Thread: Why I love (and hate) dating Russian men (article)

Im only half russian, so maybe thats the solution. lol

I'm feeling cognitive dissonance when reading that article.
As for me, the article contains a bunch of mutually exclusive statements, and I hardly understand how a person can draw such conclusions as the author did.

She expects a man to be gentle and respectful to his woman and at the same time passionate in bed. She also expects a man not to be rude and jealous. Fairly reasonable desire! So what's the problem?
IMHO, the problem is that she just doesn't believe such a man can exist. And instead of believing in her ideal and trying to find it, she engages in relationships with all those strange "patriarchal alpha males".
As it-ogo already said, "What you like is what you get". Looks like she likes to disappoint herself.

Let's have a look at the image of a "patriarchal" Russian man she draws. In a nutshell, he is:
* gentleman; behaves respectfully and has good manners
* passionate and sexual
* rude, jealous and ignorant

Can you see any contradictions? I see two ones.

First, could a real gentleman be rude and ignorant? I think the answer is obvious: he couldn't!
Second, how can it be that being a gentleman is called "patriarchal style" now? I don't know what's going on in USA, maybe they actually have some problems with that insane feminism etc. If I were told that from American point of view being a gentleman and having good manners is patriarchal, I would decide something is totally wrong with America.

As far as I can remember, feminism is about equality of rights, not about being unmannered jerks. Feminism is a result of development of our civilization: the same civilization that teaches us to be kind and respectful to each other. So gentleman's attitude does not conflict with feminism and is not "patriarchal".
In fact, any educated reasonable person in the modern world is a feminist "by default". We all grown up in the same cultural context: kindness, honesty, human rights, science, arts etc. So if a person smart enough, he/she is able to decide by him/herself that equality of rights is a Good Idea. Even if he/she has never listened the word "feminism".

But something went wrong. Feminism mutated from idea of human rights into a bloodthirsty monster, who requires us to sacrifice all our conceptions of friendship, love, respect and honor. When did we take the wrong turn to that weird way where idea of "take care of each other" became patriarchal and idea of "disregard each other" became acceptable?
That's disappointing!


But enough whining. Let's go back to "alpha males" stories.
"You do not meet a Russian man, you are chosen by one. You could be sitting in a banya, or at a café..."
Uh... Well... Ok. But I have some questions. What kind of men and women make acquaintance in a banya? The answer is obvious, isn't it? And how did the decent girl get in a banya with some strangers? Maybe should her not be waiting to be chosen by a pick-up man in a banya, but take a few steps to meet somebody by herself? Did she ever try?

The similar questions I'd like to ask on those "doing business-just-business" men too. We all understand what kind of men they are, don't we? The only thing I don't understand is her reason to meet with them. But if she does, there is nothing surprising in the fact those "alpha males" are rude and ignorant. Gangsters usually are.

The same with the story of "standing on a dirt path in a Russian country village". The same with the story of being harassed for years. And so on.
All those men didn't arise from nowhere, she allowed them to appear in her life. They "chosen" her with her consent.


That all is not about patriarchal society, alpha males or Russian mentality. That is about здравый смысл.
Don't get in a sauna with strangers, if you don't want to be raped.
Don't mess with gangsters.
Don't walk at night with a person you couldn't completely trust.
Don't tell your phone number to odd people.
Simple and resonable rules, whatever country you live in.


And one more thing. When I looked at the clock last time, there was 21st Century there. Facebook, twitter, skype, dating services, laptops, iphones, all that stuff, you know. I just wonder what the hell she has to hang around pick-up men, gangsters and villagers to be chosen by someone. We live such a wonderful time when one can make acquaintance with thousands of people around the world without leaving oneself's home. So why?

Maybe my words sound too offensive. I'd like to clarify I have nothing against her and I don't blame her for her troubles. That woman seems to be unhappy, so I'd like to wish her to be happy with a man she looking for. My point is that her conclusions about Russian men are totally wrong because of her strange attitude and limited experience.


First of all, there is no patriarchal society in big cities. But there are people who knows how to take care of his/her partner. And I don't think it is a patriarchal tradition. I'm sure such people there are in USA too, although the author of the article does not seem to believe that.
Maybe villagers can be named as patriarchal society, and I think this society presents in any country. If you drive off from big American cities for a hundred of miles, you'll find the same patriarchal society there. Won't you?

