Claire Khaw proposes to John Cleese

http://ask.fm/oneparty4all/answer/112660500609

Q:  Would you accept a proposal of marriage from John Cleese?

A:  He would need so much attention.

http://ask.fm/oneparty4all/answer/112662928513

Q:  Why do you feel that John Cleese would need a lot of attention from a wife?

A:  He is getting on a bit, isn't he? He probably wants someone to laugh at his jokes.

http://ask.fm/oneparty4all/answer/112663949441

Q: I am sure that Cleese does not think of his being a comedian to be his defining identity. His age is irrelevant, and you have said you would consider marriage proposals from men older than him. I actually think there is a political point you could make by marrying him.

Really? He is LibDem and I am ex-BNP.

http://ask.fm/oneparty4all/answer/112676379777

Q:  I believe you and Cleese could draw up a pre-nup using Islamic marital contracts as a template. Allow the document to be publicly available, thus garnering media attention to your idea. Use Cleese's dreadful experience with alimony from his last ex-wife to support your argument for these contracts.

A:  That is indeed how I would go about it, but first there must be an invitation to treat for matters to proceed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Offer_and_acceptance#Invitations_to_treat
It does not have to proceed to completion. Even if negotiations were abortive they would be usefully illustrative.

http://ask.fm/oneparty4all/answer/112676432769

Q:  I wish to add this: You have said you would consider proposals from men further to the Left than Cleese. You once stating conquering a leftie would be a nice achievement. He has expressed conservative views on culture and immigration. You can make him right-wing with your wiles and persuasion.

A: All right.  I will propose to him on Twitter.

http://thebattlefieldoflove.blogspot.co.uk/search?q=domestic+partnership

If we do get married our matrimonial home should be called Khawlty Towers.  

male oppression and chauvinistic feminism

If single parenthood has its origins in feminism and female emancipation, is it conceivable that women are partly to blame for the decline and fall of Western civilisation?

After all, they want to mother everything, don't they, and get offended if you point out the irrationality of their emotions?

Are we not, as a society, morbidly infantilised and over-feminised? Is not Health and Safety run almost exclusively by bossy, over-nannying safety-obsessed women?

Perhaps there is a connection between the oppressiveness of health and safety regulation and women who wait until nearly the end of their fertility to have children because they had to develop their careers. (The loss of an only child by a woman who has come to the end of child-bearing years is of course a greater disaster for her than a woman still young and capable of having more children.) This is understandable, but what sort of attitude does it create about taking calculated risks? Is it healthy for boys to be tied to mother's apron strings and be seen jogging with their trendy mums?

Should European men be seen wearing baby slings and other baby-carrying implements, just like female peasants in third world countries? Is masculine pride now completely a thing of the past?

Cato: "As soon as they begin to be your equals, they will have become your superiors."

http://www.womeninworldhistory.com/lesson10.html

Does a civilisation deserve extinction because it is irrational, infantilised, sclerotic and risk-averse, when it allows the quality of its next generation to be progressively impaired by its continuing tolerance of single-parenthood, illegitimacy and chauvinistic feminism - the kind of chauvinistic feminism that is allowed to claim that women are simultaneously

(1) equal to men
(2) better than men yet
(3) require and demand the financial support of men - such as Alyce Faye Eichelberger - without fear of contradiction?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-562067/Dont-mention-wife-John-Cleeses-amicable-divorce-but.html

Cleese has already agreed to give his estranged wife a £750,000 apartment on the Upper East-Side of New York. But because the warring couple have fallen out over renovation work there, she was this week staying nearby in Manhattan's most prestigious hotel, The Carlyle, where rooms can cost up to £7,500-a-night.

The 63-year-old Miss Eichelberger, a psychotherapist, who married John Cleese in December 1992, is demanding half of his earnings since their wedding.

And in the meantime, her lawyers have submitted court documents that specify she needs an astonishing £71,250 a month to live on, this includes £2,000 for clothes, £5,000 on gifts, entertaining and holidays, and £1,000 for eating out.Cleese has already agreed to give his estranged wife a £750,000 apartment on the Upper East-Side of New York. But because the warring couple have fallen out over renovation work there, she was this week staying nearby in Manhattan's most prestigious hotel, The Carlyle, where rooms can cost up to £7,500-a-night.

Not bad for a woman who was living with her two sons in a third-floor London council flat when she met Cleese 18 years ago.

Vote: Should men question chauvinistic feminsim that allows women to simultaneously claim to be (1) equal to men (2) superior to men AND (3) the weaker sex in need of greater protection?

http://www.1party4all.co.uk/Home/Account/TopicForm.aspx?topicsId=110