Quote:

Wives should welcome their husbands' extramarital affairs as a sign of a healthy marriage, France's most prominent female psychologist has suggested. Maryse Vaillant claims French men should stop being castigated for being womanisers and that keeping a mistress can actually improve a marriage. In Men, Love, Fidelity, a new book on the effects of infidelity on married life, Miss Vaillant writes that her aim is to "rehabilitate infidelity". According to figures cited in the book, an estimated 39 per cent of French men cheat on their wives at some stage. "[Most] don't do it because they no longer love them, on the contrary," she writes. "They simply need breathing space. For such men, who are in fact profoundly monogamous, infidelity is almost unavoidable." Once French women accept that the "fidelity is not natural but cultural", and that infidelity is essential to the "psychic functioning" of certain men who are still very much in love, it can be a "very liberating" for women, she writes. One woman bound to disagree is Sylvie Brunel, who recently became the first ex-wife of a serving minister to write an expose on his alleged infidelity, and midlife crisis. In her Guerrilla Handbook for Women, Miss Brunel, 49, claims Eric Besson, France's minister of immigration and national identity, was an insatiable cheat with "interchangeable mistresses". At their wedding in 1983, when the mayor began reciting the vows of "fidelity, aid and support", she says Mr Besson commented: "Fidelity, no." Miss Brunel, although "humiliated", convinced the shocked mayor it was a joke. But Mr Besson was, she claims, unfaithful for five years before their marriage and 25 years afterwards, adding: "I can't say I wasn't warned." Mr Besson left his wife for a woman "almost as young as our eldest daughter" and who "oozed narcissism from every pore of her pretty skin", according to his ex-wife. Mr Besson described her book as "shameless". She hit back, saying: "What's shameless is the way you've treated me for 30 years." Miss Vaillant insists in her book that fidelity is not proof of love. In fact, "pathological monogamists" in many cases lack the strength of mind to take a mistress, she suggests. "They are often men whose father was physically or morally absent. These men have a completely idealised view of their father and the paternal function," she writes. "They lack suppleness and are prisoners to an idealised image of a man of duty." Several high-profile French politicians have been reported to have had mistresses. Valery Giscard d'Estaing's alleged love of women was given greater credence when his car collided with a milk truck at dawn during his presidency. The whole country assumed he had been returning from a tryst with a mistress - and his opinion poll ratings went up. The late Francois Mitterrand would spend most nights with his mistress, Anne Pingeot. The existence of their secret love child, Mazarine, was only disclosed after he died. Jacques Chirac recently admitted in a book: "There have been women I have loved a lot, as discreetly as possible". Miss Vaillant was divorced 20 years ago but said she had since been in a "stable" and "faithful" relationship. The Daily Telegraph

http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/lifematters/infidelity-boosts-marriage-psychologist-20091231-lkq1.html

Ah yes, a man cannot have every night fish fish fish, sometimes he need some chicken... ;D

How interesting and I totally agree..it should work both ways of course..I have never considered the core concept of marriage as being workeable or realistic for this very reason..

That said it would still be a very hard introduce this concept  as the norm by the majority of females and many men.

So for as long as it took this cultural 'norm' , ie"fidelity" at all costs ,to become such a core concept that even divorces are/were to be based on, it make take the same length of time to phase the concept out .

Marriage vows should not be based on obligations, but until it is clear that love no longer lives in a relationship and be acted on according to that..



Infidelity is not a sign your partner doesnt love you anymore.

I don't see how this makes sense. The men need breathing space so they take a mistress to get smothered by another person on the side? I suppose I must be one of those pathological monogamists (although both of my parents were usually absent), but I would never cheat on someone and I would never accept infidelity from anyone around me. If I found out that one of my friends was unfaithful to their partner then our relations will be broken off because it is really unacceptable behaviour in my opinion.

men can easily stay faithful, its just these days we are encouraged not to so much that many feel they have a right to cheat.

