This is not a debate about men. Men are fine, I like men very much, in fact I dearly love several of them. My love and desire for my girlfriend is not a rejection of men or masculinity, it simply is love and desire for my girlfriend. I've always wanted kids, and I want them with the person I want to share my life with. Of course I also want my kids to know, learn from and respect men.

One of my old school friends is married to a great guy. He is an accountant, and their marriage (and 3 happy kids) are an envy to anyone. He was raised by 2 lesbian mums, and has only good things to say about his childhood. Children's point of view? He's it to me. I only hope I can do as good a job with my kids as his mother(s) did with him.

Maxx Ginnane, London,

Women who don't want to be women as parents is a ludicrous concept. But then so is listening to Outer Space for intelligent radio signals. Back here , on Earth, a father and a mother functioning the way we have evolved and whose moral development has progressed beyond adolescence are indispensible if you want a healthy, well-adjusted citizenry. One day, someone might produce a TV comedy series entitled "Never mind the research, feel the sentiment!'

John Thom, Charleston, South Carolina

So, real women (straight or lesbians), are only entitled to raise children in a successful way. While it is only the idealised man in touch with his feminine side that can be celebrated and proposed for upbringing the matriarchal family of Minette Marrin. If men are mostly no good at bringing small children alone, one could throw on the desk the argument (and documented facts) of the generation of children knifing and shooting each other in our inner cities and brought up almost exclusively by single mothers.

Oh, and by the way - the children's point of view is not mentioned. The Minette Marrins know best

Fabrizio, Bristol,

Most everyone is familiar with the oft-used word misogyny, but I doubt that same number have even heard the of the term misandry. While I don't necessarily agree with her assertion that gays should be able to have chidren like straight couples, kudos to Minnette for an outstanding acknowledgement of the necessity of men. I'm tired of being made to feel stupid or sub-human merely because of my xy chromosomes. Feminism has gone too far....and sadly, women have taken the bait.

Gerard Voytek, Bridgeport, CT

I think this article says a lot about the author's view and experience of men. If this had been written the other way around, it would probably have been labelled misogynist. Get a life.

Nigel, New York,

Minette Marrin's article illustrates what is wrong about much of the discussion on the role of fathers (as opposed to whether 'men are necessary'), reference to which is removed in the proposed legislation. The article is written almost entirely from the perspective of adults; the needs of children are added right at the end almost as an afterthought.

The point is not whether children do or do not need fathers (some people might disagree), but whether this need is to be recognised as a human and legal right. This is being denied to children by the bill before parliament. In the case of lesbian IVF, the sperm donor can't even be recognised officially (e.g. on the birth certificate) as the genetic father; but the birth mother has the right to register the lesbian partner as the other parent (in the place of the father). Hence, in the eyes of the law, the child can be deprived not just of an emotional father but even of a genetic father. This violates the child's human rights.

David, Cambridge, UK

@Jamie-lynn Spears, newcastle. "And think of the poor child, it will be teased and may even be bullied at school by having two mums and no dads. " only if the children who do the teasing were raised by homophobes

Martin, Bristol, UK

A friend at school has two mums and has had a better, more secure (emotionally, financially etc) upbringing than I have had with one parent.

Frances, London, UK

A lesbian couple knowingly and deliberately deprives a child of a father's daily presence in a child's life. Research on the influence of fathering on children is showing how important they are. For instance, recent research on women who succeeded in business is demonstrating that their fathers were a major influence in their success.

Good fathers ARE important and necessary, just as good mothers are. I do not think it is a good idea to knowingly deprive of a child of either a father or a mother. When a child suffers the loss of either a father or mother through the death of a parent that is a case for sadness, but to knowingly deprive a child of either a father or a mother is even worse.

William Jones, Pasadena, California

As a white male in his late twenties in a steady relationship with a 2 week old son I feel some what hounded by this article, I go to work pay the bills and when i come home I help in a loving partnership with my girlfriend to look after our beautiful baby boy.

I feel loved and needed but this article implies that i might aswell have given my partner a sample of my seed and just left her to get on with it.

Inrespect of lesbian couples getting IVF this is big debate that must be covered but no matter what the outcome, men will be needed to provide semen to ensure that IVF is possible. Unless of course there is a magical way to create semen without man.

p.s. Lady Portia HISTORY has absoloutley nothing to do with HIS i.e. sex based so the HERSTORY argument is ludicrous.

NathanWalker1, Newcastle, England

If anybody wants to know what Feminism is really about, I suggest they Google the words Rockefeller AND Feminism.

