like that. Men you should be proud. MikeNov 28 2010 11:42pm I agree with Mike. For sacrificing ourselves like that we are saints. AnonymousNov 28 2010 11:47pm GOSH, THESE AMERICAN WOMEN ARE GOING NUTS. WELL IT'S EASY TO UNDERSTAND THEM - THEY ARE SO UGLY THEY DON"T ATTRACT THE ATTENTION THEY SEEK FROM FOREIGN MEN. AND THEIR, AMERICAN MEN ARE CUNTS THAT ARE SUBMISSIVE TO THEM!!! EUROPE HOPES FOR ANOTHER 9/11 YOU DESERVE IT, WE WILL GET POPCORN AND ENJOY THE SHOW ON TV! AmericaIsDoomedDec 01 2010 7:26am Men are useful as soldiers. Testosterone's purpose is to increase aggression. In cave man times, that agression was used for hunting and protecting the family. The male can be used to be soldiers and expend aggression that way. Sure in a matriachal society everything may be unicorns and rainbows thus no war, but if war does exist you would want males fighting it. 5th ColumnJan 14 2011 9:56pm yeah,american women definitely are ugly fat whores anonymousFeb 18 2011 10:34pm The great Jasmine revolution was brought about when a petty minded woman inspector [who is single NOT married] slapped a Tunisian Post graduate unemployed street vendor set up an illegal shop on the street to feed his starving family & confiscated his electronic weighing scale !!!!Humiliated at her high handed FEMINAZI -nature & frustrated @ being unable to feed his family in an era of rising food ,petrol etc. prices he set himself on fire ----a fire which has since engulfed Egypt , Tunisia , Libya , Iraq , parts of China ,Yemen , Bahrain , Jordan & Iran !!! He is a posthomous Hero to the world ---the FEMINAZI bitch is a hated , reviled villainess -----which FEMINAZI bitch says men are useless ??????????? Ashesh GhoseFeb 26 2011 7:48am yeah, girls are awesome and mostly beat any guy on everything, i they want but,men useless? never. we have made most technological advances we have a more creative future vision and are natural leaders, in a good sense a good man is programed to help the family or anyone who wants to follow him to reach success also, yeah, we're great comediants 90% of the best monologuists are men thatguyoverthere ??Mar 12 2011 8:54pm Men are not useless, only women. AnonymousMar 17 2011 7:53am No man = No woman = No human. Because woman became so cute and smart to impress man, otherwise they would be lazy n fat and ugly.. Man became strong and brave to provide and protect woman.. otherwise; they would be all sissiy scared, fat n lazy ( like now they are because there are no woman left ) all what I see are females who are MAN wanna bees and Males who are female wanna bees :S SICK! Dinoraptor101Mar 24 2011 4:05am Dinoraptor 101 ---how right you are ! ----totally agree with you .In fact in future it will be totally chaste couples who would utilize their unique Semen & copulins through Yogic self-restraint & cooperate with their spouse who will dominate Society ,Economy & the world !!! Ashesh GhoseApr 20 2011 9:30am The male is expendable and may eventually be entirely obsolete. The female is the primary biological form. It is the female who is primarily responsible for reproduction which is the most complex and essential of all biological functions. Since the female is necessary to carry on life, she is inherently stronger than the male.The male body is simply a genetic variation of the basic female form. This is clearly seen by the fact that males have nipples, which are female body parts. Every man has useless male breasts on his chest as a reminder of his natural inferiority. The delicate male reproductive system, most of which hangs precariously on the outside of his groin, consists of a few simple glands and a hydraulic tube which respond to the overwhelming sexual power of the female. She engulfs him and draws out his semen, after which he is exhausted. The female's sexual organs are complex myriad of internal organs which are protected by her strong pelvis and abdominal muscles. Her vagina, with which she engulfs the male, is a muscular organ, much larger and stronger than the penis which it surrounds and swallows. The clitoris provides the female with pleasure which is many times the intensity and duration of anything a male experiences, is sometimes erroneously described as a vestigial penis. This is clearly wrong, since the clit is much more sensitive than the penis. Also the penis which is used not only for ejaculation of semen, but for urination, has the urethra running through it. The clitoris and the female urethra are not combined as one, but are separate organs. This shows that the penis is in fact a modification which combines two previously separate structures. If the clitoris was a 'shrunken penis' it would still have the urethra running through it. The truth is that the penis is a bloated clit which is less sensitive and has to do double duty as an excretory passageway. Nature has made females the stronger sex because thy are more important in the overall scheme of things. Males are a biological afterthought. Women can reproduce without males because sperm can be easily replaced by means of ovum fusion But eventually a small number of males will be kept around for menial tasks even after their job as sperm provider is a thing of the past. WmnpwrMay 08 2011 4:02pm Taking misandronistic female chauvanist sow-bitchism to the extreme,I see. Nice one, Wmnpwr. an intelligent life formMay 11 2011 5:51pm So much hatred out here. We need more love. Yes the Female is the human in the divine/higher form. However, we need willing worshippers and servants. The solution is not gender extermination or physical coercion. Rather we need to encourage men release to release their natural instincts to worship and serve women. 5,000 years of patriarchy have distoted this fundamental dynamic between the genders. Thankfully we are reaching the end of that dark tunnel and moving back to the matriarchal default for humanity. Goddess MariskaMay 16 2011 2:54am Goddess, most respectfully, do You keep any servants and how do You discipline them? obedient husbandMay 20 2011 7:30pm If the female is the default form of the species, why do women have vestigial male genitalia? an intelligent life formMay 24 2011 4:13pm I only have one dedicated devotee obedient husband. That is all I require. He devotes his whole existence to worshipping, serving and obeying me. Your use of the word 'discipline' shows to me you are caught up in the BDSM mindset of Mistress/slave. The Goddess-consort dynamic is fundamentally different. I dont need to physically punish my devotee. With my sexual allure I know how to faciliate full compliance. If there is any hint of disobdeience all I need to do is verbalize my displeasure and remove attention from my consort. This denial makes him crave my approval again and focus on my happiness. True superiority can never rely on coercion. Most men know deep down they are inferior and want to worship Women as their natural superiors. A woman doesn't need to whip, cane or tie up a man to get his obedience. Far too much focus is given to pandering to male sexual fetishes here and not enough to worshipping women and fulfilling their desires. Goddess MariskaMay 31 2011 4:25pm Thank you for responding Ma'am. I tend to be more compliant after receiving firm strokes from Mistress across my behind and She seems to enjoy using me in that way but each Woman has to use Her own procedures in dealing with Her males. obedient husbandJun 02 2011 5:41pm Mariska, you are not a deity, you are a mortal human being of flesh blood and bone. If pricked, you would bleed. If tickled, you might laugh. an intelligent life formJun 09 2011 4:14pm IF Mariska's slave worships Her as a deity than She is one to him. Jesus bled the way I remember reading about it but people worship him as a deity. obedient husbandJun 11 2011 7:38pm I do not assert that Women are immortal deities. That would be nonsensical. Merely, that they are the highest form of life on this planet and as such can aspire to a divinity or a Goddess like nature in the eyes of any male. While all have not become so, I believe it is the natural state of Women to be divine; I believe each Woman contains this essence within her, whether she realizes it or not. After all, we Women are what human beings were intended to be in its highest