So we are not patriarchal. We are European people, maybe somewhat angered because of our recent history, but we are. And as in any other country, there are all sectors of society here. If you want to meet with gangsters, there are gangsters; if you want to meet with intellectuals, there are intellectuals.

I believe no one of my female friends encounter troubles similar to ones she described. Of course, not all of them happily married, but I hardly can imagine one of them could be tolerant to such replies as "What were you doing talking to that guy? Did I tell you you could talk to him?!" That is absolutely no-no.
For sure, there are lot of men who behaves such unpleasant way. And there are a lot of women who likes such behaviour. So if they can find each other and be happy, that is fine. But in my environment and in the environment of my friends, there are no such people.

One shouldn't think all Russian can be described with a couple of cliches.

The article has nothing to do with Russianness of men. It is about the contradiction between sexual attractiveness and other advantages.

Yeah, you can see TRENDS, in nationalities and what the men are like. But that's all.

And I think a programmer living in central Moscow would be a quite different person from an artist in Vladivostok or a policeman in a village in Siberia.

There's probably less of the (to me, unattractive) metrosexual stereotype in Russia though.
Personally I prefer to wear the skirt in the relationship, so to speak.
Men who feel the need to show off their gourmet cooking skills, discuss celebrity gossip or fret on how to find the perfect shade of cushions for the sofa are not for me!

Based on my experiences in Ukraine and Belarus, I give ex-USSR area men 8 stars out of 10 on the European gentleman chart. They will help a woman with a heavy bag, and they will not slam the door in your face. However they are not extreme flirts and do not try the Casonova tactics the minute they see you, like some Southern Europeans will.
I personally like their style, on the whole.

But my impression is that there is a lot of infidelity and men who behave like pigs towards their wives. I met several women who had to divorce their husbands because they were drinking and being unfaithful and they got to a point where they didn't want to put up with it anymore. Of course, I only heard the woman's side of the story, but I don't see how excessive drinking and infidelity can be excused.

I agree with some of what you say, Red Fox,

But this statement disturbs me:

That all is not about patriarchal society, alpha males or Russian mentality. That is about здравый смысл.
Don't get in a sauna with strangers, if you don't want to be raped.
Don't mess with gangsters.
Don't walk at night with a person you couldn't completely trust.
Don't tell your phone number to odd people.
Simple and resonable rules, whatever country you live in.

It sounds naive. And why is it always the victim's fault when things happen? For example, not all women who are raped "put themselves in the situation." In fact many of them do not. Men will rape old women coming come from church. Men will rape women wearing burkas covering their face and legs. Men will rape women in any situation, at any time, without any reason except to humiliate another human being.

So, sure, you can follow these "common sense rules" all you want, but shit still happens. Little babies get raped. Do we blame the baby for being "in the situation?"

At some point, men are going to have to take some responsibility for the violence they have inflicted, and stop blaming the women for everything bad that happens. In America, when women are raped, they are never believed. The police assume that the victim must be lying because she is female (and women lie more often than men, apparently), so they question the victim harder than they question the accused rapist.

The rapist needs to be blamed. Not the victim. And I don't care if she met the man in a sauna, or in a bar, or after church while she was walking her dog. The MAN chose to rape. He chose to behave that way. He put HIMSELF "in the situation."

I understand that anti-feminist sentiments are strong right now in Russia. If I even mention the word "feminism" I am likely to encounter a tsunami of rage from some of the Russian guys! It reminds me of the "backlash" movement America went through in the 80's, when men fought back against feminism.

My understanding of feminism has not altered from the very first definition you provided above:

As far as I can remember, feminism is about equality of rights, not about being unmannered jerks. Feminism is a result of development of our civilization: the same civilization that teaches us to be kind and respectful to each other. So gentleman's attitude does not conflict with feminism and is not "patriarchal".
In fact, any educated reasonable person in the modern world is a feminist "by default". We all grown up in the same cultural context: kindness, honesty, human rights, science, arts etc. So if a person smart enough, he/she is able to decide by him/herself that equality of rights is a Good Idea. Even if he/she has never listened the word "feminism".