This is not really about fidelity as I see it , but more the whole concept of marriage is bound up by expectations that have nothing to do with reality..

Sure some pp are happy to remain faithful for the term of they're marriage but  a great many are not..they merely exist in a marriage and they are unhappy . They are adhering to expectations by partner and society that says they must live their life according to a law drawn up by some draconian heirarchy in the 1800s or so, that does not apply to everyone ( but does to some, the conformists who are happy to live their life dancing to a preordained set of rules).

I guess those pp should never get married but for those who do and there are millions, its a terrible trap to try to escape from once kids come along and the all the nasty reality of just how restrictive that peice of paper that they signed on the happiest day of their life , can be..

Marriage has been out dated for a long time and is why its not nearly so popular anymore..

Men are usually the losers from marriage..think about that. Marriage is for women and children..men go along with it...

Ive heard it said most men would not marry of they didnt have to.

Classic Liberal wrote on Jan 4^th, 2010 at 2:38pm:

men can easily stay faithful, its just these days we are encouraged not to so much that many feel they have a right to cheat.

If they were happy why would they want to exercise that right?

If you need to cheat your with the wrong partner, or she is.
And to all those guys who think just putting it in is enough, it aint.

Quote:

I guess those pp should never get married but for those who do and there are millions, its a terrible trap to try to escape from once kids come along and the all the nasty reality of just how restrictive that peice of paper that they signed on the happiest day of their life , can be.. Marriage has been out dated for a long time and is why its not nearly so popular anymore.. Men are usually the losers from marriage..think about that. Marriage is for women and children..men go along with it... Ive heard it said most men would not marry of they didnt have to.

It doesn't really matter if a couple is married or not. The government deems the contract valid even if there is none.
Soon there will be a penance to be paid to hookers.
Let's face it, it's just an ulterior motive to keep men working until they drop dead. Economically driven crap.
The day that men accept themselves for what they are will be a massive step forward against those who control them.

Quote:

It doesn't really matter if a couple is married or not. The government deems the contract valid even if there is none. Soon there will be a penance to be paid to hookers. Let's face it, it's just an ulterior motive to keep men working until they drop dead. Economically driven crap. The day that men accept themselves for what they are will be a massive step forward against those who control them.

True but society is set up to protect the kids that are born to any union married or not..so thats not surprising is it..

I would like you to expand on the 'economically driven crap 'when you have a mo' amadd.. I need to know further your thoughts there.

Its obvious you are protective of the rights of men and all men should be aware and protective of same..women are protective of their rights as well ,but as we are the 'weaker sex', we have to talk a lot to be heard, hence we use the media to get our message across and in doing so inflict our 'cause' upon even those who dont want it/are not interested, thereby alienating pp who might otherwise not rail against feminism if not provoked/sickened by it.



I am not a feminist/hate feminism..it has buggered relationships between men and women..up to a point., but like every woman I constantly have to say that I am not a feminist because the feminist movement has tarnished the name of all women, even if they dont know it.

Why do people even bother getting married anymore? Hardly anyone makes the effort in getting a marriage to work. It feels like we put all our energy into throwing the best wedding party and outdoing other idiots whom we've always hated but as soon as the honeymoon ends, we give up. When things don't go our way, we run to the nearest divorce lawyer.

Megalodon wrote on Jan 10^th, 2010 at 8:35pm:

Why do people even bother getting married anymore? Hardly anyone makes the effort in getting a marriage to work. It feels like we put all our energy into throwing the best wedding party and outdoing other idiots whom we've always hated but as soon as the honeymoon ends, we give up. When things don't go our way, we run to the nearest divorce lawyer.

It depends on the person. If they do not want a marriage, they shouldn't get one in the first place. I don't think people understand what they're getting themselves into sometimes. In my opinion, unless it's "until death do us part", it's not marriage.

Quote:

I am not a feminist/hate feminism..it has buggered relationships between men and women..up to a point., but like every woman I constantly have to say that I am not a feminist because the feminist movement has tarnished the name of all women, even if they dont know it.