form. In this there is a code of responsibility we as Women must uphold to ourselves?that above all, we must be beautiful and powerful and transcendent. Goddess MariskaJun 17 2011 2:08pm Why do so many men find immense pleasure in worshipping and serving Women? I would suggest they are happy and totally content because they have found their place in this world. They have found a reason to exist, a reason which they can intuitively link to the natural order of things. To learn that they are inferior does not make males unhappy, on the contrary; they state it with pride. Males who have found a Goddess to worship know that that they can be useful, and this makes them happy. They also realize how lucky they are to share this planet with such wonderful beings as Women. To worship, serve and obey a Woman is not degrading; on the contrary, it is an honor for males to serve their superiors, It is assuming their rightful place and duty in the order of the universe. Goddess MariskaJun 17 2011 2:19pm Obedient husband I have already made clear the man that worships me is not a 'slave' but my consort. I dont think such language is really accurate in describing the dynamic between a Goddess and her devotees. They willingly choose to serve her. There is no coercion or violence in the true path of the Goddess. I dont literally 'own' anyone and would not seek or want such a relationship. Goddess MariskaJun 17 2011 2:31pm If I offended You Ma'am I apologize since I basically agree with what You have been saying here. obedient husbandJun 17 2011 6:34pm There is no need for an apology obedient husband. I am not offended. I simply wanted to clarify my position. I know the Mistress/slave meme is currently more prevalent in our society due to the influence of BDSM. However, historically, the Goddess-devotee dynamic is far more ancient and pervades all of human history before the patriarchal take over. I think far more women can relate to be treated as a Goddess than the BDSM paradigm of a Mistress. Goddess MariskaJun 18 2011 1:55am dear G.Mariska ---Ma Kali the original Empress/Creatrix/Domme of this Universe loves HER sons MUCHO MORE than HER daughters & demands direct worship ----if the poor hubby starts worshipping the wife as a GODDESS this enrages the MOTHER like nothing else ! let the MOTHER be rendered HER Worship & then only HER slavegals, serving wenches & maidservants can lick the crumbs from the foot of HER IMMORTAL ALTAR ! G.A.Jun 18 2011 5:24am Thank you Ma'am obedient husbandJun 21 2011 5:31pm Everything written on this site is nothing more than masturbation material for submissive males. In the real world there are very few men who want to submit to a women and even fewer women who want a man they can dominate. That's why submissive males have to come on here and vent their fantasies. AKJul 08 2011 5:51pm I take offence at the suggestion that as a dominant woman I am the product of some male fantasy! It might be hard for the last poster to comprehend but bossy, dominant, assertive women are more frequent than many might think. Most of us dont hang out on fetish sites or work as Pro-Dommes. We are real flesh and blood women with real passions. I would have to agree though that demand does outstrip supply at present. When I advertized for for a male devotee online I was inundated by applicants. Then again not all so called 'submissive men' are really genuinely seeking to be moulded into a genuine devotee and servant. Many many are simply seeking to live out selfish fantasies with no desire to really surrender their ego to a woman worthy of their adoration and obedience. However, I think it becoming more and more socially acceptable for women to embrace their birthright as the guides of men to whom they naturally aspire to worship , serve and obey. So while I do not deny many men and women may come here to indulge a fantasy at the root of this is the changing dynamic moving us to a female-centric society. Goddess MariskaJul 13 2011 3:46pm You f*ckin whores honestly think you are better? There is a reason all great thinkers were Male. Macmillan2.0Aug 08 2011 9:51pm no,mens will be used as there slaves.for there enjoyu.female will use men as there toys. okhigbjklgjjhkSep 12 2011 12:17am Thank you Macmillan. You are rather making my case for me! You are living proof of why males needs the guidance and direction of women. Goddess MariskaOct 01 2011 3:39am So Ma'am did You find any potential servants who WERE appropriate and are You using them now? obedient husbandOct 10 2011 5:08pm Males are useful to serve women. As long as they are kept in their place as sex objects and doing domestic chores, they are wonderful. Although they are inferior to us women, they are very sexy if they are in great shape and have large penises. I think that only the best looking males with the biggest penises should be allowed to breed. We could have a race of trophy males to serve us and please us sexually. Without males who would perform the heavy labors? How would we enjoy sexual pleasure? My favorite thing in the world is my partner's eight inch, very thick penis. FemSupremeDec 19 2011 10:52pm It's good to see people like Goddess Mariska in here. True female domination is not about subjugating men to physical violence or about abuse, but simply about women being in the driver seat in terms of having all the important political offices, being top level managers and so on. There will still be non level management worker roles available for us men. As FemSupreme also state men will be also able to be homemakers or work as sex objects to provide eye candy to women. Goddess Mariska is also making an important point about female supremacy being more than just male fantasies. I'm a male performer and nude model myself, and while I admit it first started out as a fantasy and that I enjoy what I do it is also much more than that. You can certainly play out cfnm fantasies and similar stuff with your wife or some female friends, but when working as an entertainer you have to realize your role of being a professional sex object and you have to be very dedicated to succeed. MeDec 28 2011 2:42am ME: I commend you on being a professional sex object. That's a very fine career for a young male. In fact, my male partner was a stripper in a niteclub when we met. He's now a barefoot, naked househusband. He still worksout every day to keep his muscular, lean physique. Every male should do this to maximize his sex appeal. Women should do this too, of course. Males should also be circumcised as well. Circumcised penises are so much more beautiful, and the exposed glans makes the male more naked. FemSupremeDec 29 2011 11:35pm Ms. FemSupreme Ma'am, most respectfully I am fascinated by marriages where the Woman is socially and economically dominant as well. If he is Your naked househusband what do You work at that permits You to keep a naked male sex object at home? Is he kept naked in the presence of company and subject to corporal discipline? I hope You deign to answer the queries of this mere male. obedient husbandDec 30 2011 5:31pm I am a highly paid professional, and earn enough to support both of us comfortably. When my female supremacist friends come over, my husband and my friends' husbands are naked, but if it's business he is clothed. When he misbehaves or displeases me in any way he gets corporal punishment. I lash his buttocks or the back of his thighs with my whip. He is required to remain silent during the punishment or he receives extra lashes. FemSupremeDec 30 2011 9:44pm Thank You for responding Ma'am. You sound like a REAL WOMAN!!! obedient husbandJan 01 2012 5:02pm Obedient husband, I also believe that the woman should circumcise her male partner during the marriage ceremony with no anasthetic. This extremely painful and humiliating ordeal would make the male more submissive and fearful of the woman. It would show the male how much power the woman has over him. It would be an attack on his entire sexuality since the penis is the ultimate symbol of maleness. For a male, there is nothing more terrifying than the thought of having a sharp knife taken to his genitals. This is why circumcision would be an excellent tool to control the male. It is the ultimate form of sexual sadism. Would you be willing