Men can still be physiologically satisfied by said rubber sheath, because all they're really physiologically driven to is to orgasm. Women are physiologically driven to want babies, which nothing can satisfy except having or adopting one. I suppose they could adopt a man and they'd essentially have one too.
First off, if you can be satisfied by a condom alone, I feel sorry for your dates. Secondly, if you don't have the vagina or the scientific studies to back that statement up, I call misogynistic asshole.
The question was whether or not women had more choice in the matter of parenthood, and the fact that they do, simply by virtue of their reproductive system being the easiest to manipulate, cannot be disputed.
Men can be satisfied by their party of five.
I'm surrounded by enough vagina's to back that statement up.
As for me being a misogynist, you're an idiot.
Protip: When insulting someone's intelligence, spelling and grammar are important, lest you appear to be speaking to a mirror. The correct pluralization of vagina is "vaginae," or the more common "vaginas." An apostrophe before the s makes it possessive.
Now that you've successfully dug yourself into a pit, you may wish to produce that scientific study to back up your claim, so as to try and dig yourself out. In the mean time, here's the lid on your hole:
Contraceptive choices:
Women:
Permanent:
Hysterectomy;
Tubal ligation (may be reversible);
Non-permanent:
IUD;
Hormonal implant;
Spermicidal sponge;
Diaphragm;
"The pill";
Emergency:
Abortion;
Plan B;
Men:
Permanent:
Testicular removal (also kills sex drive);
Vasectomy (may be reversible);
Non-permanent:
Condom;
Emergency:
Run!
Women are inherently disadvantaged on a free market. Because they need to take breaks during pregnancies and the time after
Or, alternatively, they are inherently advantaged because
they have the option to become pregnant and men have no such option. A woman does not have to become pregnant unless she believes the advantages outweigh the disadvantages.