Seriously? Feminism gave you the semi equal rights you enjoy today. I'm not a fan of militant, ball busting, hairy feminism myself, but to say you hate the movement that fought for your right to equality is hypocritical if you've ever voted or worked as anything but a scullery maid.

@Annie,

The female vote only came a few years after male suffrage was won and decades before aboriginal suffrage here in Australia.

Prior to male suffrage, only the landed males could vote.

Female suffrage should not be likened to feminism. It was not feminism.  

Sappho wrote on Jan 12^th, 2010 at 9:45pm:

@Annie, The female vote only came a few years after male suffrage was won and decades before aboriginal suffrage here in Australia. Prior to male suffrage, only the landed males could vote. Female suffrage should not be likened to feminism. It was not feminism.

That is eyewateringly stupid. Even from a sapphic lady...

If suffrage, the right to participate, as equals, in public affairs was not feminism (understood as the political and social movement for political and social emancipation, ie equality), then what the hell is??

Quote:

If suffrage, the right to participate, as equals, in public affairs was not feminism (understood as the political and social movement for political and social emancipation, ie equality), then what the hell is??

There you go, you heard it here first Soren. Feminism is 'over' equal, or equality ++, or uber-equality  ;D

Quote:

True but society is set up to protect the kids that are born to any union married or not..so thats not surprising is it..

Are you saying that without kids then all deals are off?
Yes of course the kids should be looked after, but the very important and ancient responsibility that women once had of choosing a partner that will be there for the long haul becomes not so important when they can get themselves knocked up by any fleet footed bozo and have the law chase them up for cash. As a second, third or fourth thought, they might then find their "Mr. Responsible" who will then be burdened with their lack of responsibility for the rest of his life through no mistake of his own.


Quote:

I would like you to expand on the 'economically driven crap 'when you have a mo' amadd.. I need to know further your thoughts there.

Basically, you get more bang for your buck by making men the workhorses. That's what they're built for and that's what they do best.
Under the guise of "women's rights and fairness", it's been possible to force men to work their asses off for a non-existent family. How many women would be stupid enough to do that?


Quote:

Its obvious you are protective of the rights of men and all men should be aware and protective of same..women are protective of their rights as well ,but as we are the 'weaker sex', we have to talk a lot to be heard, hence we use the media to get our message across and in doing so inflict our 'cause' upon even those who dont want it/are not interested, thereby alienating pp who might otherwise not rail against feminism if not provoked/sickened by it.

I'm also being protective of women's right to be women. I doubt if it was some amazing leap in evolution that women have come to "talk a lot to be heard". They've always talked a lot, but now it's a male created law that we must listen.
What was the ultimate objective of that "cause" again? I missed it the first time, but I have a sneaking suspicion that the goal has been achieved, so you can give up the ear-bashing now  :P. - insert Cartman: You must respect my authority!!i

Quote:

Female suffrage should not be likened to feminism. It was not feminism.

What Soren said. The right to vote for women was fought for and secured by the feminist movement.  

Soren wrote on Jan 12^th, 2010 at 10:25pm:

Sappho wrote on Jan 12th, 2010 at 9:45pm: @Annie, The female vote only came a few years after male suffrage was won and decades before aboriginal suffrage here in Australia. Prior to male suffrage, only the landed males could vote. Female suffrage should not be likened to feminism. It was not feminism.   That is eyewateringly stupid. Even from a sapphic lady... If suffrage, the right to participate, as equals, in public affairs was not feminism (understood as the political and social movement for political and social emancipation, ie equality), then what the hell is??

It was the very same movement that motivated the landless men to seek voting rights those few years prior.

Wiki says... "In most countries, full universal suffrage - with the inclusion of women - followed universal male suffrage by about ten to twenty years. A notable exception is France, where women could not vote until 1944."

It was about the right to vote Soren. Feminism is about the rights of women and not just suffrage.