to be circumcised in this manner? FemSupremeJan 01 2012 9:24pm Most respectfully You mean if Wife were to predecease me and leave me in Her will to another Woman who ordered me to undergo such a ritual? Obviously I would obey. I would not have any more choice in the matter than livestock when it is branded. I did witness a wedding where as part of the ceremony the wedding ring was inserted into the male's penis. He screamed in pain but did not try and avoid it. Afterward his Wife attached a leash to the ring and led him naked around the room in the presence of Her guests. They have been married for 27 years. obedient husbandJan 05 2012 4:49pm PS Ma'am, do I have permission to ask You about Your wedding ceremony? obedient husbandJan 05 2012 4:51pm We had a civil marriage to make it legal, but had a private ritual at home, just the two of us. He vowed to obey me at all times, and vowed to silently endure his punishments whenever he displeases me in any way. I then gave him several lashes with my whip to show him what he would experience when he is disobedient. Unfortunately, my slave was circumcised at birth, so I couldn't do it myself. Enduring circumcision would be an excellent way for the male to show his worthiness to the woman. FemSupremeJan 05 2012 11:57pm Most respectfully, thank You for responding Ma'am. obedient husbandJan 09 2012 5:23pm Circumcising must be done with no anasthetic pitty it is not allowed in our society. If it would happen to me it must be done like this reeveJan 30 2012 9:36am Circumcision probably began as an extreme form of sexual sadism FemSupremeJan 30 2012 10:46am Not according to my wife. She had her name tattooed on my ass, drove me to the doc to get a vasectomy, takes all the money I earn and I don't even know the password on our bank account, makes me wear thongs, makes me wear my hair long/shoulder length, makes me watch the kids, do the dishes, vacuum, do laundry and massage her feet when I am not working to support the family. I work at home, don't have a car, she hasn't worked in over 10 years, she never gives me blow jobs, makes me shave my arm pits, and I always have to go down on her. Vince - Happy slaveMar 01 2012 10:46am Thats a good boy Vince. You are learning your true place in life is to love, worship and obey your Goddess without question. Soon your lifestyle will be the predominant one in American society. I hope you take genuine pride in serving your superior like this? PandoraMar 04 2012 8:20am Wife Mistress bent me over naked and gave me a severe paddling on my bare behind to celebrate our seventh anniversary this weekend. It still hurts. Talk about a "seven year itch". obedient husbandMar 04 2012 2:35pm Menwho are hard-wired for humiliatory erections & humiliatory orgasms can only get excited , erect or orgasmic if they are sexually humiliated : spanked , whipped , scolded , sneered at , Sodomized , sissified etc. They will not get erect or orgasm in a man spanks gal scene !! Similarly ladies who are mentally wired into humiliatory orgasms will be excited or orgasmic only when she is spanked , whipped , Sodomized , scolded & not in Femdom scenes !! So when we have a male poster ask "what if men are useless ?" if he's geared to humiliatory , submissive mental circuitry he's already hard when he posts this & can shoot off just by discussing this topic !!! So it's not out of a deep thirst for knowledge or science he's posting on this boaRd ! A Poster asking GsaMar 11 2012 12:02pm FemSupreme: "ME: I commend you on being a professional sex object. That's a very fine career for a young male. In fact, my male partner was a stripper in a niteclub when we met. He's now a barefoot, naked househusband. He still worksout every day to keep his muscular, lean physique. Every male should do this to maximize his sex appeal. Women should do this too, of course. Males should also be circumcised as well. Circumcised penises are so much more beautiful, and the exposed glans makes the male more naked." Yes, I agree that both men and women should do an effort to look attractive for their partner. But I do think it'll be men's task to keep really, really fit and good looking at all times in the future. Women will of course benefit from keeping healthy and attractive but as they will thrive in terms of good careers, monetary power and so on, women will also be able to define the future definition of beauty allowing women to be considered attractive by developing a variety of body types. Having a few pound extra won't be considered inappropriate for a woman. And most important, women will be able to set their own body standards as more and more women progress through their careers. When women dominate the top level of professional businesses and politics the power to define beauty for both men and women will be be held by women in all important aspects. And of course, circumcision for men will be one of the beauty traits. MeJun 05 2012 9:39pm Most people DON'T agree that women are superior to men. And if they did that would be sexism. voteresultshomeJul 10 2012 5:09am "Most people DON'T agree that women are superior to men. And if they did that would be sexism." ........... Not 'sexism' just factual. AnonymousAug 18 2012 2:12pm after women do become succesful they also become fat , bald & sprout hair on their upper lip s & face ---net result ---the Ugly Feminazi !?!?!? GAAug 20 2012 7:48am Where do you people get your ideas? an intelligent life formAug 20 2012 4:00pm Mostly from the internet ailf[an int. Lif. form] GAAug 21 2012 5:40am What is that fabulous stuff your smoking and where can I get some? feministsarefagsSep 14 2012 3:34pm Fu©k this shìtty pole you bi+ches and Faggs Go shît with your fu©king @$$es JebediahSep 24 2012 3:54pm Femsupreme is a bitch who poos in the f*cking site JebediahSep 24 2012 3:59pm With her dumb ass get a life fu©king pooter & faggot JebediahSep 24 2012 4:01pm Can't I say the fu©king word shìt shīt shît shįt shiit JebediahSep 24 2012 4:05pm Femsupreme want to go out on a date? FreddieSep 24 2012 6:29pm Femsupreme says She is married but perhaps like many Superior Women She practices polyandry. So maybe Freddie has a shot. obedient husbandSep 26 2012 7:50pm Lots of fantasy stuff here! To address the poll question: Are men useless? (1) They are still needed for reproduction, although future science may change that. (2) They are useful for doing the heavy and/or dirty jobs women don't want to do. (3) Women in general seem to have an emotional need for men, although they seem to do better as singles than men do. Re use #1: although men are and may continue to be needed for reproduction, there doesn't need to be so many of them! Each man could be milked to provide sperm for at least a hundred women; so, for that use there may be a need of only one man for every 100 women. As for use #2: the development of intelligent robots would reduce considerably or even eliminate a need for men for heavy and/or dirty work. That leaves reason #3. The future use of males seems mostly to be a matter of women's emotional need for them. Given that the future society is going to be a matriarchy, I think the future use of men will be to do the cooking, dish washing, laundry, cleaning, grocery shopping, baby caring, and sex servicing for all the female breadwinners. Just ThinkingOct 03 2012 12:48pm As a man I would love women to have the Right to put a man in stocks whenever she feels like it ,it would consist of a large room with rows of stocks,there would be no need for air conditioning or heating, in the summer the man would sweat and swelter, in the winter he would freeze, there would be no time limit ,he would be at her mercy as to when he is released so she can do things at a leisurely pace ,it could be a hot sunny day in summer she can go for a swim to keep cool ,leaving him sweating in the stocks ,there are so many advantages to this ,wherever this happens would be a trouble free zone as the woman would be keeping him in line while enjoying the benefits of a man free area,they would all be securely locked in stocks under the womans complete and total control this should be implemented immediatley AnonymousOct 17 2012 2:24am As a man I would say men are useless and as such would be a keen supporter of women