Adrian Peirson, luton, uk

I believe a man is not needed, but genetically he is. The sperm is needed so therefore so is the man. And think of the poor child, it will be teased and may even be bullied at school by having two mums and no dads.

Jamie-lynn Spears, newcastle,

Craig (first commenter) with respect I don't think you are right to say that anyone who has grown up without a Mum and a Dad apeice feels they have missed out. There are so many variables that prove this to be false. An episode of WifeSwap springs to mind where a pair of lovely young girls brought up two men were the picture of happiness and I'm sure that scene is replicated in many a home headed by same sex parents. Just as I know many people with one Mum and one Dad are desperately unhappy.

The rehabilitation of positive masculinities can only be a good thing.We really need to augment this though and be more savvy about and comfortable with the diverse gender identities that people have. Having a Man or a Women in a child's life doesn't necessrily mean they have positive male or female role models. Equally having two Dads doesn't mean a child isn't receiving male and female influences. One Dad may be much more 'traditionally' male and one may be more 'female'.

Alan, Glasgow, Scotland

It seems to me that there is too much of a "because we can" attitude, with little to no regard given to the effects on children reared by lesbian/gay parents. Ask any child who has grown up without a mother, or without a father if they would have prefered to have had one, and the answer will be yes. I dont have a problem with gay marriages, or homosexuality, but what I do have a problem with is people who selfishly will set about to do something because they can, want to, or feel the need to in order to sate some inner desire without fully acknowledging the consequences of their actions on those who will be involved, in this case, the children. The question is not "Are men necessary?" or for that matter "Are women necessary?" , the question is "What is the BEST environment we can give our children?" anything else is, whether we can do it or not, irresponsible. Should a child have to suffer in order to make homosexual couple's wishes to have a family come true?

Craig Lacey, Chilliwack, Canada

Just because a tiny number of lesbian or gay couples are having children, or rearing adopted children, suddenly its "the last days of Rome". Get a grip, idiot heterosexuals! Most people are attracted to the opposite sex, so most babies will continue be conceived in the usual heterosexual way - obviously.
Sexual orientation has no bearing on parenting skills. We should welcome the way reproductive technology can enable infertile couples or lesbian couples to bring loved and wanted babies into the world. And before some twit says "it's not what nature intended", staring at your computer screen reading this isn't what nature intended either. Very little of what modern day man does is "natural", the exceptions being both homosexuality and heterosexuality.

Diesel Balaam, London, UK

I couldn't find any reference in your article to a child's right to have a father . . . . .

conrad, Dover,

Surely, if you're a lesbian you need to accept that you can't have a baby. I don't see the problem with adoption.

Rebecca, Felpham,

Actually, it's women who aren't necessary.

According to Genesis, it was a man who gave birth to the first child - Eve.

Women were only an afterthought.

Now please, put your pen down, and step away from the pedestal.

jeff, Beeville, Texas, USA

I can't understand why you have to defend an idealistic man and woman when there's NONE. Most of what you call "man" and "woman" are culture. There are differences between men and women just like everyone is different from each other.
I know "strong" women (being lesbian or not) just like I know "weak" men (being gay or not). I know irresponsible parents, and I know great parents (being a straight couple or single).
If you all are really thinking about the children, you should think about how to educate them on a straight couple, gay couple, single or watever family, because it's impossible to say "only a man and a woman can raise a child". What about when both parents die? What about when the mother let the baby on an orphanate?
You have to review your culture of man and woman, your culture of what a couple means. I am gay and I want to adopt a child, I don't want to "birth" a baby, why? Because I know that it would me far better to the child then grow up without a family.

Anderson S, Curitiba, Brazil

I have to agree with Nanda in my wish that humans as a whole could admit defeat and leave the course of nature to itself. However, as a lesbian and as someone who cannot have children, I am also torn by the idea of never passing along the essense of 'me' to another human being. That fact, alone, makes me want to fun to the closest baby deep-freeze and try to salvage what I can of my naughty ovaries. My point is this: I believe in the ability of raising children without a partner of the opposite sex. I believe in the the ability of raising children in a home of loving parents--regardless of their sex. I believe in the ability to parent a child and to do it in the best way you see fit. But I also believe that I am well rounded tody because if HOW I was raised. Not by whom.

Barbie, Birmingham, AL, USA

I would like to pick up on one important sentence in this article and it is, "Little boys brought up by stay-at-home dads are less likely to do well at school than other children and the absence of the mother may do emotional damage."..

