life lessons from "legalizing misandry"

[fromaway]

On Essentialism:"Ideological feminists do hold out some hope for men, but only to the extent that men are willing to stop being men. From this it follows that feminists may blame those men who are unwilling to do the right thing. This has become clear in their response to recent developments in medicine. Given the relentless hostility of

Comments

[nyarbaggytep]

A woman's character, feminists insisted, should not be judged by her sexual activities outside marriage. But if women were sexually liberated and therefore indifferent to what anyone thought about their sexual activities outside marriage, why would they need or even want a law to protect them from being embarrassed about these activities?

I think that this really sums up what is going on for this author. If sexual liberation = indifferent to people's opinions, then why I am so offended by this persons? Gah. *rolls eyes*

[fromaway]

It's the worst logic ever, too. I mean, even if you take for granted that it's no big deal to have your personal business paraded around in court, they haven't established relevance, and the way they try to do that is by treating prior legal acts (having consensual sex) as if they were the same as prior criminal acts (committing sexual assault) under the heading of "sexual history." It's weaselling of the worst kind.

I agree

[nyarbaggytep]

It isn't logic, it's bigotry in a poor disguise.

Re: I agree

[fromaway]

And it's so insulting to other men! They write in other contexts that when women try to set up child custody hearings, etc. so as to protect women and children from abusers, they're implying that all or most men are abusers. What do they think they're doing referring to sex crimes in a man's past as his "sexual history"? I mean, every man has a sexual history...

Re: I agree

[nyarbaggytep]

Even celibacy is a sexual history. Sexual crimes are part of his *criminal* history. I think they're a little confused. Either that or accidentally betraying that they actually believe that there is no such thing as a sexual crime... I have dark suspicions of them.

Re: I agree

[fromaway]

Well, their example of a sex crime in a man's past is "a pinch on the butt." Because pinching a woman's butt would totally get a man convicted of sexual assault. Because it's in the statute! So if you, Innocent He-Man, pinch a woman's butt, even once, she'll totally call the police, the Crown will totally choose to prosecute, and a judge will totally throw the book at you!

God, you can tell these people aren't lawyers.

Re: I agree

[nyarbaggytep]

Or therapists.

I've seen many people who've experienced sexual violence who won't even consider going to to the authorities because of the way they expect to be treated (and with some reason I should add).