Does anyone else agree with feminism?

Post Reply New Topic

The great bit is that the person who supposedly said this (Andrea Dworkin) said no such thing,
and the "source" for this supposed quote (her book Intercourse) doesn't contain it.

So while it's true that it's absurd to waste time talking about what one individual from a progressive movement numbering in the tens of millions did or did not say,
in this instance,
the individual in question didn't even say it.

This is nihilism, or this is truth. He has to push in past boundaries. There is the outline of a body, distinct, separate, its integrity an illusion, a tragic deception, because unseen there is a slit between the legs, and he has to push into it. There is never a real privacy of the body that can coexist with intercourse: with being entered. The vagina itself is muscled and the muscles have to be pushed apart. The thrusting is persistent invasion. She is opened up, split down the center. She is occupied--physically, internally, in her privacy. ... There is no analogue anywhere among subordinated groups of people to this experience of being made for intercourse: for penetration, entry, occupation. There is no analogue in occupied countries or in dominated races or in imprisoned dissidents or in colonialized cultures or in the submission of children to adults or in the atrocities that have marked the twentieth century ranging from Auschwitz to the Gulag. There is nothing exactly the same, and this is not because the political invasion and significance of intercourse is banal up against these other hierarchies and brutalities. Intercourse is a particular reality for women as an inferior class; and it has, in it, as part of it, violation of boundaries, taking over, occupation, destruction of privacy, all of which are construed to be normal and also fundamental to continuing human existence. There is nothing that happens to any other civilly inferior people that is the same in its meaning and in its effect even when those people are forced into sexual availability, heterosexual or homosexual; while the subject people, for instance, may be forced to have intercourse with those who dominate them, the God who does not exist did not make human existence, broadly speaking, dependent on their compliance. The political meaning of intercourse for women is the fundamental question of feminism and freedom: can an occupied people--physically occupied inside, internally invaded--be free; can those with a metaphysically compromised privacy have self-determination; can those without a biologically based physical integrity have self-respect?

Why exactly do you feel the need to show 'feminist solidarity' when someone claiming to be a feminist loses the plot and starts demanding absurd things like this or that 'all sex is rape' etc etc etc

That wasn't a dig at you Hyperlex, at various times the feminist movement has gotten behind some strange ideas because they came from radical feminists and at various times erupted into self righteous outrage about absurd things.

So tell me again how the phrase 'all sex is rape' is somehow being unfair to the garbage that this woman produced?

I don't know what to tell you.
When one reads the passage you quoted with a basic understanding of the book's topic,
that being the experience of heterosexual sex within a patriarchal society,
then "all sex is rape" appears not even an oversimplification, but a flat-out made-up phrase.

I've yet to meet someone who makes said stupifying claim who's actually read the damned book, is what I'm sayin'.

this was you speaking out against feminists, DC:




you were telling me what feminists supposedly do. but we didn't do that. and we are feminists.

it seems like the passage is saying that women are subjugated by patriarchal society, and that the act of sexual interccourse is a metaphorical example of that power differential. that we have sex with our oppressors, in a sense. and sometimes we are also sexually assaulted in addition to that.

i don't agree, i am just doing my own summary.

this was you speaking out against feminists, DC:




you were telling me what feminists supposedly do. but we didn't do that. and we are feminists.

I am a man.
I have never raped anyone.
Therefore men do not rape.

Same logic as you are using and just as untrue...

women are strong intelligent beautiful.

Some are, and some aren't.



TBQH....I scoff at those who idealize entire groups people; especially the idealization of women as the "fair sex". And do not try to deploy the false dichotomy that I either love women as a whole or hate them entirely! They are flawed, imperfect, self-interested humans too, as are men.

I find women to be more beautiful then men plus they have better qualitys too.

I find women to be more beautiful then men plus they have better qualitys too.

I dunno. I often get the feeling Dworkin simply wrote down what a lot of people were secretly thinking. I do sometimes feel like a member of the 'inferior' sex because the hole in my body was put there for the purpose of being penetrated. That I have organs that are there for the purpose of my body being parasitised to continue the human race. That for thousands of years, being penetrated and carrying babies was mandatory. You don't carry around that kind of cultural baggage lightly, especially when the facts of your biology seem to confirm it.

It is genuinely a deep source of sadness for me. I understand that this is not the case for other women, but I don't think I'm alone in this.

Women are people - not better or worse, just people.