Nowhere in the article does the author make any attempt to refute claims in the HC constitution. Then this is in the closing statements: >The HC’s constitution is a dream of male self-reliance taken to an illogical conclusion: Men have the power to do anything they want, as long as they’re shielded from the all-powerful influence of women, immigrants and basic civil rights Notice he tries to twist reality with: >as long as they’re shielded The reality is that women in power was not a natural progression; it was forced by law, because it is not natural.