If you wanted confirmation that it is the natural order of family life, for a MAN and a WOMAN to take shared responsibility in the upbringing and nurturing of thier children, you find it in that one sentence.
If it is proven that the absence of the mother affects the child negatively, then vice versa, the abscence of the father (which is a certanty if both parents are females) will also affect the child in a negative way.
We live in a world which lives by the motto "IF IT FEELS GOOD --DO IT !!" We no longer live by a higher moral code of whats wrong and right....WE decide whats wrong and right. NEWSFLASH.."Just because it feels good, it does not make it right" But it is time for men, to be Men.

Simon Morris, Kviteseid, Norway

Hi,
The two basic laws of biology that apply to every spices including Humans
Is to feed yourself so that you can reproduce yourself every thing other like sexuality is detail.
Regards Dr. Terence Hale Zandvoort

Terence Hale, zandvoort, Holland

I'm afraid if you want a correct picture of the future it will be more like Afghanistan under the Taliban. According to the Daily Mail, Britain and Germany and France will probably be a majority Muslim by 2050 almost certainly by 2100 (barring the unlikely emergence of a new Hitler who wouldn't take kindly to feminists and gays anyway).
Muslims believe in traditional family values and thus have a more successful evolutionary strategy and thus more children, . So it just seems inevitable that the future belongs to them. Womens rights and homosexual rights will likely be shown to have been a historical blip probably never to be repeated.

Keith Bentham, Wigan, Lancashire

No, homosexual parents will not undermine family life, but why can't we keep it simple? Boy meets girl, they fall in love, have sex and...presto! a baby is born, they will be responsible parents and bring their baby up to be a responsible adult. Sadly, not everybody can have babies, why can't we just accept it and not try to interfere too much with nature? Is the human race so arrogant that we cannot accept our physical limitations?

Nanda Giles, Surrey, UK

As society`s attitudes to children and parenthood seem to be changing at such speed, allow me a fancifull look into the future. A future where neither a (natural) father nor (natural) mother is required, and babies are manufactured ( with the help of well paid doners ) and sold off on ebay to the highest bidder. As long as the bidder has 100% feedback......no problem.
The last days of Rome ?

J.B., Berlin, Germany

Minette Marrin's piece is thoughtful, feisty and interesting, as usual. She is right about lesbian parents - the hoops that lesbian parents are forced to jump through, let alone the sheer expense of IVF, means that they do not take on parenthood lightly, but very carefully, with much love and forward planning. Children brought in to the world by this means usually fare better than those that result from a drunken heterosexual bunk-up in the back seat of a Ford Mondeo.
Minette is also correct about the need to value and welcome true masculinity - wise, strong, courageous, witty , inventive, kind and sensitive men are a joy. Becoming such a man is an achievement for any male in our society, which increasingly denigrates masculinity by misrepresenting men as inherently selfish, violent and disruptive tossers.

Diesel Balaam, London, UK

I am totally against this. Any child needs a man and a woman in a proper realationship. Two women (or two men) is just not right. Societies ignore this at their peril. Think of the humiliation the child will have at school having 2 mums!!

Andrew Smith, croydon , England

Come to the United States where there are no restrictions on who can get IVF treatment. The MPs should vote to approve IVF treatment for anyone who can afford it. Here in the US it costs at least $10,000 US dollars per treatment. If you can afford that, you are well off, probable well educated and mentally healthy. Any child would be lucky to be raised in that environment.

warcwulf, NB, USA

PETER HANDFORD - Perhaps you already have one planned, but I am surprised not to have seen an obituary yet on Peter Handford, who died earlier this month aged 88. Not only was he one of cinema's supreme soundmen - working on dozens of classic movies and winning an Oscar for "Out Of Africa" - but he was a legend in the world of steam railways. Single-handedly he trekked around the country with his recording equipment during the last days of steam to capture for posterity the evocative sounds of a byegone era. I am sure such a unique achievement would be of interest to your readers. His widow is the actress Helen Fraser (of "Bad Girls" fame).

Ray Crick, Theydon Bois, England

Every time I think of this, it makes me sad to think that men are not really needed for the human race to continue.

No wonder it is said that men are 4-5 times more likely to take their own lives. Feminism has done so much damage to our society and for that I loathe it.