Feminism was born after WWII as the women, having discovered the freedoms men took for granted, refused to give them up. This then grew into the huge movement that fought for equality for women as it became in the late 50s, 60s and 70s.

Quote:

Feminism is about the rights of women and not just suffrage.

30,000 women signed the petition to be allowed to vote in federal elections. That petition was organised by feminists.


Quote:

Feminism was born after WWII as the women, having discovered the freedoms men took for granted, refused to give them up. This then grew into the huge movement that fought for equality for women as it became in the late 50s, 60s and 70s.

That's incorrect. The first wave of feminism started in the 18th century. Virginia Woolf (a notable feminist) was dead before you say the movement began.

Actually, there are notable women throughout history and not just from the 18th century wanting for the rights than men had... I do not doubt that pre-history has such women also. Therefore, according to your rationale... feminism has been a thriving movement since end of matriarchy.

Oh yeah... and Woolf is from the 19th century.

Quote:

Actually, there are notable women throughout history and not just from the 18th century wanting for the rights than men had

I'm talking about the feminist movement, not a few notable women looking for equality.


Quote:

Oh yeah... and Woolf is from the 19th century.

I didn't say Woolf was from the 18th century - I said that she was dead before the end of WW2, which is when you stated that feminism began. Do you deny Woolf was a feminist?

I think that Woolf has been recast as a feminist by the feminist movement... which by your reckoning is the second wave... but that her lack of interest in class divisions shows her not to be a feminist.

Quote:

her lack of interest in class divisions shows her not to be a feminist.

Since when does an interest in class division determine whether someone is a feminist?

And to clarify on the 18th century feminism, Wollstonecraft wrote A Vindication of the Rights of Woman, one of the first books of feminist philosophy, in 1792.

Annie Anthrax wrote on Jan 13^th, 2010 at 2:35pm:

Quote: her lack of interest in class divisions shows her not to be a feminist. Since when does an interest in class division determine whether someone is a feminist?

Since the so-called second wave feminist movement that crossed all class divisions.

Infidelity boosts income: lawyers

Sappho wrote on Jan 13^th, 2010 at 3:34pm:

Annie Anthrax wrote on Jan 13th, 2010 at 2:35pm: Quote: her lack of interest in class divisions shows her not to be a feminist. Since when does an interest in class division determine whether someone is a feminist? Since the so-called second wave feminist movement that crossed all class divisions.

Another aspect of Feminism that is often forgotten is that it is not about equality except as a consequence of the philosophy. Were it only about equality... then it would not be called feminism.

Indeed, Feminism is the philosophy of masculine oppression of the feminine.

Sappho wrote on Jan 13^th, 2010 at 7:07pm:

Indeed, Feminism is the philosophy of masculine oppression of the feminine.

Antithetical philosophy, don't you mean?

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jan 13^th, 2010 at 8:54pm:

Sappho wrote on Jan 13th, 2010 at 7:07pm: Indeed, Feminism is the philosophy of masculine oppression of the feminine. Antithetical philosophy, don't you mean?

Thesis, antithesis, synthesis... it's all philosophy. Where you stipulate, I did not. I am happy with merely claiming it a philosophy of the masculine oppression of the feminine.

I'm curious though. Are you suggesting that feminine is the antithesis of masculine?

Quote:

I'm curious though. Are you suggesting that feminine is the antithesis of masculine?

Feminism is an antithesis of humanity.
Feminine is to masculine as netball is to rugby.

Amadd wrote on Jan 14^th, 2010 at 3:46am:

Feminism is an antithesis of humanity.

Would you mind explaining that please?

Quote:

Would you mind explaining that please?

Feminism poisons the minds of otherwise good women and breaks apart the traditional family structure all in the name of the unattractive oinker's ambitions to usurp acceptance.


Gloria Steinem:
Any woman who chooses to behave like a full human being should be warned that the armies of the status quo will treat her as something of a dirty joke. That's their natural and first weapon. She will need her sisterhood.


