>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