It needs to be taken down. Now

Craig, Neath, UK

As someone said the world's gone mad. Christian values have been replaced by liberal and politicall-correct values such as support for homosexuality and an extension of traditional family values to homosexuals as if an homosexual couple was the same as an heterosexual couple. Face it: they are different! Having said that, there is eveidence evrywhere supporting the view married heterosexual couples are the best to raise children/

Daniel Fernandes, Middle England, UK

Okay, I have been thinking about this and Lesbian couples should be allowed IVF because every child needs two parents, and if thats how two people work best together then they should be given the oppurtunity to raise a child together.

My only problem with IVF is the possibility of single parenting through IVF. Two parents are needed in a houshold, you rarely hear of people going into single motherhood out of personal choice. It is always because her man let her down etc.

Also if a single woman has a child through IVF will she have the support of her family and friends, and most importantly if the single mother were to die who would become the guardian of the child? Is it fair for a child to be brought into this world when its perspective mother knows of its even larger lack or security?

Kathryn Brown, Belfast,

yeah right. The world's gone mad. What a sad reflection of today;'s society.

louise bennet, strathblane, uk

I get the feeling William from Deal and certain other contributors have only read the headline of this article. Either that, or they've has completely failed to take in the article.

Star, Lancaster,

Maybe if we need "the rehabilitation of real masculinity", we just need male teachers in schools? And fathers in the home?

Radical thought I know......

Jim Conway, Brussels,

I don't think anyone, male or female, is unnecessary. We are all human beings and should value each other. However, I wonder why we worry about guys feeling bad about themselves in a world where men are still hold the power reins and where religious, cultural ideology and social in a lot of the world still results in women being bottom of the heap - education, rights, receiving end of violence. Why does addressing the cruelties inflicted on women get portrayed as being mean to men? I think women are still perceived as less important and if some women want to go it alone sometimes that's only a natural response. So men are more intelligent and funnier? Yes, I can see that in the actions of the Janjaweed, the Taleban, the South American gangs targetting and murdering girls for kicks. My sides are not splitting with the humour of the situation, but hey as long as we're concentrating on not hurting guys feelings that's the main concern that women should have eh?

DisappointedinHumanity, Leeds,

What is not necessary are those hate filled, bigoted supremecists who make this and other similar arguments. The world doesn't need those who rationalize the exclusion of human beings based on gender.. these feminist extremists have truly turned themselves into the sort of sexist pigs that the movement originally sought to take a stand against. They are irrelevant and there is no room for them in this day and age.

Jenny, Grand Rapids, MI, US

How can this be allowed? Only superficial socialist thinking can entertain this absurd concept which ultimately will contribute to a brave new world. Its happening now. Artificial insemination for a group of people whose agenda is not in the childs interest, but in theirs. Sure this can ultimately remove the human male animal from this civilisation. But in labs throughout the world artificial wombs are being developed, and this can remove the human female animal from civilisation. How can we allow the lowest common demination to decide the advance of civilisation? Advanced robots/androids are currently being developed that will allow any partner to have the ideal lover, and this will ultimately lead to a schism between the human sexes, with repercussion that only those that follow these concepts can understand.
Unfortunately those that advocate such nonsense do not see further than their own selfish limited vision. The blind leading the blind, and those that can see are quite likely too few to prevent the leap into the abyss.

william, deal, england

Ust, that may just be Birmingham. I think this article demonstrates what many already knew - in that in order to provide a family a family with the appropriate mental and emotional tools to lead a properly balanced life, you need both male and females involved in the upbringing

Irfan Hemani, London,

I think that Minette's views are off the mark and unexamined in it full ramifications. Implying that a novel depicting a mainly woman-centric world that succeeds beyond expectation begs the question: what where the socio-economic foundation of those women and did they grow-up in families with fathers.

In the US, there's a growing revelation about the connection between fatherless homes and the mushrooming of gangbangers in major US cities and in smaller towns. The children in homes without two parents are less likely to seek achievement, are more likely to stray into drug and alcohol abuse, and are more likely to have run-ins with the law.

On top of this, recent studies now indicate that nonbiological fathers (ie, boy-friends and step dads) are more likely to abuse a mother's children than biological dads by quite significant margins. All this and more are why US courts are beginning to change course regarding the inclusion of dads in their decisions.

Steve, Chico, US

If men were not necessary, then you wou not exist.

lisa, norwich, uk

Good points, but the author makes the mistake of claiming men are "anxious" that women may not need them any longer. That is a common feminist canard. Men don't care if women need them, and I personally would rather they did not. Men simply want equal rights -- men are half responsible for bringing children into the world and do not like our "enlightened" laws to view them as secondary parents. They are not, regardless of what some self-righteous feminists want to believe.