only areas in society ,there are already women only hotels ,women only clubs , and women only beaches ,they are very popular ,women enjoy keeping men at bay,this way it is done for them ,a woman can relax without men drooling and making crude advances BogeyNov 20 2012 11:55am Men need to be placed in deep pits ,forced to climb down on a rope ladder the rope ladder is then pulled up by a woman then celebrate as the superior sex can then have the enjoyment of a peaceful day without the totally useless irritant that is man causing trouble BogeyDec 08 2012 4:59am GOSH, THESE AMERICAN WOMEN ARE GOING NUTS. WELL IT'S EASY TO UNDERSTAND THEM - THEY ARE SO UGLY THEY DON"T ATTRACT THE ATTENTION THEY SEEK FROM FOREIGN MEN. AND THEIR, AMERICAN MEN ARE CUNTS THAT ARE SUBMISSIVE TO THEM!!! EUROPE HOPES FOR ANOTHER 9/11 YOU DESERVE IT, WE WILL GET POPCORN AND ENJOY THE SHOW ON TV! AmericaIsDoomedMar 12 2013 4:20am Men will make great slaves once female supremacy is accomplished. SarahJun 04 2013 12:51pm @Sara. And why do you think a female supremacy will be accomplished? Just wonderingJun 05 2013 7:52am Look at what is happening. Male strength is no longer an advantage but female patience with school and for detail is. More girls are finishing college than boys for that reason. Gradually more and more women are in Congress, positions of power in academia and business. Once we get control of something we don't cede it back. Young women are earning more than you men. We won't need you to reproduce. It will be slavery, in some form of other, or extinction for men SarahJun 05 2013 9:56am @Sara. You make a good case for women gaining more power than men (matriarchy) but not for women using that power to oppress men (female supremacy). Many now predict a matriarchy and you may get that. But if you do, why would you want to use it to oppress men, even to the point of slavery? And what kind of slavery do you have in mind? Just wonderingJun 05 2013 10:43am Men wont accept matriarchy easily, and many of the duller males are too inclined to violence. Eventually women will politically marginalize and then disenfranchise men. Once matriarchy, it will simply be able to get what we need out of men, and less risky, by enslaving them. SarahJun 05 2013 11:07am @Sarah. Actually, I think men would accept matriarchy easily, where matriarchy would be a society in which most positions of power in government, academia, and business were held by women, and nothing nothing specifically to suppress, oppress, or subjugate men. In an equal opportunity society, the cream will rise to the top, and you made a good case for women being the cream. In a democratic society we are all conditioned to accept the will of our legislatures and courts, which, if you are right, would be dominated by women. Equal opportunity plus democracy seem to be all that is required to establish and maintain indefinitely a matriarchy. So I think men would accept a matriarchy (as I defined it) but would rebel at being significantly oppressed, and that would certainly include attempts at enslavement. Trying to move from a matriarchy (as I defined it) to a female supremacy (as I defined it)seems to me would increase, not decrease, risk to women's gains. Just wonderingJun 05 2013 11:47am Men like you are not the issue. I am sure I could make you behave appropriately without 24/7 supervision. Many man will resist the evolution, now at the turning point, into matriarchy. They will become lazy and unproductive--we already see that in many households with women as primary breadwinners--or become violent. It is too difficult to motivate the lazy and sort out those who are troublesome and dangerous. It would be best just to acknowledge the superiority of women, inferiority of men, and the necessities of political disenfranchising men and placing them under female control. Male registration and control legislation, which places every male under the supervision and responsibility of a female, and requires women to supervise and restrain their males, will likely be most practical. It might take the form of marital chattel, denying men ownership of property--the kind of things men did to women through the middle of the 19th century--or it could be more extreme. SarahJun 05 2013 12:08pm Once women take control of politics and business, most men will gradually fall into line—and the number of troublesome males will decline but remain menacing. Men will be socialized differently—successful women will look for younger, virile mates—that are pleasant to look at. Increasingly, and then completely, men will be discouraged from attending universities, etc. and start competing for high earning wives Eventually, their opportunities will be as limited as those of women in another era, and men will fall dependent on and subject to the authority of women at work and in the home. It will be easy. Boys are interested in physical things, and girls in learning and building. Males to please females will increasingly emphasize body building and cultivating pleasing appearances for somewhat older females who will make the rules in relationships—all makes sense, as women live longer than men, are more inclined to multitask, and whereas men are focused on sex in relationships, women value and better manage the entire arrangment. With men better socialized, fewer men will be troublesome and resist all these necessary societal changes. Disenfranchising men, limiting their education to their natural inclinations, etc will just tumble into place. Limiting the mobility of men to keep them out of mischief will follow, and after a generation males raised in such an environment will offer little resistance. AnonymousJun 05 2013 12:18pm Once women take control of politics and business, most men will gradually fall into line—and the number of troublesome males will decline but remain menacing. Men will be socialized differently—successful women will look for younger, virile mates—that are pleasant to look at. Increasingly, and then completely, men will be discouraged from attending universities, etc. and start competing for high earning wives Eventually, their opportunities will be as limited as those of women in another era, and men will fall dependent on and subject to the authority of women at work and in the home. It will be easy. Boys are interested in physical things, and girls in learning and building. Males to please females will increasingly emphasize body building and cultivating pleasing appearances for somewhat older females who will make the rules in relationships—all makes sense, as women live longer than men, are more inclined to multitask, and whereas men are focused on sex in relationships, women value and better manage the entire arrangment. With men better socialized, fewer men will be troublesome and resist all these necessary societal changes. Disenfranchising men, limiting their education to their natural inclinations, etc will just tumble into place. Limiting the mobility of men to keep them out of mischief will follow, and after a generation males raised in such an environment will offer little resistance. SarahJun 05 2013 12:48pm @Sarah. So you would deny me the vote. I suppose by "political disenfranchising" you would include denying me the right to run for and hold elective office. You would not allow me to own property. And if we were a couple you would be responsible for me and I would be under your supervision. My first thought about what you would do was that that's not right. That's not fair. Then I considered that what you would do to me is what men did to women through the middle of the 19th century. OK, but society decided what men did to women was wrong. Wouldn't doing the same to men be wrong also? Just wonderingJun 05 2013 12:55pm No because women are superior to men Until not long ago men's strength afforded them great advantages, but that is no longer the case. Things changed not because men thought it was wrong but because women demanded and bullied men into changing arrangements. In our age of knowledge and technology, girls simply are better made for school that boys, and it shows in who is graduating from college, who is earning more among young people, etc. Society can be run more effectively if women make the decisions, and