NAMALT. Really? Dig deep and be honest with yourself. AMALT

[NoEggs]

I love my DH. He’s a great guy and we’ve been happy for many years.

But
He’s not perfect. Doesn’t do the laundry. Defaults to letting me make stuff happen etc. etc.

Now even if your partner is a paragon I would argue that the species ‘men’ will generally default to slightly bloody useless.

AIBU?

Can you tell me of any oppressed group in history who got equal rights by simply asking?

So when your daughter gets killed by a member of the trans lobby claiming they wouldn't have got equal rights just by asking? Or by an ISIS bomb? (not that I believe you have a daughter as no way would you ever date a man lol).

But it's shite. It used to be the 2nd best army in the world. Then it was the 2nd best army in Ukraine. When Pregozhin marched towards Moscow, the Russian army was the 2nd best army in Russia! It is drafting convicts, conning foreign nationals and hiring slaves from North Korea to "man" its front lines.

Exactly. Having military power and tech doesn't mean your men won't end up fighting in the streets. The US couldn't defeat the Viet Cong nor the Taliban after fighting the latter for two decades.

We absolutely thrashed the marines in the exercise Green Dagger while trialling new commando tactics. We started with 20% of the territory and ended up with 65% after destroying key assets in focused raids, forcing the US troops to surrender and ask for a reset just two days into the five day exercise. Given that the attacking force is usually at a disadvantage that's pretty good going.

And in another training exercise a single Swedish ultraquiet sub 'The Gotland' defeated an entire US carrier group. It evaded the US subs/boats/planes undetected and sent photos of the USS Ronald Reagan in its crosshairs whilst still undetected, proving beyond doubt it could've sunk the Reagan. The same thing kept happening every time. The Gotland was worth £100m and the Ronald Reagen alone was worth £6bn - 60x it's value. The US then requested to borrow the Gotland for two years to study it.

It seems that unless you're talking about a mismatch like the US against Venezuela then pretty much anything can happen. If say China decided to get involved in a future conflict we could easily find our soldiers engaged in infantry combat. Nobody can say that it'd 'all be fought by drones' or that a certain army would defeat another easily.

It’s strange that as a woman (as asserted in various posts) @GaIadriel posts entirely from male view points. I can only assume that by working in a male dominated industry she has some sort of Stockholm syndrome or is “not like other girls” and aligns herself with the men in the hope and expectation that misogyny and sexism will bypass her.

'Men who lie about using birth control can get sent to prison.'

• that's because stealthing (removing the condom during sex) qualitatively changes the nature of the sex act, making it rape.

Lying about being on the pill is awful bit doesn't qualitatively change the nature of the sex act.

If there were a male pill, and men lied about being on it, they wouldn't be jailed.

@Carla786 what nonsense is this? if a man and a woman have sex they both take the risk of pregnancy as far as the court system goes. if a woman can prove the man lied about contraception the man will face legal consequences. And even when a man can prove the woman lied about the pill or whatever method, the court states that the supporting the child financially is more important than the woman’s deception and mummy of the year walks off. don’t even use this as an argument it is so dodgy.
could any of you not tell the difference between the dick that had a condom on a moment ago and the same dick without? not sure the men can tell the difference between us being on a pill or not. come on.

could any of you not tell the difference between the dick that had a condom on a moment ago and the same dick without?

Not reliably no. Depends how lubricated you are and so on, not to get too graphic.

There have been occasions where one has come off or broken and I've only realised afterwards.

the serious aspect was the legal ramifications for men and none for women. but happy to focus on moisture, lol

i had broken condom before too. it is different when it breaks compared to it being removed altogether

So when your daughter gets killed by a member of the trans lobby claiming they wouldn't have got equal rights just by asking? Or by an ISIS bomb? (not that I believe you have a daughter as no way would you ever date a man lol).

Why are you comparing the fight for women's votes to groups of men who are actively trying to take our rights away?🤯 If women living under ISIS control were to carry out armed resistance against ISIS, I would support them.

While you and the PP sit comfortably, 1000s of miles away, condemning them on the internet.

I think pp meant that Isis would argue they bomb civilians to win a just cause. I don't think she was talking about the victims of Isis.

Imo, that's a bad analogy. Isis clearly don't have a just cause. A better comparison would be the IRA, where Catholics really were discriminated against but the terrorist methods used were indefensible.

'Armed resistance ' is not the same as terrorism. Fighting armed people with arms is different from terrorism, which is targeting civilians/non combatants with bombs.

Apologies to TooBigForMyBoots if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure I remember her posting about having children on another thread I was on.
It's a bit naive to think women with negative views on men as a group must have never had a LTR or children with one

I personally know several who aren't, so I am being honest.
Being honest does not mean "agree with me"

The best comparison is the like for like situation of women fighting to be people, not property.

If the women living under ISIS control were to use the same methods as suffragists and suffragettes I would do what I could to support them. It never occurred to me that other women would condemn them for it, but here we are.🤷‍♀️

So if women under Isis control set bombs in theatres, private homes, sent letter bombs etc, and so put civilians in danger via terrorist actions, you would think that was morally justified?

(Setting aside the issue that it's unlikely that, if women under Isis control were able to resist, they would do so by terrorist attacks on civilians. Would that be the most effective way of combating Isis?)

I don't think this can even be argued on the basis of opinion. It's got about as much credibility as saying that PND in women is irrelevant because men suffer it too (which they do).

If we look at the Ukraine war, the UN has confirmed that 5000 women have died and that the true figure is no doubt higher.

With men the figure is harder to calculate but the BBC estimates approximately 200,000 killed as of February 2026. The Economist estimated between 73,000 and 140,000 killed as of mid-2025. CSIS (Center for Strategic and International Studies) estimated 140,000 through the end of 2025. So likely about 200,000 to date.

That's just military deaths and men also make up 60% of civilian casualties apparently. You probs don't want to even go near the world wars for casualties by sex.

To be fair, the Ukraine war was a very particular situation in that women had the opportunity to flee. Many other wars had far less options for them to do so.

True, but despite everybody suffering I can't imagine actually being forced to fight to the death if you were non violent or a timid person. Being maimed with not an ambulance in sight etc. That said, I'd absolutely fight for my country. Although I'd probs end up in the logistic corps as people that can drive trucks and operate heavy machinery are already in short supply.

how did we go from nigel being lazy to people being killed in some war? crazy

Nigel lazy at home but OK because manbrain full of very important things like war and inventions and rescuing people from fires, no matter that Nigel not do any of these things. Womanbrain do dishes. Rawrgh.

right. off to use my womanbrain to make some mac n cheese then.