My view still reflects that and I do not see where feminism turned into the "monster" you referenced above. I do think that feminism is being blamed for a variety of societal ills, because there is so much anger against women. But feminism is becoming a tired excuse, a worn out old scapegoat. Maybe we should fix some of society's problems and stop fixating on "feminism" and just try to treat each other as human beings. I'm just tired of all the whining and kvetching. Women don't want to clean house. So the guys should just get over it already, and learn to pick up after their lazy selves. Or hire a maid. Last time I checked, my pudenda didn't come equipped with a mop

As for the woman in the story, sure she could have made different choices. She sounds young, maybe in her 20's. I would not want to live with any of the men I loved in my 20's. Maybe she just hasn't moved beyond the black/white thinking yet. I dunno. I can understand some of her frustrations, certainly. It's hard being single, especially for an intelligent woman.

Originally Posted by Deborski

It sounds naive. And why is it always the victim's fault when things happen?

It is not the victim's fault. It is just some kind of misunderstanding here. Maybe I should be more clear in my statements, sorry.

I'll draw analogy:
Let's suppose, for example, you were relaxing in a park and when you were leaving it, you had forgotten your phone there. You noticed that and came back in a moment, but your phone had already been stolen. It is not your fault. The fact is a person who stole your phone is a thief from the law's point of view, and he or she should carry punishment by law.
Some weeks later the situation repeated: you left your phone or some other thing in a public place and it were stolen. And some time later it repeated again.
The facts are still the same: some people stole your stuff, so they should be punished. But also we can state there is another fact. The fact is you should probably take more care of your stuff and don't scatter it in public places all the time.

The same is about that woman. It is not her fault that people can be violent, ignorant and so on. But her fault is that instead of thinking about her strategy and taking a few steps in desired direction, she is just complaining and writing "analytical" articles.
Well, I agree, there are lots of ignorant people in Russia. But all those findings on patriarchal society where the same people are gentle and violent at the same time (really?! O_O) is just weird.

Originally Posted by Deborski

My view still reflects that and I do not see where feminism turned into the "monster" you referenced above.

Sometimes people from US and some other countries talk about such kind of problems: men are no longer men, women are no longer women, insane feminism is everywhere and so on. In Russia there are those talks too. So my "monster" is a hyperbole based on those talks. Maybe the monster is true on some small part. (At least, some number of insane feministic people do exist.) But mostly it is just because people don't tend being very responsible when choosing their friends and patrners, I think.

Originally Posted by Deborski

Last time I checked, my pudenda didn't come equipped with a mop

Great aphorism!

Originally Posted by Deborski

As for the woman in the story, sure she could have made different choices. She sounds young, maybe in her 20's. I would not want to live with any of the men I loved in my 20's. Maybe she just hasn't moved beyond the black/white thinking yet. I dunno. I can understand some of her frustrations, certainly. It's hard being single, especially for an intelligent woman.

So I think. Probably it is because of her age. We all have to get through that at certain age.

Originally Posted by Deborski

As far as I can remember, feminism is about equality of rights, not about being unmannered jerks. Feminism is a result of development of our civilization: the same civilization that teaches us to be kind and respectful to each other. So gentleman's attitude does not conflict with feminism and is not "patriarchal".
In fact, any educated reasonable person in the modern world is a feminist "by default". We all grown up in the same cultural context: kindness, honesty, human rights, science, arts etc. So if a person smart enough, he/she is able to decide by him/herself that equality of rights is a Good Idea. Even if he/she has never listened the word "feminism".

Then don't you think that "feminism" is improper word for what you describe. The word itself contain a reference to women and that is all. The best term for equality of rights is "equality of rights". The best term for being kind and respectful to each other is "being kind and respectful" - and it is not the same as "equality of rights". Putting everything good together and mark it as "feminism" looks more like PR action rather than proper definition. You know there was a widely broadcasted slogan in USSR: "Партия - ум, честь и совесть нашей эпохи." "(Communist) party is the intellect, honor and conscience of our age." So if you also have some intellect, honor and conscience you are a communist by default even if you never listened the word "communism".

But in fact by claiming you are a feminist you just support the brand - and all those people who did different things (good and bad, smart and stupid) in the name of feminism rather then "equality of rights", "being kind and respectful" or whatever. As for me after reading press I have an impression that nowadays (unlike in the first two thirds of XX century) in the name of that brand bad and stupid things are being made more often than good and smart ones.

Originally Posted by it-ogo

Then don't you think that "feminism" is improper word for what you describe. The word itself contain a reference to women and that is all. The best term for equality of rights is "equality of rights". The best term for being kind and respectful to each other is "being kind and respectful" - and it is not the same as "equality of rights". Putting everything good together and mark it as "feminism" looks more like PR action rather than proper definition. You know there was a widely broadcasted slogan in USSR: "Партия - ум, честь и совесть нашей эпохи." "(Communist) party is the intellect, honor and conscience of our age." So if you also have some intellect, honor and conscience you are a communist by default even if you never listened the word "communism".

