PZ547 wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2013 at 6:09pm:


Where were the feminists in the late '60's and early '70's? Where were they when I, as a lad, stood in admiration watching young women working on their father's farms, who could lift and throw bags of wheat onto the back of a Dodge 5-tonner and then drive the truck, once loaded, to the local granary? Those bags, BTW, used to average 50kgs - about average weight-loss needed by the heifers often seen in places like Coles with their screaming, undisciplined, fatherless rug-rats.

Now we have a world where cement is sold in 25kg bags and it's supposed to take two blokes to handle a bag - in OHS speak, 'to minimise injury'.

Now we have a world where a woman can marry, work at a part-time job (while hubby's slaving full-time to pay the bills) 'til the kids come along, quit working and then get bored with housework and child-minding, have a bit of nooky on the side and then exit the relationship with half the joint accumulated assets of the marriage they walk away from - usually at their own instigation.

So you get the house, the car, the kids, 50% of MY super and child-support to boot. So, you get half - but the bigger half. 

And now we have feminism!  Along with all the other ...isms of a 'modern' world   

While I'm the first to admit that some women have suffered horrendous problems with, and because of, their choice of mates, I fail to see why all males should suffer for the sins of a few.

At the same time, I resent the fact that women's capabilities and responsibilities have been eroded by the grindstone of feminism.

I reckon if they put half the effort into maintaining their relationships as they do bitching about their failed ones, there'd be a lot more happy families.

Once you remove the need, and drive, for sex from the equation - all you have to do is deal with the d**kheads in society (which seem, for some obscure reason, to be multiplying at an exponential rate).

Of course, I'm a mere male - so my opinion is automatically invalid.

Mnemonic wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2013 at 8:34pm:


Now that's an observation that needs more investigation.

The condom had been around for centuries before the Pill. The reasoning behind that is obvious - prevention of pregnancy.

When the Pill first became available, condom use declined to almost zero, despite the risk of STD's. Which were then minimal anyway.

Now, you almost take your life in your hands if you don't use a condom - and it's primary use is not to prevent pregnancy.

So what's changed?

Lionel Edriess wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2013 at 8:03pm:


If you don't trust women, don't get married, don't have sex and don't have kids. That's how simple it is. Just donate your sperm to a sperm bank so you never have to see her face and never have to know her.

There will be less population growth and we will have to let in more immigrants from China, India and the Middle-East, but at least you'll be free.

Lionel Edriess wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2013 at 8:03pm:


If there's one thing I don't like about feminism, it's the trend against violence in films, especially for boys. Until recently, until the last century boys grew up with violence. Boys dreamed of being cowboys, warriors, baton-wielding policemen, gangsters, thieves and dangerous criminals. They played with toy soldiers. They stepped on insects, got into fist fights, poked spiders, broke sticks and set up booby traps. They formed gangs, broke windows, hit people's front doors with cricket bats, vandalised property and caused trouble in the neighbourhood.

The reason why so many of today's movies are so unappealing is because we don't see men and boys doing what they used to do -- stirring up trouble, getting into a fight and either winning or losing. There are too many metrosexual men in movies.

Thanks goodness for Puberty Blues where boys started being boys again. Where's me pie??? You're dropped. Go fetch me a chiko roll, ya mole!!!!

If the feminists think feminism is conflict free, they should make a movie on girl-on-girl bullying in schools. Take that. Nobody's a saint.

Don't even start!

There was a piece in today's paper about banning throwing sticks for dogs to fetch.

Apparently they can get hurt!

Like humans, there is no thought given to the dangers faced by our, or their, ancestors in the wild. 

I can just imagine Cro-Magnon man being threatened with expulsion from a nightclub. Or Canis Lupus being told to be careful about what they eat.

We have such freedoms for which to thank our arbiters.

'Tis a pity our governments are not truly representative of the public good in today's world.

One reason for abortion has since occurred to me, or was in fact pointed out to me, but I guess this won't sit well with some.
That is, since we've had ultrasound and other medical tests, it's now possible for people to know in advance many of the gross impairments a child will be born with. They can then have the choice of termination, which I would fully support.

BTW, I'm impressed by your contributions Lionel Edriess and GA