Breuk, lately every time you post, I realize that you're one of the most archaicâ??and frighteningly uninformedâ??men I've ever been acquainted with. You also distort the most simple concepts put forth by others. Cases in point below:

- To get equal pay for equal work
We already have laws for that.
No we certainly do not. We have laws for equal opportunity employment which aren't always honored, but we don't have any such law for equal pay. Unless you have one in NYC. Nationally? No sir. Women still make .73 - .82 cents for every dollar men do.

- To receive equal educations and have teachers and professors nurture girl and women, gay, and racially diverse students in the same way they do straight white male students, from K - post-graduate professional school
Translation: Affirmative action based on sex and race. "Special" considerations, and additional coddling for said recipients.
Affirmative action was your translation, not mine. Here I simply want teachers to pay the same attention to women and minorities as they do to boys and men. Do your research. They donâ??t do this in primary or secondary schools. They donâ??t do this in colleges, grad schools or law/medical schools, either. What a pity youâ??re not aware of this. Itâ??s been studied and proven repeatedly.

- To get equal consideration for all jobs
See above
Again, you're seeing it through your own disparagement filter here. I mean real equal consideration. That does not happen right now. Ask the EEO Commission or the Dept of Labor. They see thousands of cases every day that have nothing to do with affirmative action or lack of it.

- To be free from religious or political judgment or oppression
Women and minorities are not free of this type of behavior, but get away with it even more today.
I don't even know what that meant, but, as is so often the case with you, it conveyed disdain instead of coherent thought. I want us all to be free from religious or political judgment or oppression. Even you.

- To receive and give equal courtesy (to have doors opened for us and to open doors for others, both literally and figuratively)
American men are still chivalrous, to a large extent, but you can't please everybody.
My goal was of a many-way street of courtesy but, yet again, you didn't grasp that and interpreted this only through a sexist male-female filter. I want us all opening doors for each other, and I mean women for men, men for transvestites, all people for old folks, men for women, all people for people of color and vice versa. And I want us opening the thought and perception doors (like in education, health care, and religion) that have been closed to these groups before now.

- To be seen as intellectually equal with 25- 55-something white men no matter what gender, race, age or sexual preference we are
To be "seen", whether they are or are not intellectually equal in every case? Generally speaking, nobody really takes intelligence into account as far as these criteriaâ??s go, but who is responsible for most of the world's inventions and scientific discoveries?
To be acknowledged as equal when intellectual equality exists. Here I began to get nauseated with the realization of just how out-of-balance intellectual equality is with you.

- To compete and be considered for physical jobs when we demonstrate physical equality (military combat and fire-fighting are two that pop into my head)
Men cannot be chivalrous and work with women in dangerous jobs at the same time. They have been raised, at least in America, to protect - and it is very dangerous for them to have women on the front lines in hazardous occupations such as firefighting. Their wives and female loved ones know this better then anyone.
Malarkey. Men wouldn't be asked to be chivalrous any more than women in these jobs would, and if they felt inclined toward it, then that wouldn't be reason to prevent women from having those jobs even so. I was a firefighter-medic for 7 years. Physically strong women do that work every day. You probably didn't know that paramedics pass all the same firefighting and physical endurance exams and get all the same training that men do. We suit up and fight fires in addition to doing medical rescue work every day. We work as police officers, too. Those of us who are physically capable, as we are in firefighting and police work, can do the same in military combat. Both genders can support each other in dangerous situations. In reality, that's how that actually works in those jobs.

- To have men of all races and geographies, particularly the ones who have a touch of machismo or religious-influenced women/gays/blacks-are-second-class-citizens attitudes, regard us as intellectual equals, and to have any women/gays/people of color who don't perceive us as such (and there are a frightening lot of them) regard us the same way
Religions are primarily supported by women, minorities, and the working class.
Check your facts more closely. In America, slightly more women attend church than men. But people who consider themselves religious both here and around the world are a balanced mix of women, men, minorities, and various classes. Universally, the primary financial and political supportâ??and every aspect of organized religion/church leadershipâ??comes from men. Your response really had nothing whatsoever to do with the goal I cited.

- To have mastery of our own physical destiny, which extends to
1. Medical care (women, people of color, gays, and poor people lag behind in their quality of health care)
2. Our reproductive rights (men and women, particularly, but also transgendered people. Here I mean birth control, abortion, and surgery to add, subtract or create female or male reproductive organs )
Who is supposed to pay for this multi-minority sexual-fetish utopia?
Here youâ??re distorting through your â??curmudgeonâ? filter again. And itâ??s again a simple answer, not a utopian one. Same people pay for it who pay for it now. Insurance. Patients who pay fee-for-service/out-of-pocket. In some cases, health care social services, but thatâ??s rare. If we can get universal health care, thatâ??d help. You neednâ??t worry about that personally, though. You wonâ??t support it. When you have time, you need to read about the causes of transexualism (hormonal influence in fetal development) and also educate yourself on the actual definition of â??fetish.â?

3. Our right to die with dignity and, if we need it, with compassionate assistance[/INDENT
No argument there.
Nor from me reciprocally. I do wish you regarded people who are different from you with equal amounts of dignity in life, however.

- To have equal rights to marry or not to marry, whether we're women in a non-equality culture like Saudi Arabia, or gays
Let's not interfere with Saudi Arabia anymore. Gays should be allowed to have civil unions equivilent to marriage.
Yet again you distorted a simple statement and answered it with a different tangent involving â??interference.â? Please educate yourself. Saudi Arabia is simply a single example of the women-as-marriage-chattel behavior and attitude that goes on around the world all the time and even still occurs in well-developed countries (mostly by the more primitive religious groups). Thatâ??s what I want to stop for women. At least you understood the part about civil unions.

Iâ??m so glad Mrs. Greenjeans chimed in. For a while there, thought my brainy male and female friends here were probably either so perplexedâ??or so exhaustedâ??by you that they were not even going to waste their time commenting. After this, I shall follow their lead. Youâ??re not really someone who can follow simple debate points accurately enough to be able to respond logically.

Slowlickity, you can read my responses above to Breuk, which may answer some of yours. Especially about firefighting and the military and teacher-preferences for boys. Thatâ??s a proven fact. Over and over in now more than 20 recognized academic studies. Ask anyone from people in basic teacher training to the dean of the Harvard School of Education. Check it for yourself on Google. This is something we all need to be aware of.