But in fact by claiming you are a feminist you just support the brand - and all those people who did different things (good and bad, smart and stupid) in the name of feminism rather then "equality of rights", "being kind and respectful" or whatever. As for me after reading press I have an impression that nowadays (unlike in the first two thirds of XX century) in the name of that brand bad and stupid things are being made more often than good and smart ones.

I understand what you're saying IT-ogo, but the problem is that you are completely cutting off the roots of feminism and why it arose in the first place. Feminism did not come to exist because men were being oppressed. It came to be, and remains, because women were and are oppressed by men. The fact is that feminism IS about equal rights, and anyone who calls themselves a feminist should understand this. I don't know what bizarre brand of feminism has made its way to Russia and caused all men everywhere to despise the very word itself, but the feminism I embrace has nothing to do with women being "superior" and everything to do with women being "equal."

I tell you what: On the day when women actually have achieved equal rights everywhere in the world, maybe we can stop calling it the "feminist" movement but until then, that is what it is, because that is how it started.

Originally Posted by RedFox

It is not the victim's fault. It is just some kind of misunderstanding here. Maybe I should be more clear in my statements, sorry.

I'll draw analogy:
Let's suppose, for example, you were relaxing in a park and when you were leaving it, you had forgotten your phone there. You noticed that and came back in a moment, but your phone had already been stolen. It is not your fault. The fact is a person who stole your phone is a thief from the law's point of view, and he or she should carry punishment by law.
Some weeks later the situation repeated: you left your phone or some other thing in a public place and it were stolen. And some time later it repeated again.
The facts are still the same: some people stole your stuff, so they should be punished. But also we can state there is another fact. The fact is you should probably take more care of your stuff and don't scatter it in public places all the time.

The same is about that woman. It is not her fault that people can be violent, ignorant and so on. But her fault is that instead of thinking about her strategy and taking a few steps in desired direction, she is just complaining and writing "analytical" articles.
Well, I agree, there are lots of ignorant people in Russia. But all those findings on patriarchal society where the same people are gentle and violent at the same time (really?! O_O) is just weird.

I dunno how bizarre it is. In my experience people are often contradictory. Good people can suddenly turn cruel. Cruel people can suddenly do something kind. People are walking contradictions, and so is the society they created. Sure, we should all be careful not to put ourselves in harms way - but (at least here in America) we have a disease called "blame-the-ictim-itis" where victims are the ones being punished instead of those who committed the crimes. And this blaming especially seems to occur when the victim is perceived as "weaker" - ie, female, poor, sick, old, etc. If poor people are robbed, it's their fault for living in a bad neighborhood. If a woman is raped, it's her fault because (insert any reason here). If sick people die, it's their fault because they should have been wealthy enough to pay for health insurance in the first place. I don't know if you have this same trend in Russia, but in America it is very pervasive. For example, in the town of Steubenville, Ohio, a little girl was brutally raped by a gang of football players from the local high school. The entire town came together to rally - not in support of the girl who was raped - but in support of the boys who raped her. They were more worried about the boys` reputations, and the boys` future, than they were about the girl. Meanwhile, the boys not only raped the girl, they video taped the whole thing and posted it on youtube. But there was no outrage about the girl's reputation or future which the boys (giggling the whole time) destroyed. And unfortunately, such events are not just limited to one town but are happening with alarming frequency.

Sometimes people from US and some other countries talk about such kind of problems: men are no longer men, women are no longer women, insane feminism is everywhere and so on. In Russia there are those talks too. So my "monster" is a hyperbole based on those talks. Maybe the monster is true on some small part. (At least, some number of insane feministic people do exist.) But mostly it is just because people don't tend being very responsible when choosing their friends and patrners, I think.

If you are talking about women who hate men, or want to dominate men, then I do not consider such women as feminists. Feminism is not about dominance or control. It's about equality, and that's all it has ever been about. The patriarchy has nothing to do with feminism. The patriarchy has been in place for thousands of years - the idea that society must be led by and controlled by men, and that it must be hierarchical - that there must be one man in charge, and he gets to order all the others around, and they get to order around the ones beneath them and so on, and women are at the bottom of that very long pecking order. Feminism has more to do with a collective society where everyone has equality. That probably sounds dangerously like communism, but Soviet The point I am trying to make here is that if a woman wants to hold on to that hierarchical system by simply placing women in charge instead of men, then she cannot call herself a feminist because she still favors dominance and a patriarchal system.

