Absolutely. Dependence or independence of woman depends only on herself, neither on marriage, nor on a husband.

Can I just check I have understood - did you say that computers steal our personal time? Yes, some of you said. So, why do you spend your spare time in front of computers' monitor typing your arguments?

In addition, computers make our life easier because they give us such a wonderful opportunity to discuss this interesting question.

Yes, you are right computers may steal our personal time. But if they steal, it means that we allow them to steal. If we used computers only for work or education, we would not be able to say that they steal. By the way, this "stolen time" is spent mostly in social networks and watching films online, isn't it?

It means that Internet (see computers) made it possible for you to meet. Hence, computers bring happiness to your life. So, how can we say that computers steal our personal time? Or, our personal time is stolen by marriage?! Of course, no! Consequently, computers make our life easier. At least they brought love in somebody's life. That's great.

By the way, there are a lot of people who met thanks to computers. For instance, according to statistics, in the USA 15% of marriages are binded by couples who met in social networks. Moreover, their number is increasing.

Could you expand a bit on what you were saying about own territory? So you mean that this territory should be controlled only by ourselves?

Gigalink, what did you mean when you said about full scope of any issue?

Yes, I agree. For example, Greengard alleges that the Uzbekistani government blocks sites that contain the information about corruption or the authoritarian regime in the country.

I would like to add that Faris and Villeneuve (2008) in their book "Measuring Global Internet Filtering" indicate that Myanmar, United Arab Emirates, Syria and Vietnam block Skype and other inexpensive international Internet-based telephone service providers, because they are rivals of governmental telecommunications companies. Additionally, Tong (2009) in his article "3 main reasons why the Chinese government blocks popular social Websites" points out that the Chinese government blocks Google for the success of Baidu, Wikipedia for success of Hoodong, Blogger for success of Blogcn, YouTube for success of Youku.

Yes, that is right. I am certain that the government may ban certain Web sites to help government-controlled businesses. For example, Greengard (2010) in his article "Censored!" published in Communications of the ACM states that the Chinese government blocks YouTube and Twitter to create auspicious conditions for their Chinese knockoffs, which are controlled by the Chinese authorities.

Barack Obama said: “Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we have been waiting for. We are the change that we seek.” This quote illustrates that a person may change himself or herself.

Yes, that's true. As it was said by John Lilly: "Our only security is our ability to change".

I see what you mean that to build career we need to be strong and work hard. But I do not say that if a person follows fashion, he or she will particularly "build career, become famous, become a star". By saying that fashion "gives people a chance to build career", I do not mean that fashion is the only requirement of becoming successful. Because that is not true.

I say that people may become successful, famous or rich "because of their belonging to fashion industry". I am sure that it is possible. Moreover, there are a lot of such examples. For instance, Libby Banks in her article "Watch: A girl called Bip" published in The Huffington Post on the 31st of October in the year 2011 tells the story of Bip Ling who became a star, started to work with Vogue and other respectable fashion magazines, because of her "belonging to fashion industry". Of course, she did not work hard, she would not achieve it, but she would achieve it without fashion industry too.