men are relegated to the jobs they can do and women don't want to do. We won't be around to see it, but men will end up possessed by women, and have limited opportunities. We are just in the transition of a great reversal. I would be very comfortable ethically and morally with men treated as women once were. SarahJun 05 2013 1:02pm @Sara. You mentioned men becoming violent and dangerous. I admit with some shame that my sex is so much more violent than girls and women. However, only a minority of men are really violent. I am a middle-aged man and I have never hit a women or even ever wanted to. Also, there is the possibility of chemical control. Neuroscience is still young and I think that in time drugs will be developed to help violent men control themselves. Most pharmacists, doctors, and biological researchers are going to be women and I would think that they would make it a priority to control men's violent tendencies. Don't you think that will happen? And if it did, why would there still be a need for the male registration and personal female supervision of each male that you mentioned? Just wonderingJun 05 2013 1:26pm If women are going to do the most intellectually demanding work, stay in school into their 20s and bear the children, men will have to accept roles they won't like. One way or another, we will have to control men--be the head of home and office--and require men to work--not be lazy--and not put it all on us. Men will have to be the ones who do the domestic chores, tend the children, and in the workplace do the arduous tasks that their brawn best suits them. It would be best to have men under direct control--as men once did women--for those purposes. Otherwise men will just get lazy--we are already seeing that in young families headed by women. As for the violent and antisocial and rebellious, chemical control may be necessary but it is too difficult and costly to wait for males to become disruptive, and sorting the troublesome ones out preemptively impossible. It's best to have each male under the direct supervision of a female, have them responsible for the conduct of their male(s), and let them use physical restraints, tracking devices, drugs or whatever is necessary to control them. It may take the form of just good old fashioned marriage, with men belonging to their mothers and wives and having limited rights, at one end of the spectrum, or enslavement at the other. The latter has the advantage is that there would be no loose males running around--they could create all kinds of mischief. SarahJun 05 2013 1:38pm @Sarah. You mentioned in one of your first comments that you women do not need us males for reproduction and that one (horrible) possibility would be the extinction of men. I don't understand. Do you mean that you think that you could store enough sperm that men could become extinct? I am not sure that biological science today can guarantee that the sperm in the sperm banks wouldn't deteriorate over time and cause the extinction of the whole human species. Could you explain further? Just wonderingJun 05 2013 2:22pm It may be possible to generate sperm/fertilized eggs from female spinal or stem cells, cloning etc. At this time that is remote but it could happen. We could also keep a limited pool of males, as sperm donors--alter the ratio of males to females in the population, and limit the number of men those needed for this purposes. That would not be many. That is not desirable. Men can serve a lot of useful purposes to woman in a matriarchy--I men still being the garbage collectors, air conditioning repairmen and all sorts of things requiring strength or unpleasant working conditions. Also we still like having virile men to sleep with and as companions, if they accept they are now the second sex and behave reasonably--do what they are told and carry their share of the load. The problem may well be, however, that men will just sit down and put it all or most all on us--that is unless we have them under firmer control. Women dependent on men for financial support in marriage provide control of women but the reverse may not be enough--males are so lazy when women are productive. I do see women completely taking over certain jobs because they are brighter and others because once women enter a field men tend to leave--they say they don't like to do woman's work, but I think it is because they fear women outperforming them once the playing field is leveled. Consider, in the 1950s and 60s, all the student crossing guards at grammar schools were boys. Then the idea came of letting girls do it too. Now those guards are all girls. There is something primal in all that. More and more women will be police--eventually women will dominate and men will disappear from that line of work. We find to our advantage to move that along, because once that happens think of how easy it will be to implement the evolution I described the above posts. You did not respond to my arguments in my previous post--you accept those, I assume. SarahJun 05 2013 3:21pm @Sarah. Please be patient with me. I didn't respond to your arguments in your next to last post because I'm still trying to get my head around what you have been saying. I think I have one last question (or related set of them). I asked if women subjugating men wouldn't be as bad as when men subjugated women. You answered no, because women are superior to men. Later in the same post you said that women would run society more effectively than men. I am persuaded that women are naturally superior to men in the traits that make for success in today's post-brawn world. As I admitted, in an equal opportunity world women are the cream and will rise to the top and in a democratic society they will achieve and maintain a matriarchy. It seems to me that being superior in the ability to grab and hold power is one thing, but whether or not that is good for society as a whole is another thing. It seems to me that to justify the female supremacy you describe, women would have to be morally superior, not just ability superior, to men and that society as a whole would benefit from women ruling. A society run more efficiently is not necessarily a better society morally By society as a whole I mean both women and men. I am not going to ask if women are morally superior to men. I grant that. The prisons are filled overwhelming with men and they start and fight the wars. However, being morally superior does not necessarily translate to producing a better society. So, I will ask why the female supremacy you describe would be a better society as a whole than a patriarchy or egalitarian society. How would the women be better off? How would the men be better off? Just wonderingJun 05 2013 4:00pm I believe woman are morally and intellectually superior. A world where men were dominated--each registered and supervised by a responsible female--would be more productive, peaceable and happier. Both genders will be happier. If we go on with present arrangements, men will become lazy and lazier, and put most of the work on us. Idle and frustrated they will likely become more violent--they will work much less and cause more trouble. Disenfranchised and under direct female supervision and responsibility men--each one, 24/7--will work more and enjoy the satisfaction of contributing more. We will have lots of ways for leveraging their cooperation--including medicating them as you suggest. Increasingly young men are having difficulties organizing their lives--women can fix that for them. And with appropriate arrangements we will. SarahJun 05 2013 5:14pm @Sarah. You made many points today and I need to think them over. I don't have have more questions about the feasibility or benefits of a female supremacy as outlined by you. However, on a personal note, I wonder why you said you were sure you could make me behave appropriately without 24/7 supervision. What did I say that led you to say that? On the more important issues of the feasibility, nature of, and benefits of a female supremacy as outlined by you, I will get back to you tomorrow. Just wonderingJun 05 2013 5:44pm Referencing you was a rhetorical device. What I was trying to express with men disenfranchised, registered and each one under the direct supervision and