"Normal" sexuality?

[mistertrickster]

130. I totally agree.

These discussions are like watching Greek tragedy: you know what is going to happen in the end, snotty demeaning personal attacks going to posters' (unknowable) motives.

The Rad Fem position is rife with contradictions:

* your (male) personal experience means nothing, but a bogus e-mail by a supposed frat boy is proof positive.

* personal anecdotes that support the Rad Fem position are proof positive, but any that refute that position simply reflect and reiterate a male-dominant world-view.

* men's magazines like "Playboy" reinforce the male-dominant view that women are just objectivized sex toys for men; women's magazines like "Cosmo" (or all the rest) that show a cheese-cake cover of a rail-thin model are not to blame--women have been co-opted by this phallo-centric dominate male gaze. You can't blame the victims, after all . . .

* making blanket statements about women is "prejudiced and sexist," but making blanket statements about men (they perpetuate a rape culture and objectivize women) is exactly what Rad Fems do.

* women are a discriminated-against minority. If you point out that women get more college degrees http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=72, live longer, and generally score higher on measures of "happiness," you're hi-jacking the issue to make it about men.

* rape is not about sex--it's about violence toward the "other." However, lusting after women leads to rape. Visual imagery of men and women having sex (pornography) which men look at for a sexual titillation also leads to rape. So . . . rape is not about sex, until it is.

Basically the Rad Fem position boils down to this: any argument--no matter how bogus--that shows men dominate women for their (men's) benefit is true; any evidence--no matter how well it's gathered and analyzed--that runs contrary to this is false.

Pointing this out makes one a sexist pig who has a giant ego and doesn't care about people and wants to perpetuate misogyny, or something along those lines.

My position boils down to this: there clearly IS discrimination against women in our society that still exists despite the major advances (just as discrimination against races and sexual-orientation still exist). There is too much sex crime against women and girls--everyone knows someone who's been abused and-or raped. That's an obvious given.

But in seeking to eliminate that discrimination and that abuse, one does not have the right to be sloppy and illogical in using evidence and argument.