An important note, thanks to @Kirran (OP edit):
Both men and women need, or at least needed each other. Keep in mind that it required at least a man and a woman to be born as an essential to become human in the first place. Mom, dad, I would never have existed if it wasn't for you. Thank you :)
Nope, because it is not a logical option. Please don't get me wrong, what I mean is that there is actually another option which is "both" :)
Do you agree or disagree, and why?
And thank you for the inspiration. I'll edit the post.
Hello people.
Before you go ballistic on me, that sentence misses punctuation marks. Here, I'll put them for you:
A woman, without her man, is nothing!
Wait, or is it:
A woman: without her, man is nothing?
You make your choice ;)
An important note (edit):
Both men and women need, or at...
Copy that, Major Tom!
Now I'll pass the transmission to the concerned personnel @Quintessence who in their part could decode it.
I personally did not understand a thing!
SG... over and out.
I didn't come up with it, I borrowed it from a post before mine. It is seen in the quoted post in my post. I edited the post to better clarify that now. The quoted post is post #2.
It's because I respect and appreciate you view. I started the thread looking for view and you gave me one, a good well put respectful one. Thank you.
Or maybe it is just because I like you, who knows.
It's not the 99% resemblance, it was the discussion we had in it. I think it was about that all lives come from the same life tree or something. I don't remember exactly, but I remember the feeling. I'm all feelings, you know :)
I could be wrong tho. See? I said it too :D
I get your point...
What about this:
1- They say they are not wrong, people quoting them say they are not wrong, then later the scientists realize they are wrong. Why in the first place they said they were not wrong? The people who quoted them later are no where to be found. Later scientists again find other stuff...