Erma Bombeck:
We've got a generation now who were born with semiequality. They don't know how it was before, so they think, this isn't too bad. We're working. We have our attache' cases and our three piece suits. I get very disgusted with the younger generation of women. We had a torch to pass, and they are just sitting there. They don't realize it can be taken away. Things are going to have to get worse before they join in fighting the battle.


Betty Friedan:
If divorce has increased by one thousand percent, don't blame the women's movement. Blame the obsolete sex roles on which our marriages were based.

speech, New York City, January 20, 1974


Rush Limbaugh:
Feminism was established as to allow unattractive women easier access to the mainstream of society.

-Women should not be allowed on juries where the accused is a stud.


Elaine Heffner:
Women do not have to sacrifice personhood if they are mothers. They do not have to sacrifice motherhood in order to be persons. Liberation was meant to expand women's opportunities, not to limit them. The self-esteem that has been found in new pursuits can also be found in mothering.  (... ;D Elaine with da big brain).


Germaine (with da big brain) Greer

-I have always been principally interested in men for sex. I've always thought any sane woman would be a lover of women because loving men is such a mess. I have always wished I'd fall in love with a woman. Damn.


-I think that testosterone is a rare poison.

-Probably the only place where a man can feel really secure is in a maximum security prison, except for the imminent threat of release.

-The house wife is an unpaid employee in her husband's house in return for the security of being a permanent employee.

-The sight of women talking together has always made men uneasy; nowadays it means rank subversion.( .....Whaa?  :-?)

-The surest guide to the correctness of the path that women take is joy in the struggle. Revolution is the festival of the oppressed.

-We in the West do not refrain from childbirth because we are concerned about the population explosion or because we feel we cannot afford children, but because we do not like children.  (....Do tell)

-Women have very little idea of how much men hate them. (..just you and your ilk Germaine)

-Yet if a woman never lets herself go, how will she ever know how far she might have got? If she never takes off her high-heeled shoes, how will she ever know how far she could walk or how fast she could run?  (...who ever demanded that women wear high-heeled shoes and buy them by the thousands?)

-You're only young once, but you can be immature forever.
(Living proof?)

So my idea of "feminism" is just the age old bitchiness that women show to each other. Most especially the bitchiness the less attractive woman shows towards the women who get the bulk of male attention.
Where once men just had a chuckle at their antics, we are now forced by law to give them the attention that they so desperately crave.
It just ain't right.

...btw, I'd much prefer Julia Gillard as PM.

I could get a wealth of lowly, insulting comments directed at women by men, throughout all the ages, and not just from recent past... does that therefore mean that men are the antithesis of humanity?

Seems to me you typify men who can dish it out but can't take it in return. Men set the standard on denigrating the opposite sex, not women.

Paybacks are a bastard eh? ;D

Quote:

Feminism poisons the minds of otherwise good women and breaks apart the traditional family structure all in the name of the unattractive oinker's ambitions to usurp acceptance.

Wrong. Feminism gave women alternatives to traditional roles. Plenty of women still choose to be homemakers and that's great, but it's not for everyone.

I actually dislike how some women still choose to be homemakers. In my extended family, everyone is double income and noone is struggling. I see women complaining about how the husband can barely manage to pay the mortgage, but if that's such an issue they should get a job!

Quote:

I could get a wealth of lowly, insulting comments directed at women by men, throughout all the ages, and not just from recent past... does that therefore mean that men are the antithesis of humanity?

I could get a wealth of insulting comments diercted at practically everyone and everything throughout the ages by men and women alike, and I will also be able to do so in the future.
But I was talking about feminists, not real women. Don't get me wrong, I'm not stereotyping all feminists as fat ugly lesbians, however, not surprisingly, there is a large following of the religion in that department.