So I think. Probably it is because of her age. We all have to get through that at certain age.

Yes... and those of us who have survived it should be proud of our scars

Originally Posted by Deborski

wreaked havoc on my marriage too, and so we had to break off contact.

omg, you continue to surprise me! Would never have guessed that you were married when you went there, lol....
He must have been quite surprised when he realised you were relocating to the USSR!?
I thought I was independent, but you are in a league of your own! It's very fascinating

As for feminism: I don't have a consistent view on that - I vary in my views on it. I can't really say anything categorical about it.

Originally Posted by Hanna

omg, you continue to surprise me! Would never have guessed that you were married when you went there, lol....
He must have been quite surprised when he realised you were relocating to the USSR!?
I thought I was independent, but you are in a league of your own! It's very fascinating

No, no, I wasn't married when I went to the USSR. Maybe I didn't say that clearly enough. I was single, in my 20's and had feelings for one of the Russian guys I worked with, but it was "нельзя" - unsanctioned.

By the time I reconnected with the Russian guy, 20 years later, I was married to Ben, my all-American husband, and reconnecting with the Russian guy wreaked havoc on our marriage because all the old feelings came back like a tsunami rolling through my heart. It made me question everything, doubt everything, and basically put me in a very dark place for a couple years. But I'm over it now. Moved on. Told that Russian guy "прощай" and am trying to work out things with my husband, who has been extremely understanding and forgiving of this whole mess.

Originally Posted by Deborski

I understand what you're saying IT-ogo, but the problem is that you are completely cutting off the roots of feminism and why it arose in the first place. Feminism did not come to exist because men were being oppressed. It came to be, and remains, because women were and are oppressed by men. The fact is that feminism IS about equal rights, and anyone who calls themselves a feminist should understand this. I don't know what bizarre brand of feminism has made its way to Russia and caused all men everywhere to despise the very word itself, but the feminism I embrace has nothing to do with women being "superior" and everything to do with women being "equal."

I tell you what: On the day when women actually have achieved equal rights everywhere in the world, maybe we can stop calling it the "feminist" movement but until then, that is what it is, because that is how it started.

You know why feminism can not be about equal rights? Because it is about equal rights of women but not about equal rights of anyone else. All humans are equal but some are more equal than others.

Feminist movement in the West nowadays is an ideological socio-political machine with giant funding, organizational structure, many people professionally involved... Such kind of machine is never able to admit "one day" that the goal is already achieved (even in a particular sphere, locally) because in fact it does not care about the so called goal. It exist to grow producing more and more nonsensial outcome and try to spread its influence to all spheres of human life even where it is absurd or even disasterous. That is what was marxism/communism in USSR. And that is what will always happen when people try to replace morals with ideology. Ideology never cares about particular people, it makes a generalization instead and ready for anything in the name of that generalization.

Roots? Yes, there are roots. A problem of mistreating women in many societies? Yes, it exists and it is a big problem. The ineffective usage of human resources due to gender limitations? Yes, it exists. But feminist ideological machine will never help against it as communist ideological machine never helped against social injustice. The morals will do, not an ideology.

I think it-ogo's point makes sense. You can take a good thing too far. Like feminism. Once it's shoved down your throat in larger portions than you want, it's no longer attractive. Let everyone have as much of it as they want, and don't force people to go against their biological nature just because of political correctness.

Originally Posted by it-ogo

You know why feminism can not be about equal rights? Because it is about equal rights of women but not about equal rights of anyone else. All humans are equal but some are more equal than others.

I completely disagree with you here. That is not my interpretation of feminism at all.

Feminist movement in the West nowadays is an ideological socio-political machine with giant funding, organizational structure, many people professionally involved... Such kind of machine is never able to admit "one day" that the goal is already achieved (even in a particular sphere, locally) because in fact it does not care about the so called goal. It exist to grow producing more and more nonsensial outcome and try to spread its influence to all spheres of human life even where it is absurd or even disasterous. That is what was marxism/communism in USSR. And that is what will always happen when people try to replace morals with ideology. Ideology never cares about particular people, it makes a generalization instead and ready for anything in the name of that generalization.