Rufus Peckham, Pittsburgh , Pennsylvania, US

The debate isn't about men being necessary; it's about how we understand humanity.

One of the fundamental questions human beings ask is who were are. Heritiage is important personally as it is culturally and we musn't forget that a fatherless or motherless state effectively takes that away.

If two women or men decide they love one another they (in my view) have chosen to forgoe their reproductive rights. There is no inaliable right to have a child after all. Yes, that sounds cold, but it's a fundamental truth. Like it or not.

I don't doubt their ability to raise a child, but I doubt that the child's welfare is at the forefront of their choice to have a child. It's about 'Me' and not the baby. And this is the real problem in our society today. The ' me, myself and I' mentality which say's that only my choice and my right to do whatever I want matters.

This is not only problematic, it's a fundamental misunderstanding of human nature. That is the real tragedy today.

John Paul Ritchie, Edinburgh, United Kingdom

It's a quirk of nature that women (mothers) are the primary developers of boys-men as they are of girls-daughters. So many of the problems men have stem from being raised by women (Doris Lessing The Cleft) with too little influence of men, ask any boy/man.
Women despite what they seem to think do not have all of the answers. When that fact dawns we might get some properly meaningful dialogue instead of boring, self-obsessed rantings. You can always follow a self-fufilling arguement if you wish. To find the truth requires more honesty, integrity and wholesomeness.

paul martin, WARGRAVE,

There is a good reason why the traditional male and female roles are now "under review": the invention of nuclear weapons has made it a matter of lunacy to continue the age-old tradition of major powers going to war with each other. And in all ages up to the recent past, physical power was the determining factor in warfare, a fact which put the male on a social pedastel, which has now vanished.

And it's not just a matter of physical strength. In ages past, academic learning was also seen as a male prerogative, and it was confined to the university. What happens, however, when the subjects of study are child psychology and child development - and the question of applying them to real life goes out of the lecture-room and into the home?

I can tell you, Mr Lochhead, as a former house-husband who stayed at home to bring up the kids: I had a whale of a time! The bliss of being my own boss! And results? You can't quarrel with a II(i) from Imperial College and a First from Oxford.

Edmund Burke, Kingston upon Thames, England

Why can't we accept that men and women are different? In fact, why can't we accept tht we are ALL different.
On a separate point, what is not just sick but actually almost sinister in this article is the description of the "shopping-mall" approach to the creation of human life.
We have become a society of largely ignorant, lazy, consumers, certainly not citizens.

Rob, Paris, France

Not often a Great Man walks this Earth but for Mr Ian Smith, this title
is fitting. In leading Rhodesia to independence he had his hands full
securing his borders from communistic approaches but still managed to
feed his country and ensured their well-beings despite punitive
sanctions. He, no doubt, will be remembered by various rabble as a
racist. The mere fact that The Rhodesian Forces had more black personnel
than white must pale those opinions especially now that we're 20 years
on and it's blatantly clear what he warned has happened. His cause was
the greater one and when deposed by the British and the country given to
the bananas that have demolished it to date, one wonders if there are
any better words at this moment than "I told you so!"

Rest in peace Sir!

Richard Browne, Port Elizabeth, South Africa

Amber from Stevenage - here here. As a woman who is good at 3-d reasoning, loves gadgets and has a very high IQ, I hate such crass stereotypes. They don't belong in today's world and neither is there any solid evidence for them - so once I read that I'm afraid my opinion of the author's reasoning went right out of the window.

In reality I think there is a place for men just as much as there is one for women - but each of us is an individual and we should play to our individual strengths rather than being browbeaten by stereotypes such as "men aren't any good at childcare" therefore they shouldn't raise children, or "women aren't any good at three-dimensional reasoning" so they shouldn't be in the military or racing drivers. What rubbish! People should do what suits them best as individuals, and if someone doesn't want to conform to gender stereotypes then good for them. Celebrate our talents as *individuals*, yes definitely, but not simply for being male or female.

Caroline, London, UK

Ms Marrin's pragmatism sometimes works but not here. The issue of principle here is that male tissue is regarded as impersonal seed to be used as and how a woman wishes, and also that woman can by an act of mere will create another woman a parent. In principle this is bizarre. The recent case of the girl getting pregnant, with the father being barred from being the legal father, takes this family law stalinism further and further into the bleak 'Brave New World' culture, with a radically feminist edge. This article does not really disagree with this prospect.