Quote:

Seems to me you typify men who can dish it out but can't take it in return. Men set the standard on denigrating the opposite sex, not women. Paybacks are a bastard eh?   ;D

At least you admit that it's all about opportunism and not equality.
Personally, I haven't experienced much payback because I usually avoid them if at all possible. If that isn't possible, then I just look at them like they are the biggest dumbass that I've ever had the misfortune of meeting, they're not deserving of a second thought.

A man's world is very tough with no place for whiining crybabies, so if you can't stand the heat then get out of the kitchen.....No I take that back...You go girl - you go do the dishes  ;Di

Amadd wrote on Jan 14^th, 2010 at 5:27pm:

A man's world is very tough with no place for whiining crybabies, so if you can't stand the heat then get out of the kitchen.....No I take that back...You go girl - you go do the dishes  ;D

Ha... poor sucker... can't earn enough for a dish washer eh? Pity the poor wifey who must suffer the financial inadequacies of men like you.

You are right, a man's world is very tough... tougher than you can handle if common white goods are beyond your ability.   ;)

Quote:

Wrong. Feminism gave women alternatives to traditional roles. Plenty of women still choose to be homemakers and that's great, but it's not for everyone.

How many men do you think have that choice to be homemakers?
Would a woman happily go out and slog for 12hrs per day or night and struggle to pay the mortgage while the man stays home to play wih the kids and surf the internet etc.?
Lots of men would absolutely loooove to do that but it's not really an option is it?

Amadd wrote on Jan 14^th, 2010 at 5:53pm:

Quote: Wrong. Feminism gave women alternatives to traditional roles. Plenty of women still choose to be homemakers and that's great, but it's not for everyone. How many men do you think have that choice to be homemakers? Would a woman happily go out and slog for 12hrs per day or night and struggle to pay the mortgage while the man stays home to play wih the kids and surf the internet etc.? Lots of men would absolutely loooove to do that but it's not really an option is it?

Oh sooky sooky la la... being a man too hard for you darlin? Must be... you can't even afford white goods.

Just remember your place as provider and improve your performance. How would you feel if wifey did a half arse job in the house? No! Well stop doing a half arsed job yourself and start providing properly for your family.
:P

PS: I'm liking this traditional roles stuff. Maybe this second wave feminism was bad for women after all.  

The more men work; the less they are in the home; the better the chances that women of leisure can play around with other men which is a great boost to the marriage.

LOL...  8-)

Quote:

Oh sooky sooky la la... being a man too hard for you darlin? Must be... you can't even afford white goods. Just remember your place as provider and improve your performance. How would you feel if wifey did a half arse job in the house? No! Well stop doing a half arsed job yourself and start providing properly for your family.

I provide for myself. I don't need any "wifey" treating me as if I can't live without her thankyou very much.
And yes, working 12hrs night shift is extremely difficult, but at least there's some financial independence at the end of it. Why would I want to donate all of that hard work to some ungreatful woman whose intention is to try to make me do it all over again?  
And a dishwasher? I could purchase truckloads of them if I wanted to, but those things must be the opitamy of the most lazy and environmentally irresponsible whitegood ever invented.
The inventor must've been married to some hen pecking feminist who thought that it was somehow "degrading" to do the dishes by hand.

If you've paid your mortgage, then you might have some right to compare finances. If not, forget about the dishwasher and get your ass to the grindstone.
I wouldn't entertain the thought of a partnership with a western woman who has less much assets than myself..because I beleve in equality.i

Sappho wrote on Jan 14^th, 2010 at 6:11pm:

The more men work; the less they are in the home; the better the chances that women of leisure can play around with other men which is a great boost to the marriage. LOL...  8-)

Am I the only one with the sense that Sappho is really a divorced bloke?

Quote:

Am I the only one with the sense that Sappho is really a divorced bloke?

:-/ Well that would take all the fun out of it.

