I think what many of the people here - and I use the word people with care, as I see almost all to be men - are missing is a deep truth which modern society has been ignoring.

As revealed to Greek philosophers and subsequently medieval Christian scholars, women are not actually human beings at all, and are thus not possessed of any human rights. We are, in a word used of fertilised zygotes above, mere blobs, given as much of animal life as necessary to support the development of future people, that is males. Since it cannot be determined in advance whether a foetus is actually a person, male, or a potential incubator, it must be assumed to have full rights until such time as it is born, when the matter becomes clear.

Since, as an incubator, a woman has no rights, she must be the property of some man, who has the right to inseminate her when he wishes, and thus cannot be guilty of rape (even if incestuous), while a stranger can be legitimately accused of this action. It is mere wish fulfilment on the part of the owner to assume that sex without consent cannot result in pregnancy. This belief, of course, allows the deduction that the woman has, as it were, stolen herself, as incubator, from her owner, and is thus deserving of chastisement.

'Spaw's wonderful anger at the stupidity of people holding these beliefs is thus ignorant of this truth, and his generous extension of consideration to women is only like that which people may extend to their pets.

When I get angry, a part of my brain goes off into stuff like this. I am, of course, not angry with 'Spaw or others of his opinion.

Penny