Drama in /r/adviceanimals when a redditor makes the comment," Who cares what feminists think anyway. They're all just a bunch of cackling hens on perpetual periods." (np.reddit.com)
SubredditDrama
127 ups - 54 downs = 73 votes
359 comments submitted at 12:48:27 on Oct 25, 2013 by tritter211
>When you have people who claim all heterosexual sex is rape and such people are never called out on the bs from within the movement, why should anyone put stock into what the movement is trying to say? Why would anyone listen after hearing things that are clearly batshit?
No one actually claims this
Linking to tumblr doesn't prove that Dworkin said that
>No one actually claims this
Yes they do. Dworkin did.
You can just google "piv is rape" and find lots of people who do. Here are some quick results.
http://radfemimages.wordpress.com/the-gears/#PIV
http://profnimchimpsky.blogspot.com/2013/05/all-piv-sex-rape.html
http://lateralpazwalk.wordpress.com/2011/05/31/why-im-anti-piv/
http://i-dont-need-feminism.tumblr.com/post/38973899041/i-recently-realised-that-i-actually-think-all-piv-is
>Such descriptions are often cited by Dworkin's critics, claiming that Intercourse argued that "All heterosexual intercourse is rape." That statement, however, occurs nowhere in the book, and her comparisons of intercourse to "occupation," "possession," "collaboration," etc. are made in the context of discussions of the way in which intercourse is depicted "the discourse of male truth--literature, science, philosophy, pornography" (122), and the enforcement of those terms through men's social power over women. Dworkin rejected the interpretation that "All heterosexual intercourse is rape" as a grave misunderstanding of her work.[2] When asked in a later interview,[3] she explained,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intercourse_(book)
But sure, tumblr is a better source than a highly cited article
SWEET BANNED BECAUSE POSTING FACTS IS TROLLING
Oh, Dworkin just said that sex is "occupation" and "possession." That's alright then.
Reminds me of people trying to interpret the bible in such a way that all that bad stuff in it is totally okay. No, you see, "slavery" in this context is actually the purely physical bond between man and god that needs to be transcended so that we can all enjoy his love.
>But sure, tumblr is a better source than a highly cited article
How does your mind work if you think that this is a statement that you can make after you've linked to your "highly cited article"? As if anyone responded to a highly cited article with tumblr posts?
That aside, you said that nobody claims it. I said that googling it could easily show that people do, and gave you examples of it. You slightly 'correcting' me about Dworkin's views doesn't change that.
Notice how you intentionally left out the third word, collaboration?
Yeah, that's because when you realize that she said sex is something that is often a compromise between two people's exclusive desires it doesn't sound like she called it rape at all.
>Notice how you intentionally left out the third word, collaboration?
Yeah, because it wasn't bad. The other two were bad. I focused on the bad ones. Because they are bad. Are you from another planet or something?
Hey, notice how you intentionally didn't respond to the majority of my post, which was about the actual topic we're discussing? That's a funny coincidence, right?
> Yeah, because it wasn't bad.
You don't get to chose two of the three words while excluding the other because it makes your argument look cheap
Hahaha.. it didn't make my argument look cheap, it just wasn't relevant to my argument.
Person 1: Nigger. Spic. Compassion.
Person 2: Whoa man, what's up with saying "nigger" and "spic"?
Person 1: HA HA YOU LEFT OUT "COMPASSION", YOUR ARGUMENT IS OBVIOUSLY FAULTY.
Great logic good job.
Also, do you mean kind of how you're excluding the majority of my post from your replies? You know, the part that covered what we were actually talking about?
Saying that sex is a chore is like calling someone a nigger now?
How is it that 90% of redditors don't understand what a comparison is?
Comparing two things is not to say that those two things are the same. It's to compare them; specifically the principle or logic behind both. In this case, "nigger" and "spic" are both bad words that aren't magically justified by using a third word that is good.
Similarly, calling heterosexual sex "occupation" and "possession" is batshit crazy even if you also call it a "collaboration."
Do you want to get back on topic now? You said that nobody claims that heterosexual sex is rape, I gave you examples I found in 10 seconds of people doing exactly that, etc..
Dworkin isn't representative of all feminism, though. Hell, even people within feminism think she's a bit whacko.
No one's saying that.
Newsmodsblow said that no one claims that PIV sex is rape, I gave some examples of feminists claiming it. Simple as that.
Except that, as /u/newsmodsblow pointed out, she didn't say that.
No, Dworkin apparently called it "occupation" and "possession", which while almost equally stupid, isn't the same thing as rape.
However, I gave four examples of it beyond her that I found on google in 10 seconds.
I don't think she's saying that sex is inherently any of those things, but she's talking about sex discourses.
Also.
>I don't think she's saying that sex is inherently any of those things, but she's talking about sex discourses.
Trying to figure out what ideological anti-intellectuals mean by the words they misuse is about as fruitful as interpreting biblical passages.
I didn't say anything about Mackinnon.
What words are being misused?
The link addresses Dworkin as well.
>What words are being misused?
I didn't just mean Dworkin in particular, but "occupation", "possession" and "violent" aren't very fitting words to use when describing heterosexual sex.
If I post a somewhat incorrect post making fun of David Icke for saying something stupid, being corrected is alright. But I'm not really interested in having a discussion about what he might really mean by what he's saying. Because it's ultimately just nonsense. Know what I mean?
>The link addresses Dworkin as well.
Noticed that after I had replied, but it didn't seem to add anything new.
Dworkin didn't even say that, she said that sex can be a chore and compromise between people because they will not likely have the same level of interest in the act.
Saying giving a blowjob is a chore because you don't like it isn't calling it rape.
Uh, Dworkin didn't. And only two of the links you sent actually make that claim, and those two links are by, what, two nobodies on blogs? If that's your standard for determining whether that's something a movement stands for, I'm pretty sure I can make all movements stand for pretty much whatever I want.
Well Dworkin is also a nobody, and you could use that to excuse just about any idealogue, because most of them are nobodies. Or any bigot, for that matter.
Anyway, read through the thread. It has already been pointed out that Dworkin didn't say it, and that not all feminists are that crazy. It's literally the only posts beneath the one you're replying to, you can't miss it. In fact, I'm a bit amazed that you did.