Tom, Oxfort, UK

Most men in the EU have been willingly castrated by
socialism and the feminist war on masculintiy; what they have left of their manhood is pathetically expressed in hooliganism
at football matches. America may be the last refuge of
masculinity -- one reason it is so hated by EU and Islam.
The Arabic male is so undone by his inability to adjust to modernity, he has to migrate to Europe where there is a male vacuum. Of course, his version of maleness is based on
12th century customs of regarding women as chattel.

Lance Allworthy, Bull Run , Montana

One of the most important things to come out of England was Shakespeare. The fundamental question in all his plays is this: what is natural?

The subject of this badly written article is not natural at all. The family has been the foundation of society for thousands of years, and its deterioration in England and elsewhere will have grave consequences for all of us.

As a father of two sons, I am completely offended, and I shall now go and make them lunch.

Jeff Johnson, collegeville, minnesota

Are men really necessary? A little circumspection will surely expose the superfciality of the question. Women may have broken into every profession, establishing their independence. But, ask how have these possibilities have arisen. First, there’s hardly a single piece of essential infrastructure – housing, hospitals, centres of learning, amenities, that is not derived from men – women have built none of it. Then take any industry: any form of transport, energy, telecommunications, electrics/electronics, photography, computing and so on, and men invented and built that industry. All our musical instruments are derived from men (though women are “hot” on the music scene) and virtually all our sports. Ultimately, men create the jobs and opportunities (which all depend on some form of industry) – women move into them. Women are empowered by men. “Cranford” has merely suppressed the presence of men. At the end of the day, both sexes are probably indispensable in some way to each other.

Paul S, Cheltenham, Glos, UK

"Men are much more likely than women to be of exceptionally high – and exceptionally low – intelligence; they are on average stronger, funnier and have a better three-dimensional sense and they are usually better at techy things."

Stereotypes and nothing new in the entire article. It shines through your article that you envy men for what they are: the better gender, the more intelligent gender and the gender which has built up this world-and all without gossiping and backbitching.

IN England, most women over 30 are fat, depressed and have no meaning in life.

Ust, Birmingham,

As the TV adaptation of Cranford shows, the idea that there was some golden age of the nuclear family is fiction. There have always been a considerable number of women raising children as single parents for a variety of reasons. Marriage, until the 20th century was almost an exclusively middle and upper class preserve. My father was brought up in a single parent family by a (necessarily) working mother in the 1920's and managed to have 6 children and a 50 year marriage that was only ended by my mother's death - hardly the social breakdown that the doom mongers would predict.

Emma, london , england

Soooo, women should stay at home and have the babies and men should go and earn the family's daily crust.

Or, man go hunt woman gather.

The reality is this argument is mostly the london pseudo-intelligentsia letting off steam. IN the real world women want men and men want women and people partner upand get married as much as ever. A small number of London women have a problem so the rest of the world has to sufer too.

The real problem is that a great many london women have high paying jobs and can't find enuogh males to go round with comparable jobs.

blah blah blitty blah.,...

neil murphy, cromer,

If "man" didn't screw with nature, leaving procreation to its natural as well as pleasurable function, we would have no IVF and thus no need for this question. Natural selection would take over, and these that need to ask the question would soon become an extinct species the way nature was meant to work!

Darwinism is a wonderful gift, and in this situation should be left to take its course without man screwing with nature!

Tim, Fredonia, Pennsylvania, USA

Let us ask ourselves what is God's intention in creating Man and Woman to help and compliment each other. Men are obviously indespensible as are Women. Masculinity will always be needed and no amount of rebelliousness by misguided souls will change that. This phenomenon exits only in the mind of those practising deviant behaivors and because it is promoted by a media which is easily entertained . Look around, western civilization exists because Man marries Woman and they honor each other and their children, for thousands of years.
Real men love their wives and Children and spend their lives being a supportive and caring human being in multiple ways.
Even the deviants are born of Man and Woman. The attack on Men acknowledges their significance. We only need an honest look at history.
No amount of confusion depicted on television or in the media will change that. Pray for the misguided souls who think they can be what they are not. May God Bless Men and Women.

