>and you have failed because you're sticking with stereotypical beliefs. not using factual knowledge of data research. Your "realism" as a factious doctrine of male superiority..... nothing more.
And your doctrine is not an attempt to push "female superiority"? Come on Scott do not get caught calling the old kettle somewhat sooty
>wrt male superiority..... its not that men are "superior" but have their own talents that are useful and needed
just like women have talents that are useful and needed
a peacock with no tail is of no use to a peahen you would expect if you suggest to cut their tails off they will get a little annoyed
