Well, Gav, what do you suggest, then? Because it sounds to me like you're coming up with problems, not solutions.
Regarding my statement addressed to Neonivek, I'll ask: do you honestly believe, then, that the proper way to go about handling racism against ethnic minorities in america is to focus on how some members of those minorities call white people crackers? Like, seriously, what kinda of fucked-up logic is that? It's a bit more pressing of a concern to handle sexism against women than sexism against men. Sexism against men doesn't typically result in death. Sexism against women quite often does.
For your first argument that isn't directed towards something I said, I just have to say that this makes no sense. If someone is being promiscuous in an irresponsible fashion, that doesn't need to be referred to be gender-specific terms. We don't even have terms for such right now, beyond 'asshole' or 'terrible person who is trying to spread STDs'.
As well, to your last argument, my point was thus; the typical idea is that men are strong, women are weak, and therefore men are in control of women. If women are also strong, that doesn't mean that men can't be in control, but it means they aren't naturally assumed to be so. That's the ideal. And yes, people can be idiots, but again, what the fuck do you suggest then? That we do nothing and sit on our hands because any action is worse than no action? That we focus on 'man problems' first?
Seriously, Gav, ignore all the responses you want to make to my arguments for the moment, and tell me what you think we should do, then, if all of our ideas are such utter shit.