John Gwynne Prosser II, Rochester, USA / Michigan

Many of your correspondents use emotive words like 'standards', values 'masculinity', 'femininity'. The article goes a long way to sketching around the definitions of these but I do belive that everyone is being far too clever (or trying to be!). Lets get down to basics: it's all about the 'dangly bits' or lack of them. Forget about hiding behind sohisticated philosophical thought-things and face up to reality. We are attracted to others by 'chemistry', insanity, curiosity and a few other undefineable reasons. Be they 'straight' or 'not straight' - definitions which I find curious! I refuse to use the word 'gay' which has been with us a very long time and has merely been high-jacked by those wishing to somehow calm all the silly old fasioned homophobics who really should all be dead anyway! The genders will eventually all be equal and they will find a level which they can all live with. I just feel sorry for the kids who have to make sense of all this.

Jim Currie, Funchal, Portugal

The argument that families can be brought us without a father, so ergo a father is unnecessary, is as valid (ie invalid) as saying that since orphans can be brought up by someone else, that children should not be brought up by their own parents at all.

Earlier this week we had the argument that men are not necessary. This is surely illegal under the sex discrimination act.

Men make up half the population and the world should be ordered in line with men's psychology and aptitude as much as for women.

This is especially true in education where too much teaching is now done by women (ie woman as role model) and in a way that is often more engaging to girls than boys. We need to be honest about the differences and then play to both sides.

Children without fathers - how often do you hear that boys have suffered without a father figure. What will a boy do who grows up and is told that he does not have a father?

Whenever possible kids should have both!

Graham Scrimgeour, Edinburgh, Scotland

I love it,
I'm a "typical male", I play rugby, am ex-military and about to graduate from medical school.
I have no problems fitting in to the modern world, I don't find myself lacking for a girlfriend and in the military the females were often reliant on the men to help with heavy duties. In medicine I find myself happy at no obvious disadvantage in either intellect of empathy. I do like the idea of women being the builders of the future...shouting crude comments at the feminised men walking past them on their lunch break.

As for the commentator who was dumb founded by the intellect part...there has only ever been one female universal genius (possibly 2) that I know of but about 37 male polymaths.
Men also get more firsts at university than women...maybe due to the difference in subjects but still.
So intellect and physicality hold count for something...I think men are safe for a while to come.

Damian, Leamington spa,

Every man in Britain should go on strike for a fortnight, then you would see how necessary we really are.

A. Jason, Herts,

What is really being said is Patriarchal system has had its day and patriarchal man is out of tune with the times.

He is replaced by an evolved matriarchal man- perfectly balanced in his male and female energy.

Lilith Barrett, London., UK

I wish us men really weren't necessary to women, then we could kick back, relax, take care of ourselves and not have to ever worry about paying child support, alimony, or being taxed to our eyeballs to support single mothers on benefits.

This, naturally, isn't the case. Women say they don't need men, but they still want big divorce settlements, child support and such things, and if this country is ever invaded, it'll be men who are drafted and sent off to die whilst the girlies stay at home.

As for the patronizing talk of revaluating men and masculinity, us men will do that thank you very much. Most women haven't a clue about femininity, let alone masculinity.

Edward, London,

"Men are much more likely than women to be of exceptionally high – and exceptionally low – intelligence; they are on average stronger, funnier and have a better three-dimensional sense and they are usually better at techy things."

I was taking this article seriously and appreciating the idea that a family with both a father and a mother would be more balanced, more likely to produce well-rounded offspring. Then I saw that sentence and it defies the credibility of anything else said.

Amber, Stevenage, UK

Women did not willingly depend on men.

That is how the old patriarchal system was set up- to keep women in their place and as possessions of men .

That is where the marriage institution came from.

Thousands of years ago all property was passed along the female line- so women were strong and independant and did not have to depend on men at all.

But the church and other patriarchal systems changed all that.

Remember the witch hunts- ah yes- a fine excuse to take the property from strong women and burn them at the same time.

Now, a new story is written not HIS+STORY but HER+STORY also.

When both are balanced all is well.

Lady Portia., Manchester, UK

I have some sympathy with the view that men have had their day.
Masculinaty no longer seems to be needed outside the appliction of the brutal, in war and calamity.
If we had a greater represetation of women in Parliment then even these occasions would be fewer and probably better managed. The general exercise of masculinity seems to follow the male to boredom and need for "action " rather than the competence in the minutia of detail and steady applicatin that is required in the modern world.
The "clubable "should now give way to those who's first instinct is to nurture and defend the values in family that are the basis of our society.

robert everitt, wolverhampton,

The problem, as always,is government. The invention of money means that resource can be transferred without the recipient necessarily being aware who has produced them. Where government steps in is to condiscate money from men and redistribute it to women, creating set of philosophical values.
The way forwards is clear. No more free money to women, whether that be via handouts, or the more sublte handouts of non-economic equal salaries and non-economic public sector jobs, or even maintenance - let parents sort out their own arrangements for supporting their children. The free resources have exactly the same corrupting effects on women as the provision of free prostitutes would have on men.

