Okay, Buffy. Go off. Keep cherrypicking random passages in the earliest iterations of Buddhist scriptures. That goes to show your Christian bias (cultural, if anything. I'm not assuming your religion) that every religion in the world should function as the Abrahamic ones (also the bias shown in the original article we're replying to here, let's not forget), which states that if such-and-such was said by mr-so-and-so ONCE in History, that's it, period, it can't ever evolve with the changing of the times because it's now set in stone. And no, that's very not what Buddhist philosophy represents. Nothing in Buddhism is set in stone, other than, as I said and will repeat for the zillionth time here, the basic tenets. There is no Bible or Quran or Torah to Buddhism. There never will be. We pursue truth and enlightenment and live by the maxim that "nothing is fixed or permanent", not even random passages that are canon. So much so, that there are many schools of Buddhism where the mysoginistic passages are not used (I for one had to google your citation. Never heard of it in my practice. It seems to be historical and only existing in Theravada).

But sure. You want to believe it's essentially a misogynistic religion, and there's no changing your mind or opening it to anything new, so go ahead. Keep saying that. Keep spreading what you think you know. Just do me a favour and stop pestering me, because I said it, and will repeat, I commented here in good faith. i did not come here, unlike you, originally with ten stones in my hands to viciously throw at other commenters whose views or personal way of life are different from mine.

Go in peace.