[TwelveOfTwenty]

OK, you seem to have strong opinions about this, but so far you haven't backed your wordy posts with anything. Here's my challenge.

Present for me any class action lawsuit organized by men, on behalf of men, and supported by men until won, against any institution that has historically discriminated against men, where male politicians expressed support, and that wasn't shot down by a male judge.

I'll give you a head start. Orr v. Orr - 1979.

[DoughtyOne]

OK, you seem to have strong opinions about this, but so far you haven't backed your wordy posts with anything.

I always find it a real hoot when folks pop up here to convince us of stuff, and when we express a difference of opinion, we're supposed to be somehow too intense, too wordy.  If we respond to precisely what they said, we're somehow dodging the 'real' issue.  You made comments.  I responded to those comments.  This post I'm responding to here, is your avoidence of responding to my comments in turn.

Here's my challenge.

Tell you what, when you have responded to what I said in the post you're responding to here, I'll give some thought to your challenge.  Let's pretend this a discussion and not a lecture with you at the podium.  If you want me to take your comments serious, I suggest you start responding to my points.  If you can't handle that, then I guess it's evident your thoughts aren't sound enough to defend.

Present for me any class action lawsuit organized by men, on behalf of men, and supported by men until won, against any institution that has historically discriminated against men, where male politicians expressed support, and that wasn't shot down by a male judge.

I'll give you a head start. Orr v. Orr - 1979.