Malcolm McLean, Bradford, UK

Real men don't care what others think, much less what they write.

Eddie Reader, birmingham, england

Great article. I think many women expect men to be something that they're not. Their real qualities should be understood and appreciated. Many modern caricatures portray most men as rather useless. Society however benefits from their risk taking, ambitiousness and single mindedness. Otherwise women's lives (sexual or not) would be duller without men. Emotionally they need men to excite and aggravate them in equal doses.

Paul P, London, UK

Masculine virtues now undervalued? Some women exhibit what sexist society deems masculine qualities and some men display feminine ones.

If we're honest, some us don't really find ourselves fitting in with either female or male societal stereotypes. Seemingly however, anyone who doesn't conform to expected definitions of masculinity or femininity is still judged in some deep-rooted way to be something of a failure.

Bi-genderist society doesn't encourage honesty. Those of us who don't conform often quickly learn to hide - and with good reason. Evidence shows that the punishments for gender non-conformity can be somewhat harsh. The horrific acts of violence that have prompted commemorations such as last week's, International Transgender Day of Remembrance (held annually every November 20th) bear example to this.

And, how about an appreciation of third gendered people, too? Sadly, I hear the incredulous laughter already.

http://www.morethan2genders.com/page14.htm

Katie, Newport, Gwent, Wales, UK

"..subtle but increasing onslaught against mascilinity..."

There has been nothing subtle about it at all. It is quite open and direct - and the 'comment' section of this newspaper is confirmation of that fact.

When you have undermined any positive notion of masculinity, particularly amongst Anglo-Saxon males, it doesn't require a genius to work out that young men will become further and further alienated from society.

Michael, Berkhamsted,

What a marvellous article - unsettling, but well reasoned and truthful.

It seems to me that it misses one important point, however, which is that it is not 'man' per se that is becoming more and more dispensible, it is 'a certain kind of man'; specifically, the version that is unable (or more likely, unwilling) to adapt to our ever evolving world. Do my mind, the sexual revolution has made only half a turn - the one which now allows women to take their place in the workforce. The second phase is to educate and thus allow men to take a more prominant role in those areas of life traditionally given to women. It is far from true to say that a man who runs the home is approved of; in fact some of the more strident opponents of such a state of affairs are women - who can be mistrustful, suspicious and even hostile to the few men I know who have made such a change. Could it be that they are experiencing some of the insecurities expressed by men when women first appeared in the workplace?

Paul Drake, London, UK

We get into much trouble when we try to eliminate the fact that men & women are wired up differently and as such better suited for different roles. Why is it so hard to accept that?because we have the 'right to choose' and choose wrong do we do alot of the time.

The existence of 'non-performing' dads is certainly no excuse to get the dad out of the family equation-what about the real dads/partners out there?

Birth is by no means an end to itself, conception-birth-development-maturity.. is a process which we need to encourage the 2 people who started to maintain to the end. That's the best that can be done for that child we so often forget about in pursuit of 'our right to choose'

I've no problem with women choosing to be manless-that's allowed-but bringing a tot into the equation completely changes the dynamic-just stick to the merits/demerits of your chosen lifestyle

We often regard advancement to be a deviation from tradition-on this one it is a return to the basics.

Don A, Manchester, UK

When women stayed at home to bring up children we had a lot of wars. Since women have gone out to work there has been a decline in wars.

Pepe, Eastleigh,

Minette,
Interesting piece, but I'm curious about how you would define 'real masculinity'?
Frankly, I'm too busy working, keeping the house from falling down, having a relationship with my wife and raising two young children (one of each) to worry too much about this sort of thing - I just thought it would be helpful for young guys just starting out.

Steven Lawson, Glasgow, Scotland

I definitely agree with you! I dislike 'feminized' men and would welcome real, masculine men! I think you can masculine without oppressing women or seeing them as inferior to men, right?!
G. Bonnet, Switzerland

G. Bonnet, Brugg, Switzerland

Thank you Minette. But the research showed only that men are less successful bringing up boys. There was no difference in outcome for girls. And as that difference makes little apparent sense, it kind of makes you doubt the reliability of the whole study.

Malcolm Lochhead, London, UK