[twstdzppr]

So what is the social contract in this instance? That men are entitled to women? That strikes me as... trying to run a society through coercion, just with the target being a group that people here seem fine with coercing.

Sometimes unpleasant times are necessary in the fight for human rights. Otherwise we would still have things like slavery. Additionally, women wouldn't have the right to vote, and they also wouldn't be able to make independent financial decisions like have their own bank accounts or mortgages. These things aren't that historic, and taking the side of trying to restrict women's relationship choices strikes me as being on the wrong side of history again.

[somenameforme]

That's quite the strawman, even by 'arguing on the internet' standards. I'd be happy to continue the discussion because I find this quite an interesting topic, but only if you're going to participant in good faith.