responsibility of a woman, we will have the means to assure that men do the work they should do, refrain from violent and other counter productive behavior, and generally accept matriarchy and obey women. Men will be more productive, compliant and happier. Happiest of all will be women. SarahJun 05 2013 5:55pm @Sara. I'm sorry but I do have another question on a personal note. In one of the latter posts you said "We find to our advantage to move that along [women dominating the ranks of the police]" The "we find" struck me. Are you a member of an organized group of women working to bring about a female supremacy? Just wonderingJun 05 2013 5:56pm I am not a member of an organized group, just a good feminist, and interested progress of society--and how the emerging matriarchy might be best managed. SarahJun 05 2013 6:12pm Also, I have sympathy for you and the fact that you must give more thought to what I have said and are having difficulty grasping. As man, you have intellectual limitations. SarahJun 05 2013 6:14pm Once women are in full control politically and in businesses, I suspect will become increasingly troublesome--laziness, mischief, obstruction, and worse, and women intellectuals and politicians will conclude it is best to disenfranchise men, circumscribe areas or work and education permitted to men, and so forth. It simply won't be feasible to have a male controlled police--it might even make sense to have any male police. These things won't happen and women in the vanguard will agitate to move along the process in the police as the climax approaches. SarahJun 05 2013 7:15pm Just Wondering, Please post again if you would like to discuss further how things are evolving--especially with more young women earning more than their husbands and significant others; and could evolve as women take control of politics, the courts, and other government institutions, and assume leadership throughout business. Women see matriarchy emerging and are reordering our lives to best assume the responsibilities--for the benefit of women and men. Some feminists are now thinking about how the dynamic between men and women must evolve to keep society progressing--building knowledge and changing social institutions to accommodate a changing environment and the responsibility will increasingly have to share their incomes with and support men. We recognized the need to both fulfill our aspirations and thoughtfully apply our emerging authority in managing the "second sex." Most of us hardly want to live without men--we have needs for warmth and intimacy as we always have enjoyed--and would not want to see breakthroughs in reproductive technologies either reduce men to sperm donors, kept in small numbers, or eliminate men all together. However, to continue society on a progressive path--and ensure that civilization may cope with a changing environment--men must accept the authority women will increasingly have in their lives, and continue to contribute in ways their intellectual abilities best suit, without causing costly and dangerous disruptions. Current arrangements do not provide for that. SarahJun 06 2013 2:04am Just wondering, I do hope to hear from you further. SarahJun 06 2013 4:20am @Just Wondering, In an effort to continue the conversation, let me outline how I believe disenfranchisement of males could/should evolve. 1. By law, men would no longer be permitted to vote, hold political office, serve as judges, become attorneys, or serve on juries. 2. Women would occupy all positions of authority in the police and military—no male officers, except those in totally male support functions, such as logistics, nursing, etc. Specific percentage—for example 67 percent—of all line police officers must be female, and no man would be placed in a position to give a direct order to a woman. A 100 percent female police would be preferable and the ultimate goal. All military officers in combat arms would be female, and as would NCOs in the direct chain of command within combat units. No man would be in a position to give a direct order to a woman, and none would bear arms, unless under the direct command of a woman. Civilian males would be prohibited from owning, possessing or using fire arms or weapons. Male police would required to leave their weapons at the office. 3. No man could own property or securities—deeds, titles, stocks, bonds, and bank accounts would be held in trust by their mothers and wives, and lacking either a woman responsible for the man, if necessary assigned by a judge, for the man’s actions and liabilities. 4. Similarly, without the consent of his responsible female, no man could obtain a drivers licenses or passport, use either for extensive travel, or enter into contracts, take on debt, possess a credit card or take on any other legal liability. 5. Financial responsibility for torts, unpaid debts, etc. ultimately accrues to a male’s responsible female. 6. In the interests of protecting girls and women, all girls would receive firearms training and specific instructions for using those to stop males attempting acts of violence against them, other women or males within their range of control. Men convicted of violent acts would be permanently removed from society, and their responsible females would be financially, and in cases of negligence criminally, responsible for their actions. Together these would provide girls/women with the incentive and the means to keep men under tight supervision and control. Beyond all this, I believed disenfranchisement should be followed by laws that require each male to be registered, tracked and under the 24/7 direct supervision and control of a responsible, capable female. SarahJun 06 2013 7:07am @Sarah. I am sorry. I apologize. I have been busy preparing for a two week trip. You know how that is, preparing for the trip plus getting a lot of ordinary responsibilities out of the way. Just wonderingJun 06 2013 11:56am @Sarah. I am amazed at how much thought you have give to the feminine future and what it might mean to the relations between the sexes. We seem to be in the midst of what is surely the greatest revolution in history (herstory?). Already, in just four decades since “women’s lib†there has been so much role reversal. More women than men now graduate from college, earn master’s degrees, and earn doctorates. In the relatively near future women should dominate academia. Dominating the prestigious professions – medicine and law -- is not far away either. Eventually the majority of lawyers and judges will be women. According to a Forbes article by Jenna Goudreau, women now dominate the following occupations: Accountants and auditors; financial managers; insurance underwriters; medical scientists ; education administrators; tax examiners, collectors, and revenue agents; veterinarians; human resource managers; budget analysts; psychologists; advertising managers; medical and health services managers; tax preparers, and social and community service managers. Obviously, this is really just the beginning of role reversal. I first became aware of this revolution when I read Jonathan Rauch’s article “The Coming American Matriarchy.†I thought, “No, this can’t be happening.