Yes, there had to be some actual working movement, or else feminism would have died with the suffragists. But what you are doing here is painting feminism like it is just some horrific movement against all of humanity, and you completely refuse to acknowledge the already existing patriarchal system which is in place in both of our societies. You act as if men are the victims here - but the fact of the matter is that men have dominated society for thousands of years, and as a result of that women were caged, beaten, enslaved and treated as property - and in fact in some countries they still are being treated in this manner completely legally. The fact that some of our societies have laws, to greater or lesser degrees, protecting women is because they NEEDED protection and they still do. If not for the feminist movement, how exactly would these laws have been put into place? It certainly did not happen out of the goodness of the hearts of all the husbands who suddenly decided to unclip their spouses' wings... A strong movement was needed, and that was feminism.

I think that you and I have fundamentally different views of feminism, and I am sorry that you see it as such a negative and evil thing. Perhaps the world prior to feminism was better? When men could legally beat their wives and rape them. When women were not allowed to own property or divorce their abusive husbands or even say "no" if they didn't want to be forced into a pregnancy.

From the way some people scream about the evils of feminism you would think that MEN are being forced to work for 70% of what women are routinely paid, and are not allowed into certain types of work because "men can't handle stress," and that MEN are constantly objectified as sex objects in movies and television - with absolutely no purpose except as eye candy for women, and that MEN are being raped, imprisoned, forced to have babies against their will, etc, etc, etc. But the very stark reality here is that men are merely being made UNCOMFORTABLE because women are stepping into their "territory." Their lives are not being destroyed. But yes, they are losing some of their power, and I suppose that must sting a bit.

Roots? Yes, there are roots. A problem of mistreating women in many societies? Yes, it exists and it is a big problem. The ineffective usage of human resources due to gender limitations? Yes, it exists. But feminist ideological machine will never help against it as communist ideological machine never helped against social injustice. The morals will do, not an ideology.

And what will "help" it? Denial? Continuing with the status quo? I don't see a lot of men lining up to battle for equal pay for women, or make sure women are treated fairly in the workplace. Although I do see a lot of men making jokes about our bodies, and about sex, and about how stupid women everywhere are, or how greedy, or how evil. I see women downgraded a lot by men who claim that they "love" women while winking at their buddies and adding "as long as they shut their mouths."

A stand had to be made. That stand was made. It was called feminism, and whether you like what it's called or not, does not change what it is about. I expect the howling and indignation of wounded males to continue well into the next century, but thankfully by then I will be long gone and won't have to go on listening to it.

I guess what it comes down to, is you yourself are not female, and so maybe you have no idea exactly what it feels like to be completely objectified and spoken about as if you are not really human but a walking, talking sex toy with no mind, no dreams, no opinions or thoughts or feelings. I've experienced this all of my life and all I can say is no human being should have to go through that, male or female. So the day I see males being subjected to all of the things I described I will be happy to take up their cause under the broad banner of feminism. I am sure we can find room for the persecuted men in our cause.

Originally Posted by Deborski

I guess what it comes down to, is you yourself are not female, and so maybe you have no idea exactly what it feels like to be completely objectified and spoken about as if you are not really human but a walking, talking sex toy with no mind, no dreams, no opinions or thoughts or feelings. I've experienced this all of my life and all I can say is no human being should have to go through that, male or female. So the day I see males being subjected to all of the things I described I will be happy to take up their cause under the broad banner of feminism. I am sure we can find room for the persecuted men in our cause.

It is not about equality of rights. In fact, it is not about equality at all.
I agree to it-ogo here, trying to solve any ethic problems of the society with aggressive ideological brainwashing does always lead to some kind of gulag.

Not males are victims of feminism mainly. Females are - their ability of critical thinking and decision making. And the society as a whole.

Увидел вот статью про дискриминацию в Саудовской Аравии. zyalt: Женская доля

"Superior", "equal". How about "different"? It is not possible to make men and women the same (I hope)

I could add a whole lot more here, because I disagree with what most of you are saying. But in the interest of maintaining peace on this forum, I am going to decline to comment more on this subject.

Originally Posted by Deborski

I could add a whole lot more here, because I disagree with what most of you are saying. But in the interest of maintaining peace on this forum, I am going to decline to comment more on this subject.

No offence, Deb. Those were nothing more then my opinions which can be changed easily with new information.