Amadd wrote on Jan 14^th, 2010 at 8:00pm:

Quote: Oh sooky sooky la la... being a man too hard for you darlin? Must be... you can't even afford white goods. Just remember your place as provider and improve your performance. How would you feel if wifey did a half arse job in the house? No! Well stop doing a half arsed job yourself and start providing properly for your family. I provide for myself. I don't need any "wifey" treating me as if I can't live without her thankyou very much. And yes, working 12hrs night shift is extremely difficult, but at least there's some financial independence at the end of it. Why would I want to donate all of that hard work to some ungreatful woman whose intention is to try to make me do it all over again?   And a dishwasher? I could purchase truckloads of them if I wanted to, but those things must be the opitamy of the most lazy and environmentally irresponsible whitegood ever invented. The inventor must've been married to some hen pecking feminist who thought that it was somehow "degrading" to do the dishes by hand. If you've paid your mortgage, then you might have some right to compare finances. If not, forget about the dishwasher and get your ass to the grindstone. I wouldn't entertain the thought of a partnership with a western woman who has less much assets than myself..because I beleve in equality.

Chill honey... you don't have to prove yourself to me, let alone compare yourself to me... we'll never met, don't you know. T'was but a joke.

In truth, I do believe in equality, but not as a consequence of feminist philosophy, but as a philosophy all its own. I work... not as much as you admittedly. I have my own home.... but not a mortgage admittedly. I've never relied on a man to get me what I want... but then I'm not the marrying kind.

Oh yeah... and I don't own a dishwasher.

Amadd wrote on Jan 14^th, 2010 at 10:14pm:

Quote: Am I the only one with the sense that Sappho is really a divorced bloke? :-/ Well that would take all the fun out of it.

It's worse than that!

I'm an early middle aged female Public Servant who's never been married.  :'(

Sappho wrote on Jan 14^th, 2010 at 10:51pm:

Amadd wrote on Jan 14th, 2010 at 10:14pm: Quote: Am I the only one with the sense that Sappho is really a divorced bloke? :-/ Well that would take all the fun out of it. It's worse than that! I'm an early middle aged female Public Servant who's never been married.  :'(

A sapphic public servant?

Quote:

I'm an early middle aged female Public Servant who's never been married. :'(

Well if we're both not married in ten years, PM me your bank account details and we'll make a deal.

Amadd wrote on Jan 14^th, 2010 at 11:09pm:

Quote: I'm an early middle aged female Public Servant who's never been married. :'( Well if we're both not married in ten years, PM me your bank account details and we'll make a deal.

Never! I shall have lovers, but no husbands.

Quote:

Never! I shall have lovers, but no husbands.

Ahh I see.
Suddenly "Public Servant" takes on a whole new meaning.

..Oh sorry, I neglected to see the lnik between your name and your orientation, but the penny does drop eventually.
It just goes to prove what I was saying about feminism supporters hey?

Amadd wrote on Jan 15^th, 2010 at 11:49am:

Quote: Never! I shall have lovers, but no husbands. Ahh I see. Suddenly "Public Servant" takes on a whole new meaning. ..Oh sorry, I neglected to see the lnik between your name and your orientation, but the penny does drop eventually. It just goes to prove what I was saying about feminism supporters hey?

Poor you, my kind must be so confusing for your kind.

I am not a lesbian. I am not a feminist. I'm much more radical than that.

Quote:

I am not a lesbian. I am not a feminist. I'm much more radical than that.

Hmmm...now what could be more radical than that? Ah yes! A public servant.

Sappho wrote on Jan 15^th, 2010 at 12:29pm:

Amadd wrote on Jan 15th, 2010 at 11:49am: Quote: Never! I shall have lovers, but no husbands. Ahh I see. Suddenly "Public Servant" takes on a whole new meaning. ..Oh sorry, I neglected to see the lnik between your name and your orientation, but the penny does drop eventually. It just goes to prove what I was saying about feminism supporters hey? Poor you, my kind must be so confusing for your kind. I am not a lesbian. I am not a feminist. I'm much more radical than that.

your  normal? seems to be the radical path of tomorrow

Allah decreed that marriage should remain sacred