†You see, I was raised to believe in male superiority and female inferiority. Then I read more and more facts and trends pointing to female superiority and a matriarchy. I haven’t read the latest works on the subject, but I have read reviews on Amazon.com and articles about them. These would be books by Dan Abrams, Kay S. Hymowitz, Guy Garcia, Lionel Tiger, and of course, Hanna Rosin. I accept now the natural superiority of the female sex and the “Coming American Matriarchy†(and also the coming matriarchy in all advanced nations). I accept these things intellectually but sometimes I struggle with accepting them emotionally because I was raised with an assumed belief in male superiority. Believing in the natural superiority of the female sex means to me believing that most women are better than most women in the capabilities, abilities, and dispositions that count. I do not believe every woman is superior to every man. After all, we have had our Newtons, Mozarts, Darwins, and Einsteins. I have B. A. and M.A. degrees and a senior analyst position, which puts me educationally and occupationally above most women. Still, the fact that most women are superior to most men in the things that count means that society will be dominated by women – there will be a matriarchy. I have given some thought to how far the role reversal would go. Not as much as you have, but some. The relations between the sexes form a continuum, however, it seemed useful to me to think of three major possibilities, or points along that continuum. (1) Reversal to something like the present; for example, in government the gender ratio of women to men would reverse for governors, state legislators, federal congresspersons, federal senators, the presidency, the heads of state and federal departments, the judiciary at all level up to and including the supreme court. (2) The second possibility would be reversal to something like the 1950’s, the era which seems to have provoked the second wave of feminism. For example, women at work and men as househusbands, the wife the expected head of the household and both the wife and the husband acknowledging that openly, women the more assertive and men the more yielding, men in the kitchen making sandwiches for his wife and her guests, and men taking their wife’s last name. (3) The third possibility would be reversal to before the mid-19th century, where women couldn’t vote, own property, were under the supervision of father then husband, and so on. It seemed fantastic to me that the third possibility was more than an academic possibility, something conceptual with any possible realization. You have convinced me otherwise. I’m not saying that you have convinced me that it will happen, or that it is realistic possibility. If men could subjugate women then as they did, why cannot women do the same to men? I see no reason women couldn’t. I have read enough of anthropology to realize the diversity of social organizations, customs, mores, values, and belief systems that humans can develop. It’s a matter of socialization. Men’s greater physical strength would not be a factor. In the South, on a plantation the slaves were many and strong from their labors and the owners were few and not as fit. Yet, the slaves accepted their position with few rebellions because they were socialized to accept it (and the owners did implement some control measures). I am amazed, and a little awed, at how thoroughly, comprehensively, and consistently you have developed your thoughts concerning the relationships between the sexes after the matriarchy arrives. Just wonderingJun 06 2013 11:56am @Sara. I must attend now to preparing for my vacation and must break off our conversation. When on vacation I do not go on the internet. I check in on the internet on Saturday, June 22, and will see then if you want to continue our conversation. For my part, I have enjoyed our conversation. Just wonderingJun 06 2013 11:57am Would like to year from you. I know--I have a staff of about fifty. Three divisions with professional managers and an admin group. Got up early to write you. SarahJun 06 2013 11:58am @Sara. I'm still on but about ready to go off. You make me feel bad about getting back to you sooner. I had no idea you had gotten up early to write me. I really appreciate that. I apologize again. Just wonderingJun 06 2013 12:14pm @Just Wondering - I look her on June 22 AnonymousJun 06 2013 12:37pm @Just Wondering - I look her on June 22 SarahJun 06 2013 12:48pm Sarah, Robert Heinlein once suggested that voting, holding political office, serving as judge, or practicing law should be permitted only by Women. Male lawyers would only be permitted to serve as law clerks to Females once the changeover was effectuated. I am currently a male lawyer but if ultimately You are successful, perhaps I could be Your law clerk. lawslaveJun 10 2013 7:03pm I would thing this transition is years away, and thank you for the compliment but I am not a lawyer. Intelligent and well socialized males like yourself will be highly prized--you would have a much more pleasant time of it than the lower half of the male population SarahJun 12 2013 1:48am lawslave, You seemed reconciled to matriarchy coming. Is that because you have concluded women are superior and should govern, hold the best jobs, etc? Or do you believe this the outcome of a female movement that has unfairly treated men and poorly socialized boys? SarahJun 12 2013 3:14am any other men? SarahJun 12 2013 6:15am Hey Sarah Lawslave sounds like someone who would fall right into line. I don't know that he realizes males like him would be highly prized--more intelligent than his gender and more compliant too. I am expecting a lot of difficulties with the less bright males as things unfold. SophieJun 12 2013 9:46am Sophie, I agree. If men we disenfranchised, I don't think it would end there--we have discussed--and if things progressed to men being possessions, he would be quite the nice investment SarahJun 12 2013 11:54am " You seemed reconciled to matriarchy coming. Is that because you have concluded women are superior and should govern, hold the best jobs, etc? Or do you believe this the outcome of a female movement that has unfairly treated men and poorly socialized boys? " "any other men?" Some of both, But mostly the former. I'm interested to hear more of your ideas about what the future holds. I'm not sure I would care to be a young ambitious man today. What are their options going forward? RobDJun 12 2013 9:17pm Elsewhere another woman posted.... Many studies have proven females are superior. In the womb all life beings as female, but for half of those embryos something goes horrible wrong and they become male. They are flooded with testosterone which damages brain cells and delays developement. Science has proven women mature faster than men and are smarter than men. Brain scans have revealed the female brain is more active, has more connections, and calculates faster than the male brain. The male brain is much slower and can only focus on one thing at a time by comparison. The female brain's superior corpus callosum also allows for better multitasking as both brain lobes are better connected. Women can now say men aren't as smart as them and we have the scientific evidence to back it up. In addition, girls have XX chromosomes and men have XY. Having two X's means females have a backup gene of one is defective while males don't. This means males are more likely to die even before they're born, and females are more protected from birth defects and medical conditions. For example, boys are much more likely to be mentally retarded. This is also why females outlive males in humans and all animal species. Science has also proven women have better immune systems, better senses (smell, touch, taste, sight). The list goes on and on. This is the great thing about science: it's factual. There's no shame in admitting a woman is superior to you, because science has proven she is. For men like yourself (it's obvious you're a man) the best bet is to stop denying your gender's inferiority.... To this I add .... If women are indeed superior, we should occupy the best paying jobs and positions of power in government--and both are gradually happening--young women are outperforming young men, earning more university degrees landing better paying jobs, and increasingly out earning men. But also, if we are superior, shouldn't we also have be the presumptive heads of families, the exclusive franchise to vote and hold and so forth? If men don't comply with the changes underway and accept their status as the subordinate sex, continue to create a lot of disruption and commit violent acts, then we will be justified in taking other measures to pacify the male population. Then taking over politics will be only the first step, as we may need a firmer had to ensure they are productive and defer to women. Whatever arrangements emerge between men and women, men, as women did in the past will have to curry favor with the opposite sex to get along in the workplace and be chosen as spouses. Ambitious men will still do better than others, even if not as well as men and now be required to answer to their bosses and wives. Less ambitious men will be marginalized and not live very well. SarahJun 13 2013 5:42am RobD, are you lawslave? SarahJun 13 2013 6:59am This is a repost with some corrections..... Elsewhere another woman posted.... Many studies have proven females are superior. In the womb all life beings as female, but for half of those embryos something goes horrible wrong and they become male. They are flooded with testosterone which damages brain cells and delays development. Science has proven women mature faster than men and are smarter than men. Brain scans have revealed the female brain is more active, has more connections, and calculates faster than the male brain. The male brain is much slower and can only focus on one thing at a time by comparison. The female brain's superior corpus callosum also allows for better multitasking as both brain lobes are better connected. Women can now say men aren't as smart as them and we have the scientific evidence to back it up. In addition, girls have XX chromosomes and men have XY. Having two X's means females have a backup gene of one is defective while males don't. This means males are more likely to die even before they're born, and females are more protected from birth defects and medical conditions. For example, boys are much more likely to be mentally retarded. This is also why females outlive males in humans and all animal species. Science has also proven women have better immune systems, better senses (smell, touch, taste, sight). The list goes on and on. This is the great thing about science: it's factual. There's no shame in admitting a woman is superior to you, because science has proven she is. For men like yourself (it's obvious you're a man) the best bet is to stop denying your gender's inferiority.... To this I add .... If women are indeed superior, we should occupy the best paying jobs and leadership in government. Both of these are gradually happening--young women are outperforming young men, earning more university degrees landing better paying jobs, and out earn young men. But also, if women are superior, shouldn't we also have be the presumptive heads of families, the exclusive franchise to vote and hold and so forth? If men don't comply with the changes underway and accept their status as the subordinate sex, and continue to create a lot of disruption and commit violent acts, then we will be justified in taking other measures to pacify the male population. Then taking over politics will be only the first step, as we may need firmer control of men to ensure they are productive and defer to women. Whatever arrangements emerge between men and women, men, as women did in the past, will have to curry favor with the opposite sex to get along in the workplace and be chosen as spouses. Ambitious men will still do better than others, even if not as well as men do now, and be required to answer to their female bosses and wives. Less ambitious men will be marginalized and not live very well. It will be better to work hard than to be lazy. SarahJun 13 2013 8:50am "RobD, are you lawslave?" No. I have never posted here before. Used to check it from time to time but then it "broke", so I was surprised to see people posting again at all. RobDJun 13 2013 4:33pm yes I stumbled in recently myself, for the first time I wrote you a long response--tell me what you think SarahJun 13 2013 4:52pm Yes, I am a man. Wasn't attempting to hide that. I'm sure (referring back to one of your earlier posts) that I am the sort of man that could be trained to show proper respect for and cooperation with women. I pretty much do that already in fact. I don't think I have any trouble admitting that women are superior to men, generally. But, again, generally, there are some fairly inferior people out there of both sexes. What I've noticed in many couples I know is that it is the woman who HAS taken the lead, if not in every aspect of the partnership, at least in the most important ones. It is often the woman who is computer literate and has to print important messages out for the man to read. Once upon a time this might have been considered the woman acting as the man's secretary, but nowadays it's more just a matter of the man being clueless and the woman still knowing how to function in the modern world. As far as young people, the "boys" may be pretty good at playing games on the computer, but as soon as it involves getting something done... writing a letter, managing a spreadsheet it's either the woman taking over or the "boy" trying to do it himself typing with one finger and asking a lot of "how do I do this?" questions. As an older person I can honestly say I "don't have a dog in this fight", but I do certainly find it titillating to see the women hand the men their asses in all areas where they compete. I'm all for what makes life better for humans. I really don't think women need quotas or special considerations any more though because they are winning fair and square. Why give men an excuse for losing? I'm not really sure it will be needed to take the vote away from men as there are already a lot of men who just vote the way their wives tell them to anyway (and I don't know of any where it works in reverse but I'm sure there are some). While it would make some sense to me to have the woman as head of household decide the family vote, is it really fair for those remaining few single guys to have no vote at all? Even in countries where there is only one predominant party (communist countries for example) there are always "loyal opposition" parties who get a few seats in the legislature. But presuming that only women get to vote and hold office, what sorts of issues would divide such office holders? Certainly women in such an environment would not have a "hive mind" would they? What would a totally feminist USA for example do in response to the many remaining male dominated countries (through religion or other traditions). Would the strategy be to simply out-compete these countries in hopes of eventually reforming them? Or would there still be women who would exercise a military option. And I don't think for a minute that a female run USA would sit well with other countries, terrorists, etc. I haven't read much from any feminist that project past reforming the US. There seems to be a somewhat isolationist point of view among feminists in general. What would women do about corruption in government, balancing the budget, fixing our infrastructure, repairing our education system (which seems to be broken for both sexes from what I can see). I freely admit that these seem to me to be almost intractable problems, for this man anyway. I seek guidance (and that is not meant as a joke). RobDJun 13 2013 5:14pm I agree about affirmative action for women. I was amused today that Hilary Clinton was talking about her desire to continue efforts to improve opportunities for women--she is disingenuous. Surely she know that girls are already advantaged over boys by maturing more quickly--the system puts a lot of emphasis now on that. She is trying to stack the deck and we don't need that--let the boys be boys and the girls will take over. In my post I said women like her would have not trouble slanting the playing field--she dislikes men. I don't but I do think we need to just let things move along--in 20 years most households will have women earning more than men, women will control the courts (may take a little longer for the male judges to retire) and then we can consider whether it is just better to tell men to behave as women did in the 1950s, perhaps the 1820s (no vote) I believe a good number of men will remain single or end up divorced and single--hence no female authority in their lives. They will be very troublesome. That is why I am ok with disenfrnachising men, and using the resulting power to exercise more control over the male population. It is not men like you, its the lower half--those will be unmarried, and troublesome. Women need to assert themselves more in marriages to force their husbands to do more--we still do too much at home. It's time for men to be the hausfraus. AnonymousJun 13 2013 5:52pm The above post was by Sarah SarahJun 13 2013 5:52pm I do think once we have most of the key jobs and control of government, it would make sense to disenfranchise men, and place them under more direct control SarahJun 13 2013 6:12